Science desk
< June 24	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 26 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Science Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 25[edit]

Health benefit of anthocyanin in Montmorency cherries?[edit]

I purchased a bottle of concentrated Montmorency cherries juice, produced by www.countryspoon.com, it states that there are more anthocyanin in these cherries than black raspberries. When checking at your site it shows choke berries and black raspberries as the highest, but sour cherries weren't even listed. What would be the value of this concentrate, was it over looked in your research or is it an advertising hype? Thank you so much for your time in reviewing this question!

Crazycookin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.162.85.189 (talk) 15:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Anthocyanin#Potential_food_value. There is little evidence that consuming anthocyanins will have any significant benefit to health. AndyTheGrump (talk)

Indeed, the evidence is that these chemicals don't even make it past your digestive system. Eat the cherries (and raspberries and choke-berries) if you enjoy them - otherwise, it's BS. SteveBaker (talk) 16:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Always assume that any marketing claims about health effects of food are total BS, and you'll rarely be wrong. Draw your information solely from qualified conventional medical sources, and even then, shy away from anything that is preliminary in nature, rather than established practice. The polular press does a lousy job of reporting medicine and science, as do pop-lit books such as self-help books. Be very wary of words like "breakthrough", "latest research", "discovery", and especially anything like "ancient Chinese secret". Those are marketing terms. Claims that seem extraordinary almost certainly are. Health care attracts quacks like a light attracts moths. Be skeptical and build up your critical thinking skills. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What they said. Eat a balanced diet with a wide variety of protein and vegetable foods, avoid processed foods and favor whole foods (i.e. eat the stuff that comes right off of the tree or is a recognizable part of of a critter, avoid stuff that's in boxes or frozen in shapes that resemble nothing from nature, or have ingredient lists longer than about 3 items). Don't overindulge. Exercise often. That's about all the advice that medical science can reliably give you on how to maximize your health via your diet. Any claims that a specific compound, chemical, vitamin, etc. is all you need or a miracle ingredient, or whatever, are usually very specious. Eat these foods if they taste good, as part of an otherwise balanced diet, but don't focus on odd micronutrients with extravagant health claims. --Jayron32 20:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is research in this area: Pharmacokinetic study of the absorption and metabolism of Montmorency tart cherry anthocyanins in human subjects says they found unmodified anthocyanins in plasma. This seems to have some data on the level in cherries but comparing the level in two kinds of fruits when drinking a concentrate seems irrelevant. 75.41.109.190 (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(My Unsupported Opinion) There was a huge amount of attention paid to antioxidant activity in the 1990s, continuing I think to some degree to this day. It always was ridiculous, even from the beginning - humans aren't test tubes, and aging isn't a chemical reaction - but a lot of people got a lot of grant money out of it. Wnt (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]