A quick post to share an alternative view of nutrition, immune strength and metabolic syndrome in the COVID-19 response, since much of the public discussion (understandably) surrounds testing, lockdown, treatments and vaccines.
A London cardiologist Aseem Malhotra recently argued in the Telegraph, a British news outlet, that poor diet is a significant factor to consider in countries with high mortality rates.[1] Low nutrient-dense foods distract regular immune function, resulting in inflammation. Chronic inflammation is expressed differently, including storing excess fat (obesity) and insulin resistance (diabetes). A disabled and un-synchronised immune system is unable to respond to new infections and can overreact.
In the case of Britain, Malhotra suggests the public health message of ‘Eat Real Food’ since this is a factor members of the public can control through individual choice, alongside ‘Stay at Home, Protect the NHS, Save Lives’. However, I don't believe nutrition can feasibly be an extra responsibility of government in any country during a disease emergency. The public would likely critique the state for burdening them with the extra responsibility of healthy eating (or even telling them what to eat), especially if there are perceived faults in the aspects such as lockdown and testing that are seen as government responsibility.
What works in governing nutrition? A cross-national study of nutrition-related policies, including how the public responds, would be fascinating. Is it about controlling food exports, encouraging local agriculture policies and enforcing BMI or waist measurements at annual health check-ups? Or perhaps food is the healthier alternative to tobacco, alcohol or drugs for some.
[1] Malhotra has also commented on BBC News. Aseem Malhotra, ‘It’s time to have an honest conversation about the risks of excess weight’, The Telegraph (27 April 2020), https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/time-honest-conversation-risks-excess-weight/#comment