Is quality food the ultimate medicine, perhaps the only medicine we need? Many friends of alternative medicine seem to think so. Comedian and talk-show host Bill Maher is fond of arguing that the reason why Americans are so unhealthy (we are?) is that we “eat like crap.” Processed foods, non-organic vegetables, etc. Is there any truth to this?
As you could guess, I’m skeptical. But open-minded. What I am most skeptical of in this case is the simplistic generalization. The always and never, black-and-white thinking.
Also, it seems to me that underlying much of the alt-med philosophy is an idealism. A belief that human beings are created to be perfectly healthy and if we become unhealthy, it is because we have screwed up, or something “un-natural” has screwed us up. So to speak.
Anyone sufficiently familiar with human biology and genetic diversity understands that no two people are the same. Some have innately robust intestinal tracts, for example, while others . . . don’t. In the least, we have different degrees of vulnerability to disease and disorder. Naturally. Many individuals so much as bend over to pick up a pen and suffer a back spasm. Others can shoulder boulders for decades without ill effect. Etc. Etc. Etc. No, we aren’t born perfect and then “poof” something happens to screw us up. It is more complicated than that.
Two recent studies into this topic of food-as-medicine, found over at ScienceDaily, got me thinking about it. But let me warn you up front, if you are looking for a clear-cut answer, read no further. Simplistic answers are for those with superficial worldviews.
The first, Marathon Runners Should Pick Cherries for Speedy Recovery, seems to suggest that, yes, food can be medicinal.
Dr Glyn Howatson, exercise physiologist and Laboratory Director in the School of Psychology and Sports Sciences at Northumbria University, examined the properties of Montmorency cherries in a study that found that athletes who drank the juice recovered faster after Marathon running than a placebo controlled group. [bolds mine]
Placebo controlled, that’s good. Hmm. I wonder what the actual nitty-gritty of the research was. . . . Oh-oh. Only 20 subjects, 10 in each group. Hold the presses. This finding must be considered much more on the “suggestive” end of the spectrum than “conclusive” due to that element alone.
Here’s a second problem: the measured variables. Okay, the cherry juice, no problem with that. But the others? Strength, seems straightforward; inflammation, certainly seems measurable, as far as I know; oxidative stress, I don’t know what this means and how it might be measured. But that could just be a reflection of my ignorance.
What I would really like to know, however, is the measured actual degree of groups differences in these variables. How much did the special cherry juice help? That’s crucial information. And it pertains to the next study.
The second study, Cancer Protective Effect of Fruits and Vegetables May Be Modest at Best, was almost a reverse case.
But first, the background:
It is widely believed that a diet rich in fruits and vegetables can reduce the risk of cancer. In 1990, the World Health Association recommended eating five servings of fruit and vegetables a day to prevent cancer and other diseases. But many studies since then have not been able to confirm a definitive association between fruit and vegetable intake and cancer risk.
And the good news, as far as the science goes: the results were based on data collected from more than 400,000 subjects. Wow.
The bad news, in terms of the results, was indicated in the title. There was -
only a weak association between high fruit and vegetable intake and reduced overall cancer risk, according to a study published online April 6, 2010 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Again — how weak was that association between variables?
In terms of the research, the bad news is that this was no controlled experiment. The findings are completely based upon questionnaires and medical statistics. Fortunately, the article contained these two, five-star paragraphs:
The authors caution against attributing any risk reduction to diet and they conclude that any cancer protective effect of these foods is likely to be modest, at best.
“In this population, a higher intake of fruits and vegetables was also associated with other lifestyle variables, such as lower intake of alcohol, never-smoking, short duration of tobacco smoking, and higher level of physical activity, which may have contributed to a lower cancer risk,” they write.
Now that’s a good example of how to communicate and model the work of science. Three cheers for it.
So. Any conclusions? From these and other studies it doesn’t seem dietary changes are a magic bullet for all that ails us, for preventing and treating the myriad forms of disorders and disease. Sure, some dietary changes can and do influence some conditions: sugar intake and diabetes is an obvious one. Yet, overall, the general idea of food as the perfect medicine seems to fall far short. Which, personally speaking, is a bit of a bummer. I, for one, would love to have my prescriptions filled at the vegetable market. In the least, I wouldn’t need a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down.
> Related Posts
Tags: alternative medicine, diet
Leave a Reply