You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Why "Promising" doesn't mean "Cure"

in #science7 years ago

There's the same problem in "my" field of science. There are loads of studies describing positive health effect of different foods and food constituents, and every day, there's a new "superfood" (how I hate this word^^) in town.
And if you look it up, it's just an in vitro study using completely irrelevant concentrations.

I think the main problem is how media presents it. We scientist know which type of study really means that you have a proven effect, and which just provide hints and preliminary data.
But the public does not, and thus jumps on every reported effect, no matter under which conditions it was produced. We need much better public reporting of science.

Sort:  

If someone wants to reduce their body weight, they will look for the pill, milkshake, tea, etc. that makes the miracle, rather than modify their diet and lifestyle because most people prefer the easiest way, which is used by the industry and the whole chain involved.

so true...

Oh, superfood. Such an exhausting topic..

A nutritious or non-nutritious compound present in foods has your intrinsic characteristics and your power to effect changes in human health is impressive, either positively or negatively. However, this effect depends on multiple factors, it can not be taken in isolation. It is the beauty of science, to discover how it interacts with other elements and the human organism. It is incredible to see that the behavior of the same compound of a food can benefit in the fight against cancer to someone, while another person can harm it, due to genetic polymorphisms. Science never stops, fortunately!
What today is a truth, tomorrow may not be true, at least for some.

brrrr, u said the word....bibber