“Why that miracle diet was a dud for you” was the title to an article in Saturday’s paper.
“New study upends everything we thought we knew about ‘healthy’ food” was the byline.
And the bold quote they featured was, “There are profound differences between individuals – in some cases, individuals have opposite response to one another.”
Now you don’t need to read the article – you’ve gotten the point.
Billed as new news because of this study, it really isn’t. Anyone who has read more than a few books on diet and nutrition will quickly notice that although the books are written by apparent geniuses with impeccable pedigrees, sadly, they tend not to agree. The words “biochemical individuality” were in print when I started studying the subject in the early 1970’s: it wasn’t a hard concept to grasp.
The authors of this current article suggest that “tailoring meal plans to individual’ biology may be the future of dieting…”. That’s an open door to any and every marketing department from Seattle to Siagon (going the long), but it isn’t a new claim.
The article points out, rightly, that blanket acceptance of general guidelines (they use the Glycemic Index as an example but there are many), isn’t reliable. Again, not news.
The good news is that will most dietary recommendations you can simply follow them for a while and see what happens. That is qualified, of course, and assumes you are in touch with your body and it’s responses to things as well as how it works to some extent. These are all good to things to learn and know anyway, and any health care professional who has been a student to the subject for any length of time could guide you (or 90% of you).
My approach has always been to work on creating a “health food” list. The foods that are “healthy” for you. And eat from that list. Start with the vegetables and work your way through the fruits, grains, diary and meats categories until you have a general handle on what works for you. Then tweak it from then on forever:-)