Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 110

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

  1. #1
    captaineight's Avatar
    captaineight is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    371

    Huge study shows red meat boosts risk of dying young

    Shop Now
    Eating a portion of processed red meat daily can boost a person's risk of dying young by up to 20 per cent, says a long-running US study of more than 120,000 people.

    While the research by Harvard University experts offers more evidence that eating red meat increases the risk of heart disease and cancer, it also counsels that substituting fish and poultry may lower early death risk.
    "This study provides clear evidence that regular consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, contributes substantially to premature death," said Frank Hu, senior author of the study in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

    Researchers gleaned their data from a study of 37,698 men who were followed for 22 years and 83,644 women who were tracked for 28 years.

    Subjects answered surveys about their eating habits every four years.

    Those who ate a card-deck-sized serving of unprocessed red meat each day on average saw a 13 per cent higher risk of dying than those who did not eat red meat as frequently.

    And if the red meat was processed, like in a hot dog or two slices of bacon, that risk jumped to 20 per cent.
    However, substituting nuts for red meat lowered total mortality risk by 19 per cent, while poultry or whole grains lowered the risk by 14 per cent and fish did so by 7 per cent.

    The authors said between 7 and 9 per cent of all deaths in the study "could be prevented if all the participants consumed fewer than 0.5 servings per day of total red meat".

    Processed red meat has been shown to contain ingredients such as saturated fat, sodium, nitrites and some carcinogens that are linked to many chronic ailments including heart disease and cancer.
    "More than 75 per cent of the $US2.6 trillion ($2.5 trillion) in annual US health care costs are from chronic disease," said an accompanying commentary by Dean Ornish, a physician and dietary expert at the University of California, San Francisco.

    "Eating less red meat is likely to reduce morbidity from these illnesses, thereby reducing health care costs."
    A separate study, also led by Hu but published in the American Heart Association journal Circulation, found that men who drank sugar-sweetened beverages daily faced a 20 per cent higher risk of heart disease than men who did not.

    The study tracked more than 42,000 men, most of them Caucasian, over 22 years. It found higher heart risks, and higher levels of inflammation and harmful lipids known as triglycerides in daily sweet-drinkers.
    The effects were not seen in men who drank as many as two sugar-sweetened beverages per week.
    According to Hu, the research "provides strong justification for reducing sugary beverage consumption among patients, and more importantly, in the general population".

    Heart disease is the biggest killer in the United States and top risk factors include obesity, smoking, lack of exercise, diabetes and poor eating habits.

    Full article: Huge study shows red meat boosts risk of dying young
    I realise a lot of you guys think that "conventional wisdom" is a load of bollocks, but I certainly do not. I strongly believe in science, and that includes contemporary medical science. It's a lot more reliable than gym-junkie pseudo-science.

    I also believe in paleo eating. But only because that makes sense: our bodies have adapted and evolved over millions of years to efficiently consume a certain diet. Mother nature has fine-tuned as to eat certain foods. I have no problem believing that. BTW, I also do not believe paleo dieting means "ultra low carb". All the scientific evidence suggests our ancestors would have had a steady supply of fruit, vegetables, berries, seaweed and root vegetables.

  2. #2
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,491
    Quote Originally Posted by captaineight View Post
    I realise a lot of you guys think that "conventional wisdom" is a load of bollocks, but I certainly do not. I strongly believe in science, and that includes contemporary medical science. It's a lot more reliable than gym-junkie pseudo-science.

    I also believe in paleo eating. But only because that makes sense: our bodies have adapted and evolved over millions of years to efficiently consume a certain diet. Mother nature has fine-tuned as to eat certain foods. I have no problem believing that. BTW, I also do not believe paleo dieting means "ultra low carb". All the scientific evidence suggests our ancestors would have had a steady supply of fruit, vegetables, berries, seaweed and root vegetables.
    I think the keyword, there, is processed red meat. Hence, I typically buy quality red meat. And, I've reduced my red meat intake on the whole, out of blood sugar concerns.

    you should also check out Robert Su M.D.'s podcast, Carbohydrates Can Kill. It goes into a lot of scientific detail, and he's talking about cancer in this series, I'm listening to right now. I previously finished a series he did on inflammation and Alzheimer's. Also, he detailed how a lack of saturated fat (which the study you're referencing still demonizes)/cholesterol contributes to the onset of Alzheimer's; another thing I gathered from the series is the development of Alzheimer's begins at a much earlier age (like 30 years of age, or older).
    Last edited by lssanjose; 03-12-2012 at 03:53 PM.

  3. #3
    captaineight's Avatar
    captaineight is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    371
    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.

  4. #4
    Sketcha's Avatar
    Sketcha is offline Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    50
    were they eating junk food as well as red meat? This study tells me nothing about their diet overall. I doubt any of these people that died were eating primally. And what did they die from? They asked them what they ate every four years? I can't remember what I ate four days ago. Just because Harvard conducted a study doesn't make it intelligent.

  5. #5
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Sketcha View Post
    were they eating junk food as well as red meat? This study tells me nothing about their diet overall. I doubt any of these people that died were eating primally. And what did they die from? They asked them what they ate every four years? I can't remember what I ate four days ago. Just because Harvard conducted a study doesn't make it intelligent.
    +1. We need to see the full journal article (if there's one around).

  6. #6
    Faumdano's Avatar
    Faumdano is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Osaka, Japan
    Posts
    75
    Confounding variables -- what are they here? Likely it's the same problem a lot of these observational studies have: people who eat the standard american diet AND eat red meat (something deemed unhealthy by CW) are more likely to not care about doing many other unhealthy things -- smoking, drinking to excess, eat processed foods, soda, etc...

    As for lean game meat, what about "rabbit starvation"?

  7. #7
    Kilian's Avatar
    Kilian is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    243
    A few people already hit the nail on the head. I seriously doubt any of these people were eating primally. It is highly likely they were eating red meat in conjunction with a CW/SAD diet of "hearthealthy grains" and everything else the USDA says is good for you. Once again, correlation =/= causation.

    Also, lean game meat my ass.

  8. #8
    tim_1522's Avatar
    tim_1522 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    St. Louis, MO area
    Posts
    500
    That's the big thing. It discounts the *motivation* for people eating the foods they eat. (as well as considering a home prepared steak from a well raised cow to be the same "red meat" as a Slim Jim from 7-11)

    Show me a study where a group of people who are following a Primal style diet because they are doing so *intentionally* with the purpose of improving health/wellness fared worse than another group eating a different style diet with similar motivations and THEN you'll have my attention.

    Don't lump me in with people eating a bunch of crap "red meat", (as well as most of the time a bunch of other stuff that's worse for you than even said "rea meat") thankyouverymuch!
    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

  9. #9
    JennaRose's Avatar
    JennaRose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    us
    Posts
    1,037
    herp derp derp derp blaffgthtt


    where does it say they were eating GRASS FED BEEF?

    that's the biggest difference.

  10. #10
    Comma's Avatar
    Comma is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    458
    this sounds like a correlation, not necessarily a cause-effect relationship as it wasn't a controlled experiment. I can see how a typically SAD diet that includes, what, daily red meat?? is not good for you. Those must have been a good amoutn of burgers, e.g, and no, that's not good for anyone. I doubt most of the people had organic red meat with veggies. Even though, it's always good to rotate your food once in a while.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... 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
  •