[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 294 KB, 500x352, 1353767620999.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5295464 No.5295464 [Reply] [Original]

I'm scientifically illiterate and I'm just overwhelmed by health/nutritional advice. Critical thinking and skepticism can only get you so far when there are all these contradiciting studies and you can't tell whether studies and figures have been used accurately or just spun to back up a claim

I see paleo people, people who say to eat throughout the day to increase metabolism while others say it doesn't matter when you eat, normal carbs are ok to eat, doesn't matter vs. must be complex carbs, it just goes on and on

I don't trust the popular science books because a) they contradict each other b) even if I look up the studies that are cited I don't know what to make of them, I can't tell if they're good studies, what their significance is in context with other research, if it's redundant etc etc

So how do I know what to do?

>> No.5295471

Eat a lot of healthy meals throughout the day. I'm talking 7+ small meals comprised mostly of fresh fruits and vegetables.

Also eat lots of fiber.

>> No.5295472

>>5295471
fucking sauce?

I've heard from a lot of people that the eat small meals thing is a bullshit myth

>> No.5295475

>>5295472
what the fuck do you need sauce for you fucking retard? What sounds healthier? Eating 8 pounds of McDonalds once a day or lightly snacking on fruits all day?

>> No.5295479

>>5295475
That's a ridiculous fallacy, and science is more than following common sense. I want to know how to be as healthy as possible, and I want to know why I have to eat 7+ small meals a day.

>> No.5295483

>>5295475

Where did OP mention McDonalds?

>> No.5295522

>>5295479

There is no way of knowing what the healthiest diet is. Even tiny changes in diet could result in years being added to your life or you might very slowly develop various forms of metabolic problems. Each person also has tiny differences which mean they are more prone to have problems related to various kinds of diets and which might not even be obvious until the diet has been sustained for decades.

There are some clear contenders for worst diets possible which people have been known to have, but most of the time we have literally no idea what happens with the food we eat on a regular basis. Like did you know that almost all vegetables contain chemicals which cause cancer? Like they weren't sprayed on them nor has it anything to do with GMO. They are native to the plan make them so that tiny bugs and microorganisms don't ravenously consume the vegetables.

Literally everything you eat contributes to your death and unhealthiness.

>> No.5295545

>>5295522
Then at least help me make sense of all the research into health and nutrition, to make the best guess at how to be as healthy as possible and not to waste time and money on things like "eat small meals throughout the day to increase metabolism" when there's no evidence to show that, or conflicting evidence

>> No.5295566

>>5295545

Eat on medium amounts of food on regular basis try to broaden your meats, greens and fruits as much as possible and you'll be fine.

Like seriously, most people that die do so because they were alive for a long time, not because they didn't eat very healthy. Most people who eat "healthily" usually do other things as well, like exercise or just have an amazing roll of the genetic dice.

Don't listen to people who try to tell you what the best diet is. Most diets work fine because the human body is amazing. As long as you don't experience serious health problems, just keep eating and try not to over do any one thing.

>> No.5296176

>>5295464
strictly anecdotal, but I'll testify for the "Cave Man Diet"

http://www.grc.com/health.htm

>> No.5296202

>>5295464
you just go to fucking pubmed and search for experiments. also if you aren't an athlete and is science illiterate just stick to caloric deficit logic if you want to lose weight.

>> No.5296206

i see just the same amounts of broscience as i see in /fit/
i'm kinda disappointed

>> No.5296215
File: 13 KB, 250x250, ishygddt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5296215

>>5295471
>>5295475
>>5296176
>OP asks how to assess scientific studies
>gets wild assumptions pulled from thin air and a link to pseudoscience

OP, here's what you need to do. Look up the institutions that have done the studies. Look up any peer review that has been done. See what past studies they cite. And see who in turns cites the study in question.

