New study slams "years of shoddy research" about Red Meat...finds it is not "bad for you" nor is it a health risk

[OngBak]

I was referring to what they call the statin paradox:

Thank you again for wasting our time with the another graph you thought to be helpful and made on women? What kind of woman are we talking about, low class, middle class, upper class. What kind of red meat did they consume over time? What kind of diet did they pursue overall? Was it highly processed red meat with thousand additives and ingredients or rather natural with none of them and preferably grass fed? I think I dont have to remind you that you are victim of the conformation bias. The studies arent reliable as the ones who are up to date, the studies you attached above are falsifiable to the standards that are up to date. All studies must be falsifiable..

 

[OngBak]

I pay no attention to any food studies what so ever. My body tells me everything I need to know. Regarding red meat, I can eat as much pork as I want and feel just fine. Beef, I can only eat in moderation. If I eat too much, I feel like crap. That's the only study I need.

Absolutely, how you feel when you eat certain foods should tell a lot how healthy it is for YOU.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Thank you again for wasting our time with the another graph you thought to be helpful and made on women? What kind of woman are we talking about, low class, middle class, upper class. What kind of red meat did they consume over time? What kind of diet did they pursue overall? Was it highly processed red meat with thousand additives and ingredients or rather natural with none of them and preferably grass fed?

Try reading it.

I think I dont have to remind you that you are victim of the conformation bias. The studies arent reliable as the ones who are up to date, the studies you attached above are falsifiable to the standards that are up to date. All studies must be falsifiable..

I have confirmation bias with respect to red meat? That's interesting. I don't have dog in the fight. You are the one arguing for exceptions to the data. Every cancer and cardiovascular agency advises against eating a lot of red meat. The longest living humans in the longest living regions of the world.. do not feature red meat as a dietary staple.

Absolutely, how you feel when you eat certain foods should tell a lot how healthy it is for YOU.

How scientific. Fat people feel good drinking soda and eating ice cream.

 

[OngBak]

Try reading it.



I have confirmation bias with respect to red meat? That's interesting. I don't have dog in the fight. You are the one arguing for exceptions to the data. Every cancer and cardiovascular agency advises against eating a lot of red meat. The longest living humans in the longest living regions of the world.. do not feature red meat as a dietary staple.



How scientific. Fat people feel good drinking soda and eating ice cream.

You are, just contact any good scientist and he will tell you the same. This is science 101.

I also dont have to remind you, how absurd your thinking is.. Fat People dont feel good, they justify/rationalize their decisions due to low-self esteem. Do you really believe fat People with poor diet feel good, healthy and vital? Then you must be out of common sense

 

[Obee1]

I was referring to what they call the statin paradox:

Thank you EyeBRollin, you may have a soul after all. I'm familiar with the paradox. I'm ready to drop it if we can agree that a better way of phrasing it would be stable plaque is bad, unstable plaque is really bad. To say calcification of atherosclerotic plaques is a good thing would be to suggest that if my CT scan showed 0 then my Dr would recommend that I try to increase my calcium score. Or if my CT score were 500 I'm good to go, when in fact the probability of having a heart attack in the next 5 years is high.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Thank you EyeBRollin, you may have a soul after all. I'm familiar with the paradox. I'm ready to drop it if we can agree that a better way of phrasing it would be stable plaque is bad, unstable plaque is really bad. To say calcification of atherosclerotic plaques is a good thing would be to suggest that if my CT scan showed 0 then my Dr would recommend that I try to increase my calcium score. Or if my CT score were 500 I'm good to go, when in fact the probability of having a heart attack in the next 5 years is high.

Yes, I thought that was implied with what I said. Plaque is bad. IF one has plaque, better it is stable than unstable. Statins, for all their bad internet rap, stabilize the plaque.

Back on the topic of red meat - I'd like to see in the future RCTs that examine different types of red meat. Probably far off. What are the differences between pork, beef, lamb, goat, venison, etc. Some religions swear off pork for hygienic reasons. Thoughts?

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Now to get back on topic:

This study stands out for actually giving us a look at protein sources with respect to CHD risk.



Diagram below is helpful:

View attachment 11815

What this means is.. if you replace a serving of fish with high fat dairy, the risk for CHD increases. If you replace a serving of red meat with a serving of beans, the risk for CHD decreases significantly.

Granted, this study's test subjects were women. Still, the discussion needs to be had when discussing food choices of what the replacement is. Is red meat better for us than sugar and refined carbohydrates? Absolutely. However, when compared with other protein sources, there are less risky options.

Again, unless they SPECIFICALLY show this with Grass Fed Organic Beef, I think they are missing the mark by treating them equally. They aren't and from a health standpoint are so different they shouldn't even be considered the same food.

Likely would see much different results with Grass Fed Organic Beef specifically

 

[EyeBRollin]

Again, unless they SPECIFICALLY show this with Grass Fed Organic Beef, I think they are missing the mark by treating them equally. They aren't and from a health standpoint are so different they shouldn't even be considered the same food.

