Naked Science Forum
General Science => General Science => Topic started by: Pseudoscience-is-malarkey on 21/06/2016 10:56:42
-
Does unhealthy food generally taste so good because of it's concentrated life sustaining properties? Is it unhealthy simply because humans eat too much of it?
-
Would it be wrong to state that maybe it's because it's meant to be good? That as far as evolution goes, that maybe we've developed a liking towards it BECAUSE it's unhealthy? That maybe we're meant to indulge in some unhealthy behaviors, that maybe nature intends us to only live to 50? We must understand that it is our technology and medical advances that enable us to live so much older than we're meant to. We're doing that on purpose; possibly in spite of evolution and nature.
Species evolve to survive as a species. But by doing as much as we are to increase our life span we are also overpopulating the planet. We're healthier, so we're living longer. We're healthier, so we're having more offspring. More born, less dying, overpopulated planet. Eventually we will not be able to sustain ourselves, and our species as an entirety will be put at risk. This goes squarely against what evolution and nature itself call for; which is for us to strive to survive as a species.
So maybe we like it cause we're meant to. Maybe we're meant to die younger, meant to have diseases and ailments that keep our populations in check. Maybe we're meant to have lower sperm counts and reproductive rates and all the other things that can come from unhealthy behaviors. Maybe, all the health nuts and all the health food industry are actually doing is hurting our species in the long run, actually creating an unsustainable system that some day will come crashing down on the species as a whole, no matter how much red meat you avoided. Maybe it's the ones who love unhealthy stuff and have no qualms eating it such as I do, who are the ones that are ultimately helping humanity and the planet. Ehhh, i dunno lol. Heck, I have no idea if I even believe whatsoever any of what I just wrote and it was more a mental exercise than anything... Just an impulsive top of my head answer to your question that popped in after I read it. But hey, it is kinda food for thought... (no pun intended!)
-
The things we like -broadly fatty, sweet, salted foods are only unhealthy because we can easily get too much of them.
In moderation they are actually very good food. If you were starving these sorts of things would exactly what you needed.
-
Don't ask - ENJOY
-
The things we like -broadly fatty, sweet, salted foods are only unhealthy because we can easily get too much of them.
In moderation they are actually very good food. If you were starving these sorts of things would exactly what you needed.
I agree, in early evolution of mankind sweet or fatty are sources high energy, but you don't get them very often. To kill a deer takes a lot of coordinated energy and there has to be a high payback to make it worthwhile.
On the other hand, I think JimBob has got it right (in moderation of course [;)]
-
Our taste receptors and brain evolved to reward the consumption of high concentration of essential nutrients that may have been rare. In modern day, food scientists concentrate those nutrients in our food to hijack the reward mechanism.
-
Our taste receptors and brain evolved to reward the consumption of high concentration of essential nutrients that may have been rare. In modern day, food scientists concentrate those nutrients in our food to hijack the reward mechanism.
I was a big fan of donuts long before anyone was doing "food science".
The problem isn't so much with the concentration- as with the total amount. It's easy for most of us to get a lot more food than we need. That's more to do with agriculture than food science.
-
Our taste receptors and brain evolved to reward the consumption of high concentration of essential nutrients that may have been rare. In modern day, food scientists concentrate those nutrients in our food to hijack the reward mechanism.
I was a big fan of donuts long before anyone was doing "food science".
The problem isn't so much with the concentration- as with the total amount. It's easy for most of us to get a lot more food than we need. That's more to do with agriculture than food science.
Yes, scarcity of food was a real issue even 100 years ago, before the Green Revolution. We were eating small scraps that probably did not cover our tongue very much, so our taste receptors would have to be quite sensitive to detect something. Now I'm guessing our taste receptors are too sensitive for the mouthfuls of food we have every day.
-
I think the "greens" have it the wrong way round, for the benefit of the planet it should be make war not love instead make love not war!
-
I spent 0.5 hours listening to a famous doctor selling his supplements on the internet recently. He came to the conclusion that we have good bacteria in our stomachs and bad bacteria. The good bacteria loves fruits and vegetables and the bad bacteria loves cakes and goodies. thus a person has to cleanse himself of the bad bacteria. And the health food industry has similar claims. Is it true? It seems possible but I am not going to spend $50 per month for his supplements. I would rather spend it on fruits and vegetables. Sadly I am hooked on a supply of candy, cake, and icecream. But I try to limit them and I am about 20 pounds more than I should be. Lately I am using an exercise bike. So the moral of the story is eat more veggies and exercise more and enjoy a small amount of goodies.