Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by riffraff 5028 days ago
I feel stupid asking this, and I ask forgiveness if it's a dumb question, but why are there so many people improvising diets?

What is wrong with dietologists[0] ?

I have been overweight and went to a dietologist, got back in shape (lost about 16kg/35 pounds) in a few months and have stayed stable for years. And I did not have headaches and was allowed some "free" meals, alcohol and sweets, with "moderation" caveats.

I can't think of another health-related area where people think that it's better to form your own expertise than to go to a doctor, at least not in the same scale[2].

It seems strange to me, if you have persisting headaches you see a doctor, if you have a bad posture you get foot support, but if you are overweight you start reading books on nutrition and try to hack yourself.

What am I missing?

[1] medics with a specialization on diets, since chrome says this is not an english word. Possibly "nutritionist".

[2] except possibly body building, where arguably there is not a "problematic precondition"

4 comments

To answer your first question - I'd posit that (especially for North American readers) the big driver is a lack of credibility in the FDA, and the 'health industry' in general. Look at the evolution of the Food Pyramid (as probably the most well known example) over the years, but also the lack of controls on where HFCS ends up (ie. just about everywhere), alternating between demonising and lionising various food stuffs from one decade to the next.

Any kind of scepticism on this front is probably (pardon the pun) a healthy thing.

Like in everything we do, people always want to find the new cool thing and easier thing to do than the routine every one else does. It's the same reason why every new week a new diet featuring a cool name or acronym becomes popular and then dies off.
Also why there are 10 new JavaScript data binding frameworks released per day.
Dietitian is the word you're looking for.

As to why the skepticism: the most successful sciences have immediate feedback mechanisms to tell you when you're doing something right. Changing diet and food, however, is slow in effect, hard to monitor, and differs a lot from person to person. Some things are obviously bad--drinking a lot of coke, for instance, and not purposely eating after you're full--but beyond that most things appear to have worked decently for someone at one point or another. So the people in the know have stuck with one set of beliefs for awhile (heavily pushed by the government, which in turn has pretty much acted at the dictates of certain agricultural powers) while alternatives work as often as the party line.

because doing it the right way is too hard!