Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

empirical.health

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 85 posts

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#61

Post by sarchertech »

delichon wrote: post #49

The meta-analysis is of epidemiological data, which shows association, but since there is no intervention, cannot show causation and does not claim to. It does not distinguish an effect of fiber from healthy user bias. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3077477/

It doesn’t, but we do have plausible mechanisms to explain the effect.

Fiber lowers LDL cholesterol, slows digestion, makes you feel full longer, and helps with regularity, so increasing your fiber intake is probably worth it anyway.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#62

Post by thisislife2 »

m463 wrote: post #29
jimkri wrote: post #12

Super interesting to read! I have noticed a huge benefit from just adding Metamucil to my diet. The following lines from the article really resonate. >Insoluble fibers have fecal-bulking characteristics that may promote regular bowel movements and avoid constipation. >"Specifically, soluble fiber binds to bile acids in the intestine" I have started to take Metamucil more frequently because I was taking an algae suppl…

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be. The thing about metamucil is that it has either added sugar or artificial sweeteners. the main ingredient is psyllium husk. I like benefiber better - no taste, just sprinkle on food. But I don't know how wheat dextrin compares to psyllium husk (or other fibers) A nurse I talked to takes psyllium husk by itself, and I wonder if that is better than metamucil…

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be.

There are plenty of foods rich in fiber that you don't need to consider supplements. The article itself mentions - Foods high in soluble fiber including avocados, whole grains, chickpeas, apples, lentils, broccoli, brussels sprouts, certain seeds, and artichokes. Most fruits and vegetables also have varying amount of fiber, as does some variety of rice, millets and wheat (that are common in some Asian diets). See https://www.cancer.org/cancer/survivorship/coping/nutrition/... for more.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#63

Post by jaapz »

chrisweekly wrote: post #42
m463 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be. The thing about metamucil is that it has either added sugar or artificial sweeteners. the main ingredient is psyllium husk. I like benefiber better - no taste, just sprinkle on food. But I don't know how wheat dextrin compares to psyllium husk (or other fibers) A nurse I talked to takes psyllium husk by itself, and I wonder if that is better than metamucil…

The 3-in-1 capsules are no sugar, just 2 ingredients: psyllium husk, gelatin. Swallow w/ water, taste is not a factor.

Why not just start eating foods with more fiber in them?

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#64

Post by delichon »

brandonb wrote: post #60
delichon wrote: post #49

The meta-analysis is of epidemiological data, which shows association, but since there is no intervention, cannot show causation and does not claim to. It does not distinguish an effect of fiber from healthy user bias. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3077477/

Unfortunately, this is a limitation of nearly all nutritional studies. Partly we use mechanistic evidence to separate cause from effect--that's part of why the article goes into detail about, e.g., how soluble fiber binds to bile in the liver. If there's an association between A and B, and a known physiological mechanism where A causes C which causes B, it makes it more likely that ultimately A is the cause of B.

It's a limitation of all epidemiological studies. These are a great way to target more expensive randomized controlled trials that are also more invasive by definition. Nutrition science has lots of those and needs more.

In an N=1 intervention study, I too found fiber to be health supporting, but that wasn't randomized or controlled.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#65

Post by NotMichaelBay »

BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #59
NotMichaelBay wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's good that they "buried the lede", isn't it? Better than the product being mentioned early and often throughout the article.

No, because then you'd have wasted time reading what turned out to be ad copy.

You're implying that the article has no value because its purpose is to attract readers to ultimately make a purchase. But if you're trying to attract readers, arguably the best way to do that is to provide something of value to them.

If the goal is to attract readers without providing any value at all, it's extremely easy to do that nowadays with AI. And luckily it's just as easy to identify low-effort articles written by AI.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#66

Post by m463 »

thisislife2 wrote: post #62
m463 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be. The thing about metamucil is that it has either added sugar or artificial sweeteners. the main ingredient is psyllium husk. I like benefiber better - no taste, just sprinkle on food. But I don't know how wheat dextrin compares to psyllium husk (or other fibers) A nurse I talked to takes psyllium husk by itself, and I wonder if that is better than metamucil…

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be. There are plenty of foods rich in fiber that you don't need to consider supplements. The article itself mentions - Foods high in soluble fiber including avocados, whole grains, chickpeas, apples, lentils, broccoli, brussels sprouts, certain seeds, and artichokes. Most fruits and vegetables also have varying amount of fiber, as does some variety of rice, mi…

Have you ever actually compared the amount of fiber foods actually have?

