In my most recent post on nutrition and health, I highlighted the issue of the nature of complexity of nutrition in health and disease, and noted that we have a long way to go in research studies to better understand the relationship between nutrition and health. Although significant progress has been made in nutritional research within the biomedical model of health and disease, I am of the view that this is unlikely to lead us a better understanding of challenges in nutrition, health and disease. The current biomedical approaches have gone as far as employing more complex approaches as systems science (article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5298925/.) to explore potential connections between nutrition and health. The systems science approach, also grounded in the biomedical paradigm, however is likely to be less successful in addressing the current nutritional science problems, as the approaches incorporate some of the scientific research methodologies which are by their own virtue, deficient in scientific research rigor. Just to mention a one or two challenges on this matter: the issue of biochemical individuality is barely accounted for in current biomedical approaches; our current knowledge limitations and the ability to carry out modelling in dynamic living systems , (biochemical processes, nutrient interaction, byproducts, detoxification, biomarkers, health or disease outcomes) is anyone’s guess.
I am of the belief that there is a need for a change in our approaches to scientific research, by expanding our research methodological approaches beyond biomedical paradigm. In my understanding, the natural/holistic health philosophical approaches appear quite logical to pursue for exploration of the food environment in health and disease. The views I hold are drawn from my experiences in my previous veterinary practice, where I had an opportunity to explore nutritional/food environment and metabolic disorders (heart attack or flip-over syndrome) in broiler chicken breeds, raised under intensive commercial/modern foods environment, and the near natural, free range nutritional/food environment.
Resounding evidence of significant cases of heart attack (flip-over syndrome) in broilers raised under the commercial modern food system and non in broilers raised under the free range food system.
Paralleling my findings in the broiler chicken exploration of nutritional environment to human nutritional environment and metabolic, cardiovascular diseases, and in particular heart attack, I realized the need for acknowledging the current limitations of our knowledge on nutrition and health as well as the need for a paradigm shift, from the current, conventional scientific research approaches
Food for thought!
Popular posts from this blog
Most of our health care providers including some M.Ds, nutritionists, dieticians, etc believe and/or would want us to believe that we can get adequate nutrients for optimum health through eating a balanced diet. My guess is such beliefs are based on assumptions derived from Dietary Reference Intake values, accepted as science-based by the biomedical community and policy makers. Of course DRI values are so low that it makes sense to believe that you can meet your nutrient requirement from food intake through eating a variety of foods (given, for example that one orange can provide approx. 65 mg which is within the DRI range for adults). The challenge is: can we achieve optimum health through getting our nutrients from food alone? I argues we don’t, because daily nutrients intake from food alone are ridiculously low ( Hickey and Roberts, 2004), to achieve optimum health. Nutrition is an essential component of our health and that of any living matter. The science of nutrition and heal
The concepts of nature cure as a natural health approach was well elucidated in the early 20th Century by one of the first pioneer authors Henry Lindlahr, in one of his book series of nature cure as follows: “ It is vastly more than a system of curing aches and pains; it is a complete revolution in the art and science of living. It is the practical realization and application of all that is good in natural science, philosophy and religion. “The philosophy of Nature Cure is based on sciences dealing with newly discovered or rediscovered natural laws and principles, and with their application to the phenomena of life and death, health, disease and cure”. Use of nature cure as an enabler for being the boss of your own health (taking charge of your own health) is based on the simplicity of the nature cure approach as compared to the orthodox medical approach in addressing health matters. Lindlahr (1922) argues that nature cure is considered an “exact science”, which reduces com
Most of us were raised in modern environments living modern lifestyles. Modern generations are completely detached from their ancestral (cave man type life-style and diets). Our current conventional approaches to health is based on reliance on therapeutic interventions from experts (health-care providers - doctors, nurses, etc. ) when we get diseased, i.e., we play a passive role in our own health. Natural health approaches are grounded in the philosophy which holds that, the human body has the capability of healing itself. In natural health, all healing is essentially self-healing, a basic property of all living beings . Unfortunately, the human generations of modernity have lost this inherent ability to live in harmony with nature and utilizing nature’s fundamentals that build and maintain health. Most if not all non-humans living organisms, however still preserved the ability to utilize nature’s fundamentals that build and maintain health. This explains the basis of survival