I seem to remember that eating enough fruit/vegetables alone raises your IQ by several points.
That seems highly unlikely. Links?
Certain nutrient deficiencies in childhood can stunt development and curtail IQ (iodine is a classic example, that’s why there is such a thing as iodized salt), but I don’t think you’re talking about that.
I’m not sure exactly where I read this, but here are some links with similarly impressive claims (albeit with the standard disclaimers about correlation not implying causation):
Based on parents’ reports, researchers assigned kids to one of three diet categories: a “processed” diet, high in fat, sugar and calories; a “traditional” diet (in the British sense), made up of meat, potatoes, bread and vegetables; and a “health-conscious” diet of whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, rice, pasta and lean proteins like fish.Based on parents’ reports, researchers assigned kids to one of three diet categories: a “processed” diet, high in fat, sugar and calories; a “traditional” diet (in the British sense), made up of meat, potatoes, bread and vegetables; and a “health-conscious” diet of whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, rice, pasta and lean proteins like fish.
…
For each unit increase in processed food diets, children lost 1.67 points in IQ.
On measures of mental sharpness, older people who ate more than two servings of vegetables daily appeared about five years younger at the end of the six-year study than those who ate few or no vegetables.
The obvious question to ask of the first study is whether they controlled for the parents’ IQ (or at least things like socio-economic status).
Indeed. But I don’t have the time to read their papers (not that the article linked to the original paper), and its not my field anyway. From a practical viewpoint, good diet might give significant advantages (if not in IQ, then in other areas of health) and is extremely unlikely to cause any harm, so the expected cost-benefit analysis is very positive.
That seems highly unlikely. Links?
Certain nutrient deficiencies in childhood can stunt development and curtail IQ (iodine is a classic example, that’s why there is such a thing as iodized salt), but I don’t think you’re talking about that.
I’m not sure exactly where I read this, but here are some links with similarly impressive claims (albeit with the standard disclaimers about correlation not implying causation):
http://healthland.time.com/2011/02/08/toddlers-junk-food-diet-may-lead-to-lower-iq
It would help if they said what a ‘unit’ is.
http://www.nootropics.com/vegetables/index.html
These standard disclaimers are pretty meaningful here.
The obvious question to ask of the first study is whether they controlled for the parents’ IQ (or at least things like socio-economic status).
Indeed. But I don’t have the time to read their papers (not that the article linked to the original paper), and its not my field anyway. From a practical viewpoint, good diet might give significant advantages (if not in IQ, then in other areas of health) and is extremely unlikely to cause any harm, so the expected cost-benefit analysis is very positive.
Oh, that is certainly true. The only problem is that everyone has their own idea of what “good diet” means and these ideas do not match X-)
I think most people agree on vegetables, in fact this is one of the few things diets do agree on.