>> No.5296219

>>5295566
this.
your body is fucking awesome at pulling nutrients from whatever you give it. Don't eat after you're full, meet your protein/fiber/iron macros (along with other nutrients), and drink plenty of water. that's all you have to do to stay healthy.

>> No.5296220

>>5296202
Didn't I just say, there are loads of studies that I can't make good judgements on and that often conflict with other studies?

Who said anything about losing weight, I want to have the best diet I can have, that's not limited to just scientists and athletes

>>5296206
Exactly! I came here because /fit/ was giving my bullshit and they ended up arguing amongst themselves

I came here for advice on how to make sense of everything and I just end up with bits and pieces of people's opinions

>> No.5296227

/Fit/'s sticky has legit info:
>>>/fit/4820056

>> No.5296233

Hit your protein.
Preferably eat whole foods (if your great grandma wouldn't recognize it, it doesn't classify) because it's a pain in the ass to manage micronutrients. Also whole foods are tasty and filling.

>> No.5296241

I've had the same problem, so I've tried to find common themes among all those "healthy diets". The gist of what I've found amounts to: fresh vegetables, omega-3 fatty acid, fibers, antioxidants, and as little fructose as possible except for fresh fruits, plus trying to eat enough protein ("enough" seems to be at least 40g or so per day).
Nutritional science struggles with producing consistent results because the body is a very complex system.

>> No.5296263

>>5296220
>I came here for advice on how to make sense of everything and I just end up with bits and pieces of people's opinions

welcome to the human race
even in college i had like 10 teachers for the same subject and they wouldn't agree among themselves while teaching us stuff. they would argue against eachother and give us different grades based on contradicting opinions.

that's why, my friend, i recommended you to go to pubmed and search for studies? i'm telling you to go to pubmed because there you can read about the experiments themselves and look at the statistics they make and not vague nutritional advice.
there's no arguing if you have results right in front of you, it's the closest thing of truthful truth we can get. its what fucking science was made for.

>> No.5296281

>>5296263
If you're not a scientist you don't understand the results and statistics, no matter what. There are so many things:

- You need to know what makes a good experiment, sample size, the design of the experiment and all this, and to know this you need to study biology or whatever the fuck else
- You need to understand the figures and statistics
- You need to know the research in context of all the research in general, you can't do this without studying
- You can't even know the implications of a study if you haven't studied that field and don't actually know what the study is about

>>5296241
I see, the conflicting results make more sense now

>> No.5296299

>>5296281
i know a lot of people who aren't scientists who can read fucking graphics and know basic scientific method. if OP have already read enough amounts of nutrition stuff he probably knows basic concepts like calories, carbs, proteins, fat, hormones and etc. also you can understand scientific articles you are good at reading. it mostly is "if you do X in Y circunstances, A will happen more often than B".

>> No.5296598

>>5296220

>Didn't I just say, there are loads of studies that I can't make good judgements on and that often conflict with other studies?

You're not really going to get anything out of reading studies if you're not educated on the actual topic. It just isn't a simple topic to understand properly, metabolism is extremely complicated and the human body is without a doubt the most insane topic to study.,

I mean say for example that a study determines thawt drinking coffee reduces the risk of getting cancer. Does this mean you should start drinking coffee? Well, what if coffee has a side effect of deteriorating your muscles over time, and after a decade of consumption you'll be unable to move by your own power?

To put it simply, On study might have been right about one effect but it might completely ignore a host of unwanted effects.

And of course if two sample groups live in different countries, they might have different lives, genes and so on, which can make the effects of a substance vary depending on geographical location.

Again, I want to make this clear. Your body is fucking awesome. As long as you don't eat too much or too little, you'll be fine.

>> No.5296611

>>5296299

Yes but the problem is that scientific studies aren't done to give people dietary advice, which is what OP is trying to get out of these studies and unsurprisingly having a hard time doing so.

>> No.5296780

>>5296611
>Yes but the problem is that scientific studies aren't done to give people dietary advice

its like nutrition don't even exist am i right