Nutrition and Violence

I found this quite interesting. It's preliminary research of course,
but it gives a new perspective on why poverty and violence might
be connected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/ma...n_idealab.html

Does Eating Salmon Lower the Murder Rate?

By STEPHEN MIHM
Published: April 16, 2006

Most prisons are notorious for the quality of their cuisine (pretty
poor) and the behavior of their residents (pretty violent). They are
therefore ideal locations to test a novel hypothesis: that violent
aggression is largely a product of poor nutrition. Toward that end,
researchers are studying whether inmates become less violent when put
on a diet rich in vitamins and in the fatty acids found in seafood.

Could a salmon steak and a side of spinach really help curb violence,
not just in prison but everywhere? In 2001, Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, a
senior clinical investigator at the National Institutes of Health,
published a study, provocatively titled "Seafood Consumption and
Homicide Mortality," that found a correlation between a higher intake
of omega-3 fatty acids (most often obtained from fish) and lower
murder rates.

Of course, seeing a correlation between fatty acids and nonviolence
doesn't necessarily prove that fatty acids inhibit violence. Bernard
Gesch, a senior research scientist at Oxford University, set out to
show that better nutrition does, in fact, decrease violence. He
enrolled 231 volunteers at a British prison in his study; one-half
received a placebo, while the other half received fatty acids and
other supplements. Over time, the antisocial behavior (as measured by
assaults and other violations) of the inmates who had been given the
supplements dropped by more than a third relative to their previous
records. The control group showed little change. Gesch published his
results in 2002 and plans to start a larger study later this year.
Similar trials are already under way in Holland and Norway.

What would it mean if we found a clear link between diet and violent
behavior? To start with, it might challenge the notion that violence
is a product of free will. "But how do you exercise that free will
without using your brain?" Gesch asks. "And how, exactly, is the brain
going to work properly without an adequate nutrient supply?" The
belief that people choose to be violent may be irrelevant if the brain
isn't firing on all cylinders. This may especially be the case for
impulsive acts of violence, which are less a choice than a failure to
rein in one's worst instincts.

Consider, for example, a study conducted by researchers in Finland.
They tested prisoners convicted of violent crimes and found that they
had lower levels of omega-3 fatty acids than ordinary, healthy
subjects. Why? Omega-3's foster the growth of neurons in the brain's
frontal cortex, the bit of gray matter that controls impulsive
behavior. Having enough of these fatty acids may keep violent impulses
in check. Violent criminals may not be the only ones who would benefit
from more fatty acids in their diet. In a recent double-blind trial,
when omega-3's were given to people with a history of substance abuse,
the symptoms of "anger" fell by 50 percent.

Of course, omega-3's are widely hailed these days as a miracle
substance, credited with boosting health in dozens of ways. But Gesch
warns against what he calls "silver bullets." The state of the
evidence, he says, "doesn't allow us to pinpoint which dietary fat is
responsible for changes in behavior." In his new study, he will look
into whether several interdependent nutrients may play a role.

Gesch further adds that we shouldn't expect nutrition alone to banish
violent behavior. "The brain needs to be nourished in two ways. It
needs to be educated, and it needs nutrients. Both social and physical
factors are important." Simply throwing fish and vegetables at violent
criminals is unlikely to have a lasting effect on its own.

Caveats aside, there's something that many people may find unnerving
about the idea of curing violent behavior by changing what people eat.
It threatens to let criminals evade responsibility for their actions.
Think, for example, of the infamous "Twinkie defense," in which an
accused murderer's lawyer suggested that junk food was partly to blame
for his client's compromised mental state. More controversial,
perhaps, is the brave-new-world idea of using diet to enforce docility
and conformity to the rules, a sort of state-sponsored version of that
timeless parental demand to children everywhe "Eat your
vegetables."

Then again, we already live in a society in which parents have
resorted to drugs like Ritalin to quell unwanted outbursts and
impulsive behavior. And when you approach it from that perspective,
changing what people eat may not be so radical after all.

Stephen Mihm teaches history at the University of Georgia.
--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

Another sensationalized media story that will go nowhere? Even before
newspaper readership became its decline, the media had a nasty habit of
making a big splash with some new wonder cure or magic potion solution,
and then never following-up when it proved to be less than promised.

The primary difficulty in this instance is contradictory science.
Salmon has long been touted as reducing heart disease and amplifying
brain wattage. But, farm-raised salmon has higher levels of such
cancer-causing PCBs and dioxin. This is especially true of the stuff
raised in Europe. Some environmentalists have considered Scottish
salmon farm industry, which created thousands of jobs, an ecological
disaster.

Meanwhile, wild salmon appear to be in decline. Manmade "progress"
seems to be contributing mightily to trend. To make matters worse,
poisonous algae in the sea off south Norway caused boatloads of salmon
to be destroyed only a few years ago.

