wedrifid comments on What should I have for dinner? (A case study in decision making) - Less Wrong

23 Post author: bentarm 12 August 2010 01:29PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (106)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wedrifid 12 August 2010 04:27:42PM *  3 points [-]

Incidentally, another bit of "conventional wisdom" that's been overturned, along the lines of the butter/margarine reversal: according to controlled studies, large doses of antioxidants reduces life expectancy. And by "antioxidants" I mostly mean vitamin E:

This does make you wonder just what on earth people were thinking when they thought extremely large doses of something fat soluble was a good idea. Crazy. I am somewhat wary of saying 'large doses of antioxidants reduces life expectancy'... that seems to be completely the wrong inference to make. Melatonin is a far stronger anti-oxidant than vitamin E but ridiculously high doses of melatonin don't cause the same problem. (By ridiculously high I refer to levels of antioxidising power that would require easily fatal levels of vitamin E to achieve.) Why don't they try the generalisation "large doses of fat soluble vitamins"? That's far more credible.

Comment author: CronoDAS 12 August 2010 05:38:23PM 0 points [-]

/me shrugs

I don't really know all the details, but "Eat this because it has antioxidants, which are good for you" still seems like a bit of a lie...

Comment author: wedrifid 13 August 2010 05:26:05AM 0 points [-]

Good point.