One of the many unintended consequences of this wired, connected world is that certain words become widely used and referred to because they sound good. Frequently, though, the meaning gets lost, or was never really known in the first place. So it is for the word “antioxidant”.
When I hear or see that word, I think about nutrition, not being sick, and long healthy life. No doubt this is due to the millions of advertisements that use “antioxidant” to sell any product under the sun that might be health related including hand creams! But is that what the word really means?
Well, it turns out that no, that’s not really what it means. In fact at least one professional doesn’t believe that it means anything at all.
In a speech earlier this year a Dr. Carl Keen, Professor of nutrition and Internal medicine at the University of California, called for banning the word from all food labeling because it is too generic and non-specific.
In his talk Dr. Keen said “We have to stop talking about the antioxidant property of food before it is consumed. These test tube results have no relevance”. He went on to say “It like saying a mineral rich diet is good for your bones. Well, calcium and magnesium are, but what about arsenic.”
Read more about his opinion and see if you don’t agree. Follow this link
And, if you were wondering, this is the dictionary definition of “antioxidant”:
“a substance (as beta-carotene or vitamin C) that inhibits oxidation or reaction promoted by oxygen, perosices, or free radicals” Merriam Webster.com