cooked tomato, folic acid, asprin, health benefits?

There are no shortage of websites indicating that research shows huge health benefits of eating lots of cooked or taking folic-acid supplements ( and for men and not just for pregnant women. Here is just one such link: http://www.mensfitness.com/nutrition/supplements/folic-acid ) as well as adults taking small daily doses of aspirin. Here are just some for the health benefits of eating cooked tomatoes:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/557233-what-are-the-benefits-of-simmering-tomato-sauces/

http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Research/Cooking-tomatoes-boosts-health-benefits

perhaps the most impressive being:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1388927/Cooked-tomatoes-good-statins-battling-cholesterol.html

however, there is an awful lot of flawed research and misinformation when it comes to claims about health effects of various foods, vitamins, supplements, drinks etc.
For example, if you look hard enough, you can find many websites indicating that research shows that taking vitamin C prevents the common code. Here is one:

http://www.hipforums.com/newforums/showthread.php?t=175118
“...Overwhelming evidence shows that vitamin C prevents common colds ...”

the problem is that it has been scientifically proven that taking vitamin C does NOT prevent the common cold!
So just because there are many websites saying research shows there are health benefits from taking X does not mean that is probably true.

So here is my questions:

Does eating lots of cooked tomatoes really give significant health benefits or is that claim just based on flawed research?

Does taking folic-acid supplements really give significant health benefits ( and not just to pregnant women ) or is that claim just based on flawed research?

Does taking small daily doses of aspirin really give significant health benefits or is that claim just based on flawed research?




I have also posted this thread at this forum:

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showforum=29

Originally posted by humy
Does eating lots of cooked tomatoes really give significant health benefits or is that claim just based on flawed research?

All Magic Ingredients or Superfoods are based either on flawed research or, more commonly, downright fraud.

HTH; HAND.

Richard

Originally posted by humy
There are no shortage of websites indicating that research shows huge health benefits of eating lots of cooked or taking folic-acid supplements ( and for men and not just for pregnant women. Here is just one such link: http://www.mensfitness.com/nutrition/supplements/folic-acid ) as well as adults taking small daily doses of aspirin. Here are just some for th ...[text shortened]... I have also posted this thread at this forum:

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showforum=29

Sorry, misprint; left out “tomatoes” in:

“There are no shortage of websites indicating that research shows huge health benefits of eating lots of cooked or...”

Which should have been:

“There are no shortage of websites indicating that research shows huge health benefits of eating lots of cooked tomatoes or...”

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
All Magic Ingredients or Superfoods are based either on flawed research or, more commonly, downright fraud.

HTH; HAND.

Richard

But do they ( the research scientists; not the marketeers/advertisers ) claim in this case to have “magic ingredients" rather than just "ingredients" or "superfood" rather than just "food"?

I am not saying the claims are sound but, surely, just the mere claim that eating X give health benefit Y doesn't necessarily make the claim flawed?

Eat what you like and darned enjoy it: we're all going to die one day anyway!

-m. 😉

Originally posted by mikelom
Eat what you like and darned enjoy it: we're all going to die one day anyway!

-m. 😉

But I rather die in 30 years time rather than 20.
If eating what I like means I die in 29.9 years time rather than 30 then I think I probably want to do that but if it takes a whole year off my life then I don't think so because I don't feel that eating what I like would make me so much happier that it is worth a whole year of precious life for me.

Besides, I don't dislike eating lots of cooked tomatoes and taking daily aspirin and folic acid and eating a low-fat diet etc not that I am implying here that that all of those things would lengthen my life -I am just trying to separate fact from fiction here so that I can make an informed chioce.

Originally posted by humy
But do they ( the research scientists; not the marketeers/advertisers ) claim in this case to have “magic ingredients" rather than just "ingredients" or "superfood" rather than just "food"?

I am not saying the claims are sound but, surely, just the mere claim that eating X give health benefit Y doesn't necessarily make the claim flawed?

That wasn't the claim in the OP. There, the claim was of "huge" benefits for eating "lots" of a specific food. That some general food categories, eaten in moderation, provide some benefits to your health, is neither new nor surprising. That this one ingredient is purported to give above-rational benefits when eaten in above-rational amounts makes this claim just another superfood myth, which can (and even must) prima facie be assumed to have been sponsored by the producers of the food in question.

Richard

Originally posted by Shallow Blue
That wasn't the claim in the OP. There, the claim was of "huge" benefits for eating "lots" of a specific food. That some general food categories, eaten in moderation, provide some benefits to your health, is neither new nor surprising. That this one ingredient is purported to give above-rational benefits when eaten in above-rational amounts makes ...[text shortened]... [/i] be assumed to have been sponsored by the producers of the food in question.

Richard

I fail to see a sharp dividing line or vital distinction between “lots of” X and “moderate amounts of” X nor between “huge" benefits and “significant but plausible” benefits.

I also don't care about nor see any relevance of whether some food has been sponsored by the producers of the food in question -what has that got to do with whether valid science says that food has some specific health benefit? I am not implying here that the health claims are valid but is there some logical contradiction between a food having a significant health benefit and a producer of that food sponsoring it?

Originally posted by humy
I am not implying here that the health claims are valid but is there some logical contradiction between a food having a significant health benefit and a producer of that food sponsoring it?

It is rather a case of any claims / scientific findings that are the product of a sponsor who has an interest in a given outcome should be suspect.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It is rather a case of any claims / scientific findings that are the product of a sponsor who has an interest in a given outcome should be suspect.

Yes, but if the claims/scientific findings are then independently ( from these sponsors that have an interest in a given outcome ) scientifically verified, I don't see the problem.

Originally posted by humy
Yes, but if the claims/scientific findings are then independently ( from these sponsors that have an interest in a given outcome ) scientifically verified, I don't see the problem.

I have yet to see a case in which they are, is all I'm saying.

Richard

Eating cooked tomatoes is best done by eating lots of italian ragu type sauces, so it must be worth a try, even if it is bs you have still eaten lots of lovely grub.

Originally posted by kevcvs57
Eating cooked tomatoes is best done by eating lots of italian ragu type sauces, so it must be worth a try, even if it is bs you have still eaten lots of lovely grub.

Ah now, that I can only wholeheartedly agree with! There are few dishes better than a good ragù where taste is concerned - if any at all.

Richard

(Also, I'm not saying tomatoes aren't good for you. I'm saying that, until I see real evidence, I refuse to believe that they're much more good for you than other vegetables eaten in sane amounts.)