By: Raul Alejandro Guzman giving continuity to my previous entries, arrived at one of the first ideas I assimilated as product of my readings and analysis of the information: nutritional paradigms. First that nothing, what is a paradigm? Basically it means example or model. In the context of the scientific paradigm establishes what must be observed, the type of questions that need to be formulated, how should be structured such questions and how should be interpreted the results. When a paradigm can no longer meet the needs of a science (e.g. to new discoveries that invalidate previous knowledge), then comes a new one. A paradigm shift is something dramatic for Science said. In the social sciences, the paradigm is related to the concept of worldview. The term is used to describe the set of experiences, beliefs and values that affect the way in which a subject perceives reality and shaped its response.
Both definitions are complementary and speak much about padlocks we wear ourselves, and do not allow us to open ourselves to new ideas (which coincidentally often are higher realities). Our traditional paradigms work in various aspects such as limits. It is worth reflecting on this issue awhile. For everything we have paradigms, and the vast majority we were imposed or copy them without being confronted with our deepest opinion and reinforce it with research. Begin to break paradigms and create new ones on the basis of the internal debate is an interesting process, even if the result is a paradigm that is not socially accepted (what is most common among those who have different ideas). Returning to the subject of health, is easy to recognize the general paradigm of people on issues of food and nutrition: nutrients necessary for healthy living are in our food, we don’t need to take vitamins, there are many hereditary diseases, all are either eaten, have bad luck when you paste us certain disease or illness, doctors are Experts on the subject of nutrition, vitamins make tumors and cancers to grow, etc.