|
|
|
|
|
by scythe
2993 days ago
|
|
There are lots of people with doctorates who give talks, many of which contradict each other. What we know is that: - the common dietary pattern isn't working - many more "primitive" diets show better results What we don't know is exactly which aspects of a primitive diet are so beneficial relative to modern diets. A general pattern is that foods which are digested quickly tend to be overrepresented in modern diets. Foods which are easy to digest tend to be more pleasurable than foods which are slow to digest because our bodies like to save energy whenever possible, but our body is also configured "with the expectation" that food will be sort of hard to digest. I bring this up not to propose my own dietary remedy but to suggest that there is likely to be a trade-off between pleasure and health, and while careful study of nutrition can help us reduce the hedonic cost of healthy eating, it is not likely to disappear. In fact, the neural pathways associated with hunger and satiety are implicated in the pathophysiology of diseases associated with overeating; this is discussed in one of my favorite reviews of the subject -- "Limitations in anti-obesity drug development: the critical role of hunger-promoting neurons" http://faculty.vet.upenn.edu/ngg/user_docs/DietrichandHirvat... |
|
[0] https://nutritionfacts.org/video/dr-gregers-daily-dozen-chec...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study