Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: L.A. Times: All Red Meat is Bad page

  1. #1
    triangulum33's Avatar
    triangulum33 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1

    L.A. Times: All Red Meat is Bad

    Shop Now
    What to make of this story? The article doesnt discuss the how's or why's, just that there is a correlation with red meat and shorter lifespan.


    All red meat is bad for you, new study says - latimes.com

  2. #2
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,491
    Quote Originally Posted by triangulum33 View Post
    What to make of this story? The article doesnt discuss the how's or why's, just that there is a correlation with red meat and shorter lifespan.


    All red meat is bad for you, new study says - latimes.com
    I'm not going to click the link provided, because I'm thinking it's using the same study posted all over the boards. Also, plenty of debate over the study, itself, throughout.

  3. #3
    ElaineC's Avatar
    ElaineC is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    843
    Yay, more beef for me! That's about all the thought I've given on the entire issue.
    Fighting fibromyalgia and chronic myofascial pain since 2002.

    Big Fat Fiasco

    Our bodies crave real food. We remain hungry as long as we refuse to eat real food, no matter how much junk we stuff into our stomachs. ~J. Stanton

  4. #4
    Sunnivara's Avatar
    Sunnivara is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    251
    My grandma ate a "meat and potatoes" diet and lived to 106!
    Last edited by Sunnivara; 03-14-2012 at 12:01 PM.

  5. #5
    elektro's Avatar
    elektro is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    89
    Does anyone have an actual explanation for why this article is wrong? My guess is that the red meat people are eating is grain fed, loaded with antibiotics and growth hormones, and cooked in canola oil, ect. But does anyone have a better explanation than just a guess?

    My concern with eating Paleo has always been whether we are eating the exact animals our ancestors ate, and also whether they had the abundance that we do now. Did our ancestors have the ability to eat a 3/4-1lbs steak several times a week, or was that a once a month kind of thing? Did they fast a lot more because there was no food available for long periods of time? Even if they ate a lot of fat, was it anywhere close to the quantity of fat that we are able to eat now? That's the kind of stuff that I'm still skeptical about with eating Paleo and always wonder if I should tweak that part of the diet to not overdoing fat and red meat intake?

  6. #6
    Dirlot's Avatar
    Dirlot is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Edmonton Canada
    Posts
    2,426
    Quote Originally Posted by elektro View Post
    Does anyone have an actual explanation for why this article is wrong? My guess is that the red meat people are eating is grain fed, loaded with antibiotics and growth hormones, and cooked in canola oil, ect. But does anyone have a better explanation than just a guess?

    My concern with eating Paleo has always been whether we are eating the exact animals our ancestors ate, and also whether they had the abundance that we do now. Did our ancestors have the ability to eat a 3/4-1lbs steak several times a week, or was that a once a month kind of thing? Did they fast a lot more because there was no food available for long periods of time? Even if they ate a lot of fat, was it anywhere close to the quantity of fat that we are able to eat now? That's the kind of stuff that I'm still skeptical about with eating Paleo and always wonder if I should tweak that part of the diet to not overdoing fat and red meat intake?
    There are aprox. 4 other threads on the same article with a lot of discussion. There are problems with the type of analysis, the processed meat eaters in the study were heavier drinkers, smokers, and heavier. Sugar and other known heart disease triggers were not factored in etc....but that is from gleaming info from the other threads.
    Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
    PS
    Don't forget to play!

  7. #7
    activia's Avatar
    activia is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Near Boston MA
    Posts
    2,198
    Actually I think its the 6th or 7th thread
    Red meat & mortality & the usual bad science
    Primal since March 2011

    Female/29 years old/5' 1"/130ish lbs

  8. #8
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,491
    Quote Originally Posted by ElaineC View Post
    Yay, more beef for me! That's about all the thought I've given on the entire issue.
    Indeed

  9. #9
    patski's Avatar
    patski is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Suburbs of Toronto
    Posts
    1,239
    Bring on MOAR BEEF!
    A Post-Primal PrimalPat

    Do not allow yourself to become wrapped up in a food 'lifestyle'. That is ego, and you are not that.

  10. #10
    lssanjose's Avatar
    lssanjose is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tigard, OR
    Posts
    1,491
    Denise Minger just posted a counter article on the front page, lengthy read, but it's something she discussed at the Paleo Summit: bad science/studies.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •