Balanced nutrition theory: advantages and disadvantages

The theory of balanced nutrition is distinguished by the rigor and consistency of its axiomatics. It underlies all modern nutrition concepts and has allowed for a scientific explanation of food needs for energy, plastic and other components.

The theory of balanced nutrition has served as the basis for modern food technologies and has made it possible to develop practical measures related to food resources and nutrition. It underlies industrial, agricultural and medical developments, which are largely based on the idea that improving the properties of food consumed can be achieved by increasing the content of nutrients against the background of a decrease in the proportion of ballast.

In the classical theory, the alimentary tract is considered as an almost ideal chemical plant, operating in non-ideal conditions due to some defects in raw materials (for example, contamination of food products), as well as due to the presence of bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract. At the same time, there are special systems that provide protection from bacterial competition for nutrients, from the penetration of bacteria into the internal environment of the body, from the toxic effects of bacteria, from invasions, etc. In the new theory of adequate nutrition, the idea has gradually formed that the bacterial flora plays a dual role - on the one hand, a competitor of the macroorganism for nutrients and a potential pathogen, on the other - an important symbiont and supplier of secondary nutrients.

The fundamental shortcomings of the classical theory include its anthropocentric nature, that is, its focus on solving applied problems of human nutrition, or more precisely, problems of rational human nutrition in conditions when a person is not able to clearly establish his or her nutritional needs. In other words, this theory is not biological and evolutionary enough. Interestingly, the classical theory of nutrition cannot explain the sharp differences in the composition of diets traditionally used by people in different climatic zones. For example, a rational diet based on the theory of balanced nutrition and suitable for Europeans cannot always be used to feed northern peoples, whose diet consists mainly of meat, fat and fish. However, this diet does not cause any harmful effects. Even more surprising is the predominantly plant-based diet of most residents of India and many Negro tribes. In the diet of the latter, the total amount of protein does not exceed 5-8%. Equally striking are the differences in the consumption of minerals by different peoples. (In this case, we are considering the physiological needs of the body for the corresponding salts.)

The classical theory is also unsuitable for explaining the regulation of nutrition in most groups of organisms with different types of nutrition and with different mechanisms of food processing based on the principles of self-regulation.

Thus, during the greatest successes of the theory of balanced nutrition, its crisis intensified, which led to the formation of a new theory of nutrition, which we called the theory of adequate nutrition. At present, it has been shown that this theory allows us to solve a number of difficult theoretical and applied problems, before which traditional approaches were powerless.

Conclusions

This article has briefly reviewed the classical theory of nutrition, often referred to as the theory of balanced nutrition. This theory was initially shaped as anthropocentric, and many important biological and evolutionary approaches of general significance were left aside and not taken into account by it.

[ 1 ], [ 2 ], [ 3 ], [ 4 ], [ 5 ], [ 6 ]