Like many other biological sciences, we now recognize nutrition research to be a matter of gene-environment interaction. Due to its complexity, nutrition has traditionally been an observational science; matching physiology with molecular thinking was next to impossible. As a result, animal models were discarded and human studies were limited to available biomarkers. With these blunt tools, human studies proceeded in heterogeneous patient populations.
The nature of nutrition is nuanced. Unlike pharmacologic interventions, food contains multiple bioactives, usually with low receptor affinities. Consequently, weak or even conflicting biological effects were observed. In seeking the statistical power of large cohorts, subtle differences become blurred. Several times, epidemiology and meta-analysis have killed solid evidence in properly performed human intervention trials and mechanistic research in animal models.1
Apparently, the major dilemma that nutrition research faces is a focus on health instead of disease without the tools to quantify health properly. So, the challenge in ...