I've tried it and it is hard.

Let's say you need 38g of fiber per day and you need to make up half of it.

You could eat 6 cups of brussel sprouts, or sprinkle 6 packets of benefiber on your food as you eat throughout the day.

Also, a lot of natural fiber in quantity has some unpleasant gastrointestinal side effects.

I'm not saying it is impossible, but it can be quite challenging to get all your fiber from natural sources in our society.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#67

Post by m463 »

dpark wrote: post #53
m463 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of wonder what the best form of added fiber should be. The thing about metamucil is that it has either added sugar or artificial sweeteners. the main ingredient is psyllium husk. I like benefiber better - no taste, just sprinkle on food. But I don't know how wheat dextrin compares to psyllium husk (or other fibers) A nurse I talked to takes psyllium husk by itself, and I wonder if that is better than metamucil…

Benefiber is wheat dextrin. It doesn’t have most of the properties that you want from a fiber supplement. It gets digested by gut microbes so it doesn’t provide bulk. It doesn’t gel so it doesn’t help with cholesterol or blood sugar. Near as I can tell Benefiber is basically a placebo. People feel good for adding “fiber” to their diet but it has none of the effects of psyllium husk or oat fiber. Psyllium husk by itse…

hmm... searching I find:

“Gel-forming psyllium is good for both softening hard stools and firming up loose stools. It is effective in preventing or relieving constipation. Research shows viscous fibers like psyllium or the fiber in oats can have some impact on improving blood sugar control and lowering blood cholesterol levels."

“Fermentable wheat dextrin does not form a gel with liquid, so it is not helpful for constipation or diarrhea. Nor can it help lower cholesterol or control blood sugar. It does, however, serve as a prebiotic, providing nourishment to the gut microbiota. When microbiota ferment fiber, they release gas, so wheat dextrin may cause bloating and flatulence."

https://www.nutritionletter.tufts.edu/gi-health/psyllium-vs-...

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#68

Post by dpark »

m463 wrote: post #67
dpark wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benefiber is wheat dextrin. It doesn’t have most of the properties that you want from a fiber supplement. It gets digested by gut microbes so it doesn’t provide bulk. It doesn’t gel so it doesn’t help with cholesterol or blood sugar. Near as I can tell Benefiber is basically a placebo. People feel good for adding “fiber” to their diet but it has none of the effects of psyllium husk or oat fiber. Psyllium husk by itse…

hmm... searching I find: “Gel-forming psyllium is good for both softening hard stools and firming up loose stools. It is effective in preventing or relieving constipation. Research shows viscous fibers like psyllium or the fiber in oats can have some impact on improving blood sugar control and lowering blood cholesterol levels." “Fermentable wheat dextrin does not form a gel with liquid, so it is not helpful for cons…

Right. So it doesn’t do any of the things generally associated with fiber, except giving you gas.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#69

Post by AaronAPU »

jaapz wrote: post #63
chrisweekly wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 3-in-1 capsules are no sugar, just 2 ingredients: psyllium husk, gelatin. Swallow w/ water, taste is not a factor.

Why not just start eating foods with more fiber in them?

I had chronic digestive issues which almost completely disappeared after taking Metamucil.

Then, about a year later changed my diet and started tracking macros. Was able to stop taking Metamucil after balancing them properly.

I’d consider Metamucil a bandaid, it is easier to supplement than rehaul your entire diet. But the latter is better in the long run for sure.

Re: Fiber reduces overall mortality by 23%

#70

Post by arp242 »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #44

> You can’t improve what you don’t measure I hate the way this saying is commonly used today. I think a literal interpretation is untrue, but many people feel that a literal interpretation is true. For instance, humans get better at speaking whatever language they are surrounded with, even though that is not being actively measured by some metric. It is probably being measured by some implicit cycle in the human brai…

I agree with what you're saying; in the most extreme scenario you end up with the McNamara fallacy, and it's bizarrely common on e.g. HN. But I also think the platitude is appropriate in this case – I probably eat a decent amount of fibre, but is it enough? I don't really know. I'd need to measure it (and it's very possible I could be vastly under- or overestimating some things about my diet).
Post reply on HN