Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 314 posts

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#111

Post by VLM »

narrator wrote: post #15

Diet science is the most pathetically politicized "science" next to economics. On one side you've got the industry groups promoting their food and giving out grants to scientists to get the right results. On another side you've got the rich radical environmental and animal rights activists wanting everyone to go Vegan and giving out grants to scientists to get their results. It's just a clusterf k of politics going b…

Its religious also. Both traditional religion (vegetarianism = good, cow = holy) and modern religion (Holier than thou because more ascetic, and grilled beef steak is delicious, therefore he who posts the most about lettuce on social media is better than everyone else)

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#112

Post by droithomme »

I avoided all red meat for decades and ended up with extremely poor health with multiple problems.

Not too long ago I saw this insane article about some author's daughter who had severe lifelong immune diseases and after years of experimentation, found that eating absolutely nothing but steaks, water, and vodka, cured all her problems. There was also commentary by nutritionists and scientists saying she was wrong and her diet would ensure certain doom.

Anyhoo, I bought a nice grill and started eating steaks every day. Red meat. Rare, barely cooked, just singed a bit. Drinking, licking up that delicious red blood left over.

All my medical problems went away. Like almost instantly. It was crazy. Absolutely crazy. I would never have believed it.

My total diet's still a bit more varied than meat and vodka though. I do a lot of vegetables as I always have still.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#113

Post by philipkglass »

chrisco255 wrote: post #28
tobylane wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to see lower carbon cost become an important goal of keto dieters. Eggs, fish, etc count for keto as I understand it. I don’t like the fetishisation of red meat.

Ruminant grass-fed meat is the best thing for the environment. It requires no pesticides, no herbicides, and the manure their bodies produce act as fertilizer and cause grasslands to expand and sequester carbon. Meanwhile, wildlife can actually live on a pasture. Rabbits, squirrels, birds, tons of insects, snakes, even coyotes. Wheat, corn and soy fields by contrast require artificial fertilization, insecticide appli…

This says that American beef production will be upwards of 27 billion pounds this year:

https://beef2live.com/story-beef-production-year-0-107550

If American beef production went to 100% grass-fed beef, no feedlots, how much beef could be produced domestically? Do you have any sources handy?

Where I live, grass-fed beef is significantly more expensive than generic beef that presumably encountered a feedlot at some point in its lifecycle. If that is generally true, urging the public to consume grass-fed beef is also effectively urging the public to consume less beef. A universal switch to grass-fed beef would increase beef prices without increasing consumer buying power.

But it's possible that a pound of grass-fed beef is really no more costly to produce than average beef and it's just the niche status/labeling that commands higher prices. I haven't found an analysis addressing this question.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#114

Post by geggam »

tathougies wrote: post #51
pazimzadeh wrote: post #27

It's complicated. Telling people who have been abstaining from eating red meat that it's ok to eat it might also be a bad idea. Humans lost the enzyme that converts Neu5Ac to Neu5Gc. Other animals have Neu5Gc, which can be incorporated into your own tissues and potentially be recognized as foreign. So if you haven't been exposed to animal products and you suddenly are, that could trigger auto-immunity. Oh and of cour…

As an anecdote, my wife gave up vegetarianism after ten years and suffered no consequences coming back onto meat. She started with a tiny bit of pork and the next day was eating chicken, pork, etc. The fact is humans are omnivores.

My wife tried every diet known, when she started eating Keto style and even strict carnivorous all of her stomach issues went away. Just from observing her and the kids I think there are huge benefits to not eating carbohydrates.

Some of this benefit could be related to the chemicals in the foods but every time she eats any grains or grain products she gets stomach issues

I dont have any stomach issues except I gain weight when I eat carbs. No carbs and the weight goes off.

There is more to this issue than meat vs grains IMO

BTW... does anyone have a reference to a medical study showing why the US recommended diet is recommended ?

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#115

Post by someonehere »

I’m always skeptical when I see counter studies to businesses that have a strong financial foothold on certain industries.

Case in point, did the meat industry have any weight in this study? Generally I feel through certain lobbying efforts theses types of industries will produce a counter study that gets enough backing to be read on the nightly news and now people go back to the way things were or are confused.

Having read the China Study, I have all the convincing I need about the role of meat in our diets and I’m fine with that.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#116

Post by moocow157 »

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #48
queercode wrote: post #29

How about "eat no meat regardless of nutritional value (unless absolutely necessary) because it's unethical to do so"?

There is nothing unethical about eating meat. Now, the factory farming methods you see and the treatment of the animals being raised for meat, is definitely unethical.

Yes, it's clearly unethical to torture rights-bearing beings but not to kill them. Come on.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#117

Post by moocow157 »

queercode wrote: post #70
F-0X wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it is not objectively unethical.

Nothing is "objectively unethical". That doesn't mean conversations about ethics can't and don't take place.

Yes, ethics is objective. Otherwise it is literally not ethics.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#118

Post by dang »

codr7 wrote: post #33
thrower123 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to be fit, the best results I've had are to eat meat and vegetables, and not much else. Going fully vegetarian is just too joyless.

You need to eat animal corpses to feel happy? Could be worse, I guess. It's perfectly possible to cook great food with and without meat and dairy. But change is difficult, especially after clinging to this kind of BS for a while.

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar, especially on ultra-worn flamewar topics. We're trying to avoid those here, because the discussions they lead to are always predictable and get nastier as they go along.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#119

Post by geggam »

sparrc wrote: post #102
narrator wrote: post #15

Diet science is the most pathetically politicized "science" next to economics. On one side you've got the industry groups promoting their food and giving out grants to scientists to get the right results. On another side you've got the rich radical environmental and animal rights activists wanting everyone to go Vegan and giving out grants to scientists to get their results. It's just a clusterf k of politics going b…

It's more like David vs. Goliath. The food industry has MUCH more money than any animal rights advocacy group.

All higher life on this planet survives by eating another life form.

Animal rights groups tend to elevate my food to having similar rights as humans. I find this to be a minimum facetious at maximum a threat to my life.

Re: New research questions the evidence for health benefits of eating less red meat

#120

Post by geggam »

droithomme wrote: post #112

I avoided all red meat for decades and ended up with extremely poor health with multiple problems. Not too long ago I saw this insane article about some author's daughter who had severe lifelong immune diseases and after years of experimentation, found that eating absolutely nothing but steaks, water, and vodka, cured all her problems. There was also commentary by nutritionists and scientists saying she was wrong and…

Not sure why this is downvoted. There are many stories like this.
Post reply on HN