Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 110

Thread: Huge study shows red meat boosts risk of dying young page 3

  1. #21
    trekfan's Avatar
    trekfan is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    327
    Primal Fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by lssanjose View Post
    That's what I told my parents, after I told them I ate as many as 12 eggs a day (not all the time). I felt a lot better than I did, when I fed myself corn flakes (the best thing I could have done was cut out corn from my diet, as well as grains [wheat]), and skim milk.
    Yep, I hear you. My father thinks this is "Primal thing" is just silly. My siblings don't get it (but they're metabolisms are unbelievably good) and my mother, she gets some of it but not all of it. I just eat what I eat and they eat what they eat, but the discussion, ah, always ongoing. They'll come around...when they want to

  2. #22
    tim_1522's Avatar
    tim_1522 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    St. Louis, MO area
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by lssanjose View Post
    Thanks, for this. It just dawned on me: my school has journal access. I'm doing it for my MBA, but I forgot I could check out whatever I can on nutrition, and the like.
    Please share as much as you can if you find anything interesting!
    Re-focusing on the Primal Lifestyle in 2012!

    Starting: 221.0lb, 29.5% BF (1/9/2012)
    Latest: 208.9, 26.1% BF (3/19/2012)

    http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread35679.html

  3. #23
    NWPrimate's Avatar
    NWPrimate is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    385
    Quote Originally Posted by captaineight View Post
    All the scientific evidence suggests our ancestors would have had a steady supply of fruit, vegetables, berries, seaweed and root vegetables.
    Where can you find a steady supply of fruit, vegetable, berries and root vegetable year round?

    Where are your ancestors from? Most of Africa (the original ancestral home of all of us) is course quite arrid, and the fruits available in the lusher regions are often totally unpalatable to humans. Chimp researchers will tell you that they cannot eat 90% of the plants that chimps forage on. They are too bitter or astringent.

    If you are of European descent, your ancestors were also survivors of the worst of the ice age, where you were unlikely to find many carbohydrates at all. Don't forget the megafauna that used to populate the globe until we ate them out of existence.

    There are a few "sweet spots" around the world that have year round fruit and tubers, but the environments that shaped our species were most likely fat/protein rich, and carb poor.

    Starches from tubers are essentially not edible unless cooked, and while cooking has played a role in our evolution, we were moving from foliage to meat long before we controlled fire.

  4. #24
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,488
    Quote Originally Posted by tim_1522 View Post
    Please share as much as you can if you find anything interesting!
    Will do. The thing I like about this site is, Mark digs up the studies, or any studies he can regarding a subject intriguing him; or he plans on writing about. Robert Su M.D. is another guy who uses studies to promote his Carbohydrates Can Kill Podcast material.

  5. #25
    bangel's Avatar
    bangel is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3
    Here is the abstract of one of the studies (The red meat one) being cited in the media:
    Arch Intern Med -- Abstract: Red Meat Consumption and Mortality: Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies, March 12, 2012, Pan et al. 0 (2012): archinternmed.2011.2287v1
    The full text is available too.

    Here is the second study they are citing, looks like full text pdf is available too:
    Sweetened Beverage Consumption, Incident Coronary Heart Disease and Biomarkers of Risk in Men

    Another nail in the coffin for the main stream media -
    First line of the abstract:
    "Red meat consumption has been associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, its relationship with mortality remains uncertain."
    Title of the article I read:
    "Red Meat Tied to Increased Mortality Risk‎ "

    Anything for a good headline...

    -Keith

  6. #26
    Kvalhion's Avatar
    Kvalhion is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    110
    These stores rock! Now everyone will run around screaming how bad red meat is, and meat sales will plummet. Prices for meat will go down. Too bad it will only be processed meat though.
    5-24-10 ................ 5-24-11
    Weight: 281.......... Weight: 203

    10-11-10
    Weight: 259
    Total Cholesterol: 243
    LDL: 188
    HDL: 40
    Trig: 96

    2-18-11
    Weight: 228
    Total Cholesterol: 239
    LDL: 183 (calc), 138 (actual)
    HDL: 46
    Trig: 49

    6-23-11
    Weight: 197.2
    Total Cholesterol: 225
    LDL: 161 (calc), 120 (actual)
    HDL: 56
    Trig: 38


  7. #27
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,488
    Quote Originally Posted by bangel View Post
    Here is the abstract of one of the studies (The red meat one) being cited in the media:
    Arch Intern Med -- Abstract: Red Meat Consumption and Mortality: Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies, March 12, 2012, Pan et al. 0 (2012): archinternmed.2011.2287v1
    The full text is available too.

    Here is the second study they are citing, looks like full text pdf is available too:
    Sweetened Beverage Consumption, Incident Coronary Heart Disease and Biomarkers of Risk in Men

    Another nail in the coffin for the main stream media -
    First line of the abstract:
    "Red meat consumption has been associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases. However, its relationship with mortality remains uncertain."
    Title of the article I read:
    "Red Meat Tied to Increased Mortality Risk‎ "

    Anything for a good headline...

    -Keith
    When I clicked the first link, and saw Dean F Ornish attributed for the article, I immediately thought, "vegan lobby!!"

  8. #28
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,488
    Oh yeah, gotta pay to register for the AHA, so I couldn't download the full PDF.

  9. #29
    Croak's Avatar
    Croak is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    345
    No agenda there. Nope, nothing to see there but settled science. Stop eating meat and move on.

    Ornish (said like Seinfeld says Newman).

  10. #30
    Go-Pre's Avatar
    Go-Pre is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    87
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by captaineight View Post
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not fan of unnaturally high-carb diets (which our modern diets most certainly are!). That is ESPECIALLY true of high-GI carbs. If there's anything "evil" about carbs, it's high-GI carbs. Highly processed sugars from candy, soda, white bread, etc. Have you ever found that McDonalds hamburger buns stick to your teeth like fairy-floss? No wonder people get so obese eating that crap.

    My thoughts are that our ancestors ate lean game meat. Not the processed crap and fattened farm animals you buy in the supermarket today. I think that the most important thing for health is to eat a lot of fresh green vegetables, including a substantial fibre intake. I believe a person who does a lot of weight training needs a lot of protein, which can be healthily sourced from lean meat, fish, poultry and whey protein powder for that extra "unnatural" boost (in as far as our caveman ancestors weren't downing protein shakes).

    A significant amount (most?) of my red-meat comes from hunted kangaroos, which I buy in the supermarket or local butcher ("Gourmet Game" brand). I've seen pictures of buffalos with a lot of fat in them, etc., posted by people trying to prove that our ancestors ate bucket-loads of saturated fats. I think these are the exception rather than the rule, and also show-off the fattiest cuts. The truth is - and any hunter will confirm this - that game meat is a hell of a lot leaner than the stuff you buy off the supermarket shelf.

    I think the study misses that point, but then again, they're hardly coming at it from the point of view of a paleo dieter. I think there is still a lot to be learned here.
    Perhaps someone can help me out on this one:

    If you buy the "lean game meat" theory, than how would a person reach their daily caloric need? Let's say you take in .75 grams of protein per lb of body weight (I know many do more than that) at 160lbs and also eat 150 grams of carbs (not super low). That would mean you need 1420 calories from fat or 157 grams to make 2500 calories.

    Do you suggest that the lean game meat theory means that animal fat is bad? And if so, how does one meat (pun intended) their caloric needs?

Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •