Cutting Through Nutritional Confusion
Understanding the gap between research and practice
“ It certainly doesn’t help us that the crucial advances we’re making at the forefront of longevity science, nutrition science, and functional medicine take so long to move from research to practice. In fact, multiple studies on translational research have found that it takes an average of seventeen years for research to reach clinical practice. We’ve hamstrung ourselves at every corner!”
– Mark Hyman, M.D.
Nutrition is a rapidly evolving field of science. For the past six decades, the dietary elements of human health have been unearthed at an increasing rate. Yet it has barely been a century since vitamin D was discovered in 1920, insulin in 1921, and the Kreb cycle in 1937, explaining for the first time how our cells convert glucose and oxygen into usable energy. In recent years, many nutrient-sensing and signaling pathways have been discovered, heretofore unknown. In the world of functional medicine, even our bodily systems are being reconstructed into a new model of understanding. In this paradigm, our organs are no longer separate, but form intricately interrelated systems.
A number of nutritional laws that were cast in stone for decades have also been overturned – or in some cases, revealed as false conclusions prematurely or deliberately released to the public for the sake of industry interests. Let us remember that the pharmaceutical industry, the food industry, and the agricultural industry are the biggest funders of mainstream media, with direct influence over content. Big Pharma, Big Food, and Big Ag also use their financial might to commission studies designed to lead to conclusions that will maximize their profits. Any outcomes to the contrary are simply not reported. Even if initial findings are eventually overturned, it’s the first headlines that stick in the public mind – and form the basis of institutional policies.
All this changing and conflicting information adds up to a lot of confusion. How can we sift through the shifting sands of changing and contradictory assertions? How do we distinguish a half-baked trend from solid, reliable truth?
To a large degree it’s about catching up with the times. Outdated 20th century nutrition beliefs continue to prevail in mainstream medicine, even if they’ve been disproven again and again. To help close the gap between current research and applied practice, this article offers a brief overview of some the most salient concepts that are worth updating. Understanding this time lag between knowledge and practice can help you make clear and informed choices.