Might Be Beef and Pork Are Not Bad For You

dbCooper

According to this research.....

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-cancer.html

FlyOverCountry

I don trust anything from the New York Dimocrat Times.

dbCooper

FlyOverCountry said:

I don trust anything from the New York Dimocrat Times.

The author is a Kentucky Colonel, that good enough for you?

https://www.nytimes.com/by/gina-kolata

FlyOverCountry

dbCooper said:

FlyOverCountry said:

I don trust anything from the New York Dimocrat Times.

The author is a Kentucky Colonel, that good enough for you?

https://www.nytimes.com/by/gina-kolata

Her name is Pina Colada?  LMAO!  Does she like getting caught in the rain?

littlerascal56

Great news for all our Kansas ranchers.  Time to put the “Eat Beef” front license plates back on the 4x4’s!

northGAcock

Has anyone found Rooster? He is still missing.

smokingal

The article definitely leaves one with the impression that the groups and individuals who vehemently oppose the new findings are significantly more concerned with the how the public will feel about being 'misled' and what that means for those who produced the previous findings than they are with the actual research results.

Botch

Sixty-five years of eating barbequed beef beats seventy years of eating oat bran.  

HeavyG

smokingal said:

The article definitely leaves one with the impression that the groups and individuals who vehemently oppose the new findings are significantly more concerned with the how the public will feel about being 'misled' and what that means for those who produced the previous findings than they are with the actual research results.

The NYTimes article has spawned a lot of rousing conversation on some other forums I visit. Here's an additional link for those that can't read the NYTimes piece(s). - https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/30/healt..._medium=social

The thrust of the articles are that the folks (NutriRECS) behind this new study feel that there is insufficient information of high enough quality to really make a scientific determination that eating a little less meat really has any significant health benefit for most folks. It also doesn't say that eating a lot of meat is necessarily a safe and healthy thing to do.

In the back and forth between the various camps I think this paragraph seems of interest:

"NutriRECS's own data show that a moderate reduction in red and processed meat consumption within a healthy eating pattern can reduce total mortality by 13%, heart disease mortality by 14%, cancer mortality by 11% and type 2 diabetes risk by 24%," said Hu."

Those don't seem like insignificant numbers to me but we all judge risk differently.

I got a kick out of these paragraphs:

"Recent nutrition research has also grown more sophisticated by looking at real-life scenarios instead of a simple eat or avoid red meat study design. The new approach discovers what people eat instead of red meat when they cut back. Is it really the whole grains, fresh fruit and veggies that nutritionists recommend?

"What we've seen is that Americans seem to be committed to eating horribly in a number of fascinatingly different ways," Gardner said. "You're not eating meat. Great! What did you have for dinner instead? Oh, a highly processed cheese pizza -- no wonder your health hasn't improved."

Since there will always continue to be disagreements as to the best diet for humans I guess we can't totally discount the possibility that Woody Allen got it right in his classic movie "Sleeper" - maybe the key to living a long healthy life is to eat a lot of steak and smoke a lot of cigarettes.

BugFreak72

Either way I'll add meat to the list of everything else in this world that might kill me and ignore.

smokingal

Looks like the lead author wasn't truthful about not having any conflicts that might impact the study:  https://www.yahoo.com/news/scientist-discredited-meat-guidelines-didnt-133708562.html

wardo

"Recent nutrition research has also grown more sophisticated by looking at real-life scenarios instead of a simple eat or avoid red meat study design. The new approach discovers what people eat instead of red meat when they cut back. Is it really the whole grains, fresh fruit and veggies that nutritionists recommend?

"What we've seen is that Americans seem to be committed to eating horribly in a number of fascinatingly different ways," Gardner said. "You're not eating meat. Great! What did you have for dinner instead? Oh, a highly processed cheese pizza -- no wonder your health hasn't improved."

Enter the new non-meat whopper LOL