Nutrition and Psuedoscience

Hey...was on google searching for different information on nutrition and supplements and came across this website commitee for skeptical inquiry...its a skeptic website. Though I am not a skeptic it did raise some good points and was wondering what you people on the forum think about it here is the link....

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/science_and_pseudoscience_in_adult_nutrition_research_and_practice/

Having just glossed over the article and your post, hear are some thoughts that come to mind:

Diet is a tool--I was going heavy on meat for the past several months, now I am mainly on a plant-based diet. The question is: what's your aim? Also, the mental relationship to food counts for a lot. For instance, the difference between a fast and starvation at the onset is determined purely by mental state, which leads to profoundly different physiological reactions. Also, diet seems to be very subjective--there is an emotional attachment to food, as evidenced by posts on this board (fruit anyone?).

Personally, I do not discount approaches that haven't been subjected academic scientific discourse. The universe works. Science will always be playing catch-up to the universe.
That said, I respect scientific inquiry. And am a true skeptic.

Hairbeback - I've always found this topic interesting. Much of the problem I believe is that many vitamins are evaluated as "drugs" or as pharmaceutical synthetic isolates instead of a whole food complex.

Additionally, many studies survey measures that are too broad and are not directly physiological to the body. Further, there is individual biochemistry. I consider the idea model for hair loss prevention (not for everyone) the Australian Aborigines who ate a diet high in fat and protein, and ate absolutely no grains or other products of agriculture. Based on what is known with respect to Lipoprotein(a) levels, their diet would be ideal.

There are other individuals who benefit from more of a plant based diet.

Based on longevity research, I believe it's quite clear that antioxidants (not the isolate forms so commonly known), but of the whole complex forms offer a true edge in extending life span.

I am not a skeptic in the sense of a psuedoskepticism....I am just skeptical of everything, especially if it has no evidence or proof. The CISCOP site does have interesting opposing arguments, but sometimes they come off a bit cynic. I am a truthseeker I am not held down by any dogma from religion, psuedoskepticism, evoultionary dogma. Life is a mysterious and nobody has all the answer....we are not even close.

The battle for information is so confusing lol. And they way many of us lead our lifes it is hard to get through loads of information. I do agree with the trail and error statement....that is probably the safest assesment one can make. Everything works differently for different people.