A former schoolteacher runs the New York Times. She is captain of a
sinking ship. The overpriced and thoroughly liberal Times only reaches
small minority of New York regional readers. Advertisers avoid it if
they can place their ads somewhere else. Its cable/satellite TV
channel is a backwater on the dial.

Why was this article make print? It probably boils down to too little
advertising or a slow news day.

By the way, the types of crimes individuals commit is usually linked to
the types of jobs public education deemed them fit to perform.
Blue-collar workers tend to commit physical crimes. White-collar
workers frequently commit bookkeeping crimes.

toto wrote:
I found this quite interesting. It's preliminary research of course,
but it gives a new perspective on why poverty and violence might
be connected.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/ma...n_idealab.html

Does Eating Salmon Lower the Murder Rate?

By STEPHEN MIHM
Published: April 16, 2006

Most prisons are notorious for the quality of their cuisine (pretty
poor) and the behavior of their residents (pretty violent). They are
therefore ideal locations to test a novel hypothesis: that violent
aggression is largely a product of poor nutrition. Toward that end,
researchers are studying whether inmates become less violent when put
on a diet rich in vitamins and in the fatty acids found in seafood.

Could a salmon steak and a side of spinach really help curb violence,
not just in prison but everywhere? In 2001, Dr. Joseph Hibbeln, a
senior clinical investigator at the National Institutes of Health,
published a study, provocatively titled "Seafood Consumption and
Homicide Mortality," that found a correlation between a higher intake
of omega-3 fatty acids (most often obtained from fish) and lower
murder rates.

Of course, seeing a correlation between fatty acids and nonviolence
doesn't necessarily prove that fatty acids inhibit violence. Bernard
Gesch, a senior research scientist at Oxford University, set out to
show that better nutrition does, in fact, decrease violence. He
enrolled 231 volunteers at a British prison in his study; one-half
received a placebo, while the other half received fatty acids and
other supplements. Over time, the antisocial behavior (as measured by
assaults and other violations) of the inmates who had been given the
supplements dropped by more than a third relative to their previous
records. The control group showed little change. Gesch published his
results in 2002 and plans to start a larger study later this year.
Similar trials are already under way in Holland and Norway.

What would it mean if we found a clear link between diet and violent
behavior? To start with, it might challenge the notion that violence
is a product of free will. "But how do you exercise that free will
without using your brain?" Gesch asks. "And how, exactly, is the brain
going to work properly without an adequate nutrient supply?" The
belief that people choose to be violent may be irrelevant if the brain
isn't firing on all cylinders. This may especially be the case for
impulsive acts of violence, which are less a choice than a failure to
rein in one's worst instincts.

Consider, for example, a study conducted by researchers in Finland.
They tested prisoners convicted of violent crimes and found that they
had lower levels of omega-3 fatty acids than ordinary, healthy
subjects. Why? Omega-3's foster the growth of neurons in the brain's
frontal cortex, the bit of gray matter that controls impulsive
behavior. Having enough of these fatty acids may keep violent impulses
in check. Violent criminals may not be the only ones who would benefit
from more fatty acids in their diet. In a recent double-blind trial,
when omega-3's were given to people with a history of substance abuse,
the symptoms of "anger" fell by 50 percent.

Of course, omega-3's are widely hailed these days as a miracle
substance, credited with boosting health in dozens of ways. But Gesch
warns against what he calls "silver bullets." The state of the
evidence, he says, "doesn't allow us to pinpoint which dietary fat is
responsible for changes in behavior." In his new study, he will look
into whether several interdependent nutrients may play a role.

Gesch further adds that we shouldn't expect nutrition alone to banish
violent behavior. "The brain needs to be nourished in two ways. It
needs to be educated, and it needs nutrients. Both social and physical
factors are important." Simply throwing fish and vegetables at violent
criminals is unlikely to have a lasting effect on its own.

Caveats aside, there's something that many people may find unnerving
about the idea of curing violent behavior by changing what people eat.
It threatens to let criminals evade responsibility for their actions.
Think, for example, of the infamous "Twinkie defense," in which an
accused murderer's lawyer suggested that junk food was partly to blame
for his client's compromised mental state. More controversial,
perhaps, is the brave-new-world idea of using diet to enforce docility
and conformity to the rules, a sort of state-sponsored version of that
timeless parental demand to children everywhe "Eat your
vegetables."

Then again, we already live in a society in which parents have
resorted to drugs like Ritalin to quell unwanted outbursts and
impulsive behavior. And when you approach it from that perspective,
changing what people eat may not be so radical after all.

Stephen Mihm teaches history at the University of Georgia.
--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits