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
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
The Combined Hydroxychloroquine Zinc COVID-19 Treatment Buzz - A Misunderstanding and/or Misinterpretation of Science.
The talk of the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of COVID-19 is often advocated for by those physicians who use it in combination with Zinc (a common nutritional supplement). Many studies, including a recent report by Horbym and Landray (2020), however have indicated that hydroxychloroquine has not been shown to be effective in treatment of COVID-19. The question then is, on what grounds are those claiming hydroxychloroquine being effective in treatment of coronavirus infection emanating from? Advocates of effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine claim that evidence is obtained from their practical clinical practices. They use hydroxychloroquine in combination with zinc and have witnessed a hands on life-saving experience, attributing treatment success to hydroxychloroquine. However, are these assertions true? Apparently yes - a combination of hydroxychloroquine and zinc is believed to be effective in treating COVID-19, but of the two entities, the main player in the tr
Effects of the coronavirus infection are variably uneven around the globe. Messaging on intervention measures is also featuring in two distinct dimensions, one (inclined towards the biomedical model)represented by countries such as the USA, the UK, Brazil, etc. is centred on long term plans for the search for therapeutic drugs and vaccines against COVID-19. The second dimension is aligned to alternative or integrative health intervention approaches, represented largely by counties in the Asian region including China, advocate for inclusion of natural health healing modalities (use of foods, nutritional supplements, herbs, etc.). The challenge is: are the so called health experts and/or policy makers still guided by science-based evidence on their advisory messaging and if so, where is the science and where is the evidence to help the world contain the scourge of COVID-19 pandemic? Here are a few highlights of emerging findings of some recent studies, in support or dismissing c