[removed]
Its interesting when looking at the longest lived countries and their meat consumption. There is a link in some cancers it seems, but as they are living to the oldest age on the planet then are they really doing badly? To some extent these cancer risks are from aging well past the limit that other people are dying, so while eating red meat “may” give an increased risk of a certain disease, all cause mortality may be benefited. Its too easy to take a singular point on a complicated tree of risks and over play one part. Very often in the nutrition realm we fall into generalisations, because that quite often is all we have data wise. Quality seems to play a part in all the macros, its not about protein vs fat vs carbs really, its protein vs protein, what type of fibre, what type of meat, what type of preperation. We need to go into a deeper level than just macros. Even as a meat eater I have been swayed to alter my cooking methods in light of the data about cancer risk.
I agree with this, it has never been enough convincing data on a lot of these points to me. Not only is the data poor, but the links are weak at best, and I would assume that any study with data like that would show that 90% of all food has a weak link to a lot of these risks as well.
Jesus Christ everything now is so polarized, “it’s bad” “there’s no proof it’s bad” “there’s no proof it’s beneficial”. How do we know this study wasn’t pushed by the red meat industry like the sugar industry did with fat?
“BGR (Boy Genius Report) publishes the latest tech news stories, expert product reviews, entertainment and science coverage, and the best deals now.”
Click bait site.
From the actual study:
>We evaluated the relationship between unprocessed red meat consumption and six selected disease outcomes following implementation of a meta-analytic approach20. We found that unprocessed red meat intake had weak evidence of an association with increased risk of colorectal cancer, breast cancer, IHD and type 2 diabetes and no evidence of an association with ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke. In other words, given all the data available on red meat intake and risk of a subsequent outcome, we estimate that consuming unprocessed red meat across an average range of exposure levels increases the risk of subsequent colorectal cancer, breast cancer, IHD and type 2 diabetes at least slightly compared to eating no red meat (by at least 6%, 3%, 1% and 1%, respectively). Furthermore, the conservative interpretation of available data is consistent with no association between consuming unprocessed red meat and the risk of subsequent ischemic stroke or hemorrhagic stroke.