In the article I found from Science Daily, "Diet Experience Can Alter Taste Preferences" they propose the idea that if fed a long-term diet of a certain food or substance, you'll eventually learn to like something you probably did not before (aversive). The authors of this article based this study on the phenomenon that happens with humans.
They used the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster as the animal model and focused on camphor, a safe food additive that is considered aversive. Over time the fruit fly showed signs of accepting foods containing camphor; this was identified by degradation of the Transient Receptor Potential-Like protein. Plus and minus some other signs, the authors then reversed the entire experiment by putting the flies on a camphor-free diet. The levels of TRPL still decreased, proving that even when provided with food that was once aversive, the flies continued to chose it as a preference.
In my opinion, forcing defenseless flies to eat something they wouldn't normally eat is a response to their survival mechanism. Wouldn't humans do the same?! If my sole food source was eating something I liked, topped with something I didn't, I too would find the good in it for the sake of survival.
I am not sure if the way the authors went about the method of proving how our diets can change our taste preference was truly accurate, but it is intriguing. What do you all think?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130909093159.htm
As far as diet changing our taste preference goes, the authors probably mean that one will obviously go for the food that is available in their environment and due to survival that food resource "grows on them".I agree, their change in food preference most likely has to do with survival and adapting to what is available in their environment.
ReplyDeleteRight?! I believe what the authors is trying to prove is interesting. It's just, I think providing only one thing makes it hard to determine if that is in fact the reason they change their preference. Then again, I guess it was the only way to have an "independent variable".
ReplyDelete