Almost all studies of this kind are extremely confounded because food survey data is close to universally bad. It is especially bad on this topic in the US and UK, because many people's idea of a serving of meat is actually closer to fried breaded bread, with condiment levels of meat on top. It would be crazy to lump those people in with the "steak and eggs for dinner 3 times a week" crowd, but they always are. Resul…
Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
81–90 of 281 posts
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#82Let's follow the money. Said "scientific study" is funded by Wellcome. An arm of WHO, unelected crisis manufacturer supreme. On wellcome's site: "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority." Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome.
I don't get the unhealthy obsession with "unelected" in some people. A proper -mediocracy- meritocracy (i.e. it's actual skills and qualification that counts) is preferable over any kind of popularity contest. That's not to say the WHO in particular works by this standard, I just find it very irritating if people insist on every position or institution - especially very specialised ones - being subject to elections.…
While I think mediocracy is more accurate, I think you meant "meritocracy".
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#83Almost all studies of this kind are extremely confounded because food survey data is close to universally bad. It is especially bad on this topic in the US and UK, because many people's idea of a serving of meat is actually closer to fried breaded bread, with condiment levels of meat on top. It would be crazy to lump those people in with the "steak and eggs for dinner 3 times a week" crowd, but they always are. Resul…
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since meat is seen as unhealthy nowadays, most people who still eat lots of it also tend to be part of the "don't care about health" crowd (smokers, drinkers, people who don't exercise...). What if don't drink, don't smoke, do regular exercise, not obese... and eat lots of high quality meat? I haven't seen anything that comes close to showing that this would be unhealthy. These studies are quick to point to conclusio…
Don’t researchers generally try to control for such factors when making a study like this? I am at work so I’m a little too busy to pick through this one right now, but it sounds like you’re concerned about this, so it’s worth checking before drawing any conclusions
Reminds me of https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#85Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#86Almost all studies of this kind are extremely confounded because food survey data is close to universally bad. It is especially bad on this topic in the US and UK, because many people's idea of a serving of meat is actually closer to fried breaded bread, with condiment levels of meat on top. It would be crazy to lump those people in with the "steak and eggs for dinner 3 times a week" crowd, but they always are. Resul…
Oh hey, look who funds Wellcome: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Gran...
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since meat is seen as unhealthy nowadays, most people who still eat lots of it also tend to be part of the "don't care about health" crowd (smokers, drinkers, people who don't exercise...). What if don't drink, don't smoke, do regular exercise, not obese... and eat lots of high quality meat? I haven't seen anything that comes close to showing that this would be unhealthy. These studies are quick to point to conclusio…
> What if don't drink, don't smoke, do regular exercise, not obese... and eat lots of high quality meat? I haven't seen anything that comes close to showing that this would be unhealthy I think the documentary "the game changers" addresses precisely that.
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#88The term "positive association" makes it hard to parse. The results state: "most of the positive associations observed for meat consumption and health risks were substantially attenuated after adjustment for body mass index (BMI)", but the Conclusion says: > Higher unprocessed red meat, processed meat, and poultry meat consumption was associated with higher risks of several common conditions; higher BMI accounted for…
Meatless is the new “low fat” boogieman. Coincidentally, industrial food producers have discovered that it is cheaper and more profitable to sell ground up peas and plant oil as “meat”, water rinsed through oats as milk, etc. All of the “problems” with meat are market issues. Animal welfare issues are due to industrial farming practices, which will get worse if the industry declines. Land use and environmental issues…
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#89Let's follow the money. Said "scientific study" is funded by Wellcome. An arm of WHO, unelected crisis manufacturer supreme. On wellcome's site: "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority." Show me the incentives and I'll show you the outcome.
Can you link to the part of Wellcome being against meat consumption? They look like a charity about vaccination or such? I couldn't find anything here about meat consumption: https://wellcome.org/about-us
You may already realize this but if you type
site:wellcome.org "Reducing meat intake, particularly in the USA where meat consumption is highest, should be a global priority."
into Google you'll find it.
Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since meat is seen as unhealthy nowadays, most people who still eat lots of it also tend to be part of the "don't care about health" crowd (smokers, drinkers, people who don't exercise...). What if don't drink, don't smoke, do regular exercise, not obese... and eat lots of high quality meat? I haven't seen anything that comes close to showing that this would be unhealthy. These studies are quick to point to conclusio…
You bring up the point that really pisses me off in these studies. They treat a mcdonalds big mac as the same quality of meat as a grass fed steak or free range chicken breast. While grain free and free range is always best, even commercially produced grain fed cooked healthy is miles better than mickey d chicken nuggets. Lumping all these together as "meat consumption" is incredibly misleading. Most of these anti me…