0
komentar
This is just a quick post to highlight two recent papers by the economist and fellow health writer Matt Metzgar.
The first paper is titled "The Feasibility of a Paleolithic Diet for Low-income Consumers", and is co-authored by Dr. Todd C. Rideout, Maelan Fontes-Villalba, and Dr. Remko S. Kuipers (1). They found that a Paleolithic-type diet that meets all micronutrient requirements except calcium (which probably has an unnecessarily high RDA) costs slightly more money than a non-Paleolithic diet that fulfills the same requirements, but both are possible on a tight budget.
The second paper is titled "Externalities From Grain Consumption: a Survey", with Matt Metzgar as the sole author (2). He reviews certain positive and negative externalities due to the effects of grain consumption on health. The take-home message is that refined grains are unhealthy and therefore costly to society, whole grains are better, but grains in general have certain healthcare-related economic costs that are difficult to deny, such as celiac disease.
There are a lot of ideas floating around on the blogosphere, some good and others questionable. Composing a manuscript and submitting it to a reputable scientific journal is a good way to demonstrate that your idea holds water, and it's also a good way to communicate it to the scientific community. The peer review process isn't perfect but it does encourage scientific rigor. I think Metzgar is a good example of someone who has successfully put his ideas through this process. Pedro Bastos, who also spoke at the Ancestral Health Symposium, is another example (3).
The first paper is titled "The Feasibility of a Paleolithic Diet for Low-income Consumers", and is co-authored by Dr. Todd C. Rideout, Maelan Fontes-Villalba, and Dr. Remko S. Kuipers (1). They found that a Paleolithic-type diet that meets all micronutrient requirements except calcium (which probably has an unnecessarily high RDA) costs slightly more money than a non-Paleolithic diet that fulfills the same requirements, but both are possible on a tight budget.
The second paper is titled "Externalities From Grain Consumption: a Survey", with Matt Metzgar as the sole author (2). He reviews certain positive and negative externalities due to the effects of grain consumption on health. The take-home message is that refined grains are unhealthy and therefore costly to society, whole grains are better, but grains in general have certain healthcare-related economic costs that are difficult to deny, such as celiac disease.
There are a lot of ideas floating around on the blogosphere, some good and others questionable. Composing a manuscript and submitting it to a reputable scientific journal is a good way to demonstrate that your idea holds water, and it's also a good way to communicate it to the scientific community. The peer review process isn't perfect but it does encourage scientific rigor. I think Metzgar is a good example of someone who has successfully put his ideas through this process. Pedro Bastos, who also spoke at the Ancestral Health Symposium, is another example (3).
