Why an iron fish can make you stronger | Hacker News Reader

Why an iron fish can make you stronger

bbc.com

52 pointsinm26 comments

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8887349

In this paper (http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/1/43) one can read this:

Results: Blood iron levels were higher in women in the iron fish plus follow-up at 3 months compared with controls, but this was not maintained. At 6 months, haemoglobin and serum iron had fallen in all groups and the proportion of anaemic women had increased.

Conclusions: This study shows that the iron ingot was effective in the short but not longer-term against IDA. Though a novel treatment option, further research is warranted to determine bioavailability of leached iron and whether or not the surface area is large enough for sufficient iron leaching.

Does this mean that the whole thing is another bogus gimmick which only survives because it’s a cute thing which first-worlders like to throw money at, and write articles about?

No, it doesn't mean that at all. The authors in the paper you quote write about the possibility of iron sequestration due to arsenic and manganese contamination in the water during the second half of the study. They call for additional research.

But the fish apparently does not work. So why is the fish still regularly hailed in papers as well as being still manufactured and sold (to first-worlders, at $25 a piece)?

The $25 supports getting the fish to 3rd worlders at a low cost, http://www.luckyironfish.com. Far as I can tell the fish doesn't work if the water is contaminated with arsenic and/or manganese, so more research is needed.

As long as the fish doesn’t work (and further research is needed to find out how to fix it), why should people pay to have it shipped anywhere? I note that it doesn’t say anywhere on the page you linked to about how the fish doesn’t work in the long term – only page after page of endorsements and accolades (and offers to sell the fish, of course).

Short-term efficacy is not zero efficacy. If the fish works to alleviate anemia for three months, it seems worthwhile to continue distributing the fish and to rally support for further research.

Sure, this fish is probably getting too much hype for how effective it is, but isn't it better than nothing?

I think that dishonest hype is worse than no hype, yes.

> Green leafy vegetables, such as spinach, are not as rich in iron [as red meat]

There's a long history of confusion about how much iron is in spinach, and then even more confusion about the source and extent of that confusion.

For a recap, "The Spinach, Popeye, Iron, Decimal Error Myth is Finally Busted," https://www.bestthinking.com/articles/science/chemistry/bioc...

Or, shorter, Supermyths: Spinach Iron Decimal Point Error Myth Busted: http://super-myths.blogspot.com/2010/12/spinach-iron-decimal...

Could they get the same effect by giving villagers cast iron cookware?

I read this story a few months ago, it had a few more details then.

They tried giving them iron cookware, but they didn't like the weight. They then tried putting a random piece of iron in with their cooking, but not many kept up with doing it. That's where the idea to shape the iron like a lucky fish came from, and it seems to be working.

It's more efficient (cost-wise) to give the smallest quantity of iron that releases it. And it can be used in pots of different sizes

Probably but that'd be more expensive.

Isn't it funny that they dubbed the non-english speakers with english with very heavy accent?

I thought that is usually a translator's voice.

This is awesome UX.

People in the industrialized world probably get way too much iron, to the point it's implicated in disease. So personally I'll skip the iron fish.

Too much iron is rare and is the result of either inherited disease or overdose through careless supplement use.

http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Haemochromatosis/Pages/Introduc...

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vitamins-minerals/Pages/Iron.as...

> So personally I'll skip the iron fish.

It's not aimed at you. It's aimed at communities that have micronutrient deficiencies. Very many people (billions) have diets deficient in iron.

https://www.wfp.org/hunger/faqs

> Micronutrient - vitamin and mineral - deficiencies are very important, afflicting nearly two billion people worldwide. According to the World Health Organization, deficiencies of iron, vitamin A, and zinc rank among the top ten leading causes of death through disease in developing countries.

> Iron deficiency is the most prevalent form of malnutrition, affecting billions of people worldwide. Iron deficiency damages a country's productivity and impedes cognitive development.

Here's a nice story about fortification of rice in India: https://www.wfp.org/stories/fortification-helps-combat-chron...

It depends on your diet. People who eat a lot of red meat are going to be fine though, as mentioned in the article, it is possible to be anemic from a B12 or vitamin A deficiency as well which could result from a poor diet even if it is high in red meat, the fish won't help with those unfortunately. If your diet doesn't include red meat or has very little of it you could very well become iron deficient.

Anyone who lives in an industrialized nation would derive more benefit from eating a balanced diet if they can afford the time and money to do so. However, if you have very little time and money you might wind up in the same pot as the poor Cambodians. Poverty knows no borders after all.

I sincerely doubt any diet rich in (reasonably fatty, reasonably "unprocessed") meat would show a Vitamin A deficiency, unless too much of such plant matter as hampers bioavailability and absorption is consumed concurrently.

Of course, a diet sufficient in (decent) meat is precisely what the world's poorest can't quite afford. But just to pick nits.

Nonsense. Iron deficiency is common in 1st world countries, especially among young girls who started to have their period which makes them lose a lot of iron. In general, starving yourself to meet the skinny beauty ideals (which is widespread) will lead to a host of problems, among them iron deficiency.

In the US, women's multivitamins tend to have iron in them.

It's much cheaper to buy unbranded, white-box multivitamins than gender- or vitamin- specific multivitamins. They often contain a wider variety of vitamins, too. Just read the label and make sure they include iron.

That has not been my experience purchasing multivitamins.

Not if you menstruate.

Iron loss from menstruation is a few milligrams per day. Women absorb iron more efficiently. It is a myth that women need more iron than men.

Iron accumulates in tissues over time and contributes to aging. Excess iron is very clearly linked to cancer and heart disease.

I make a point of giving blood a couple times a year and avoid the iron fortified cereals and flours. It's very often reduced iron, which is especially toxic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com