Do you know whether eggs are good for you? What about coffee, red wine, or chocolate? Most people probably have a yes-or-no impulse about each of these things, thanks to the amount of media coverage given to studies looking for health benefits or detriments of individual foods. And no matter what you say, you\u2019re probably right, according to at least some of that science\u2014findings often reverse or contradict one another over time, even if the conflicting studies are all methodologically sound.<\/p>\n
\u201cNutritional studies are extremely difficult to do, and it\u2019s very hard to figure out what people are actually eating, even if you try your best,\u201d said the journalist Christie Aschwanden, speaking on a panel at the Aspen Ideas Festival, co-hosted by the Aspen Institute and The Atlantic. \u201cIf I were to ask you how many times you ate tomatoes last year and what serving size tomato you ate, it\u2019s very difficult to answer that question.\u201d<\/p>\n
When studies try to set a diet or even provide food themselves, studying nutrition can still be distressingly inexact for a very relatable reason: Study participants aren\u2019t any better at sticking to a diet than anyone else. \u201cEven if you wanted to take a large group of people and split them into two, what often ends up happening is the two groups are actually much more similar than they\u2019re intended to be because you have adherence problems,\u201d Aschwanden said.<\/p>\n
In spite of study-to-study variation, most nutritionists and researchers agree on the broad strokes. Eating a variety of fresh, minimally processed foods and plenty of fruits and vegetables is one of the simplest ways humans can bolster their health, even if that reality isn\u2019t as new or exciting as many journalists writing about nutrition might wish it were. (Sorry.)<\/p>\n
New research on the variation of people\u2019s responses to particular foods may also explain the circuitous route science has taken to establishing how certain foods affect health. \u201cEverybody assumed there was this one diet which was somehow magic for all people, which couldn\u2019t be further from the truth,\u201d said Eric Topol, another panelist and the executive vice president of Scripps Research. \u201cFinally, what we can acknowledge is that we have this unique response to food, and it\u2019s not just the gut microbiome, but that\u2019s a big part of the story.\u201d<\/p>\n
Research into the gut microbiome and what it can reveal about the personalized nutritional response is still in its infancy, and both Aschwanden and Topol urged caution when evaluating microbiome-testing services that are currently available to consumers because they simply don\u2019t have the evidence necessary to back up their use. For now, it\u2019s waiting and see\u2014and then wait and see more.<\/p>\n