Likely would see much different results with Grass Fed Organic Beef specifically

I don't think they'll ever do a study that differentiates the two. It seems overly specific and difficult to implement. Then there is the socioeconomic accessibility considerations of such a study.

I would speculate the difference is analogous to the differences between wild caught fish and farmed fish. Nutritionally there are some differences but overall they still generally provide mostly the same nutrients. Organic grass-fed beef I am sure is healthier, but probably isn't "moving the needle" as much as you think.

Another analogy that surprised me was comparing olive oil, vegetable oil, and canola oil and their affect on lipids. Olive oil should be much healthier, right? Overall, canola oil lowered lipids the most.. but the difference between all of the unsaturated seed oils (including olive oil) was negligible. The benefit was most pronounced when comparing any of them to a tropical oil like coconut oil.

 

[OngBak]

Yes, I thought that was implied with what I said. Plaque is bad. IF one has plaque, better it is stable than unstable. Statins, for all their bad internet rap, stabilize the plaque.

Back on the topic of red meat - I'd like to see in the future RCTs that examine different types of red meat. Probably far off. What are the differences between pork, beef, lamb, goat, venison, etc. Some religions swear off pork for hygienic reasons. Thoughts?

You are referring to Muslims. When it comes to health, they are actually pretty accurate. Back then there was no way to find out what is really healthy and what isn’t, but Muslim religion from what I know already had some information without any application of science, which wasn’t possible anyways back then

For example fasting, Muslims fast every year for a certain amount of time and its considered tradition and consideration of health and god in their religion.

Pigs are unclean, its possible that they even eat their own poop. So from their standpoint it’s unlikely that someone who eats and dwells in dirt can be healthy for the body, which makes actually sense.

These are only few examples, there are many more and it’s surprising when you look into it.

 

[Obee1]

Yes, I thought that was implied with what I said. Plaque is bad. IF one has plaque, better it is stable than unstable. Statins, for all their bad internet rap, stabilize the plaque.

Back on the topic of red meat - I'd like to see in the future RCTs that examine different types of red meat. Probably far off. What are the differences between pork, beef, lamb, goat, venison, etc. Some religions swear off pork for hygienic reasons. Thoughts?

I'd love to see it for sure. It seems as though most red meat research is by researchers with a vegetarian agenda or a bunch of N=1 "carnivore" types. Most of the red meat research is epidemiological and/or using those dang FFQs. The biggest issues will be finding a big enough sample of people (no tobacco, alcohol, and frequent exercisers) and I would think they would want to track over 5-10 years. So funding is going to be a problem. I missed the final cut for Dave Feldman's study of lean hyper responders and cholesterol. I was told it was geography. He thought it would be a 5 year study. Turns out it didn't take near that long because the machines that measure calcium scores are much better and super sensitive now. Anyway, he couldn't get funding so he crowd funded it then got a University to adopt it. That may have to be how it goes for an unbiased red meat RCT.

I think the problem with pork is that they are natural omnivores. Because of this they were potentially competing for the same food sources as humans. They were also destructive to our farm land and a danger to some of the live stock. I think the hogs that are shot in the wild are better than what we get at the store. As far as commercial pork, some ranchers will throw their garbage into the hog pens for disposal. When they are not eating that, they are getting substandard grains that didn't make it to market. We have forced them to become vegetarian when nature never intended that for them. Because of this they're highly stressed (High omega 6) and get compromised immune systems. So they get shot up with antibiotics. I'll eat it sometimes but I don't think it should be a staple. I certainly don't buy it.

 

[Scaramouche]

Hi Obee,
"I think the hogs that are shot in the wild are better than what we get at the store"Well I don't know about the States,but down here the Wild Hogs are riddled with T.B.....Youngest Son has a thousand odd acres up in the Mountains,Pigs are are a real problem,dangerous too....He hunts them with crossbred Dogs,even made a Leather suit of armour for one...Occasionally He gets a couple of little porkers caught by the Dogs,they grab hold of their ears LOL...These are penned up for six weeks and fed Kitchen Scraps and Oats...Roasted on stones in a Hunghi dug in the ground they are Tasty...An Old recluse up the back of him went missing,they only found his boots!

 

[BackInTheGame78]

Hi Obee,
"I think the hogs that are shot in the wild are better than what we get at the store"Well I don't know about the States,but down here the Wild Hogs are riddled with T.B.....Youngest Son has a thousand odd acres up in the Mountains,Pigs are are a real problem,dangerous too....He hunts them with crossbred Dogs,even made a Leather suit of armour for one...Occasionally He gets a couple of little porkers caught by the Dogs,they grab hold of their ears LOL...These are penned up for six weeks and fed Kitchen Scraps and Oats...Roasted on stones in a Hunghi dug in the ground they are Tasty...An Old recluse up the back of him went missing,they only found his boots!

FYI, the proper way to reply to someone is to hit the reply button so it quotes the post and the person gets a notification so they know you replied.