You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition

Re:You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition by Grishnakh on Thursday January 07, 2016 @10:57AM (#10858612)

Not only that, but people's bodies differ greatly. People have different metabolisms, males use more energy than females, some people are bigger (taller) and heavier than others, etc. Also, people's bodies just work differently, some of which may be attributable to gut bacteria. Some people can get away with eating a lot more calories than others, or different foods, and have a totally different effect.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition by woobar on Thursday January 07, 2016 @11:06AM (#10858672)

All these factors are accounted for. I.e. in a controlled environment individual metabolic rate, weight, gender, etc will be measured.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition by HelloMcFly on Thursday January 07, 2016 @11:30AM (#10858848)

What wouldn't likely be measured with any sort of accuracy is individual variance is gut microbiota, which I'd assume could lead to notable differences. Even so, I think we'd get more signal than noise doing our best to measure and factor out what we are currently able to.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition by biomcgary on Thursday January 07, 2016 @01:37PM (#10859784)

Sequencing to identify gut microbiota is now common in research. The general makeup of gut bacteria is relatively stable, so weekly or monthly sampling should be adequate.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:You Can’t Trust What You Read About Nutrition by DrScump on Thursday January 07, 2016 @06:30PM (#10861653)

Microbiome, one of the most important factors, is not accounted for. Neither is genetics.

[ Parent | on HN ]