The butter complexity

Over the years I have read many articles about nutrition and it seems from the range, there is no consensus on any one position. Personally, I aim lower carbohydrate and try to eat enough fresh vegetables and limit processed foods. I am no fanatic though and my sweet tooth may actually be my entire jaw.

My doughnut habit is not on trial here today though. When I was young, butter was seen as some kind of evil force that caused fat and heart disease. These days, some still see it so and others recommend it over the alternatives. There still doesn't seem to be a solid consensus over it and most will say to consume it in moderation. This is an often used go to statement for food (and other things) when they don't really know or can't agree.

My question is this: If the doctors can't find consensus over butter, how can they recommend aspirin? Or ibuprofen? Or any one of the thousands upon thousands of chemicals that have been developed and are used as medication and food additives. Butter itself has been consumed for thousands of years and we as a species are still here. The chemical composition of butter is quite simple in comparison to the man made compounds found in just about everything these days.

When testing the safety of a chemical, how do they really know it is safe? The body is made up of many different compounds and even if they test something for safety against them all today, we are finding new chemicals in our bodies with some regularity. As well as new enzymes and gut bacteria that interact with the cells of our body and processes that we didn't even know existed previously.

So, if aspirin was tested against what was known at the time, since that time, many new body compounds and processes have been discovered. Do they go back and test all past chemicals against the new finding? Probably not.

The body is a complex system that has been designed to act and react in a certain way, based on a limited range of food sources. As we have industrialised, we have introduced a massive amount of compounds that were never before experienced by any of our ancestors so the chance of having the physical mechanisms to cope with them is unlikely. Plus, adding complexity to any system multiplies the chance of incompatibilities and breakages exponentially.

So, why do we blindly swallow whatever pill a doctor recommends? A doctor that is unlikely to have been involved in the testing and is often incentivised to sell one medication over another. Don't get me wrong, I think that doctors generally do the best they can and medicine is quite miraculous and needed at times but, for every mild headache?

We medicate ourselves (or want to be medicated) whenever the slightest discomfort appears. Whenever we feel pain or sadness. Whenever someone thinks a child is too wild or a teenager too melancholic. The slightest twinge is met with some coloured pill that promises to relieve the pain, not cure it. The damage is still there, even if the pain is not. And many headaches can be eased with a glass or two of water and a nap.

We seem increasingly willing to take an 'easy' way to health without thinking of where the path may lead. Rather than eat quality food, exercise regularly, sleep enough, drink enough water and understand how our mind and body works and interacts with the world, we avoid the difficulty it takes and again put our lives in the hands of others. Rather than simplicity, we look to complicate.

And those others seem to always have a cure on hand for every ailment. A pill for every pain. Creams and lotions and treatments for a thousand other problems, they have us covered for it all. And we pay trillions for it.

But when it comes to feeding hungry people, closing income gaps, improving equality, reducing personal debt, improving education systems, creating jobs and a thousand other issues. The problems are too big, just too complex I hear.

Still no pill available.

Taraz
[ a Steemit original ]