Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people • Hacker News Board

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#221

Post by wrongdonf » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

cbozeman wrote: post #178

bboylen wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the info. It is apparent to me from living life that meat is a big part of a healthy diet. But it can be frustrating seeing studies such as this one come out and not knowing what to believe. I recently started dating a vegetarian and am really realizing how much harder it is to eat a healthy vegetarian diet. Since no one actually wants to eat nothing but greens / veggies all day, many of her meals are carb…

Just look to biology for the answers, its there if you pay attention. The leader of a wolf pack gets first pickins at a kill, and it always eats the liver first. Large carnivores elsewhere eat organs first as well. There's a growing body of research for something that's being called the "carnivore" diet, and there's a sub-movement called "eating nose-to-tail" that seems to be, as best as I can tell, led by a physicia…

Another leader in the diet realm is Sean baker, a surgeon, who runs meatrx.com. That website contains a large repository of video testimony from people who have done the carnivore diet. There are hundreds and hundreds of them, each one making eyebrow raising claims. They include remission of asthma, arthritis, MS, anxiety, depression, chronic skin rash, brain fog and many many more things. That repository will convert literally anyone to a carnivore believer. There is even one guy who measured his CAC before and after, and his CAC was significantly lower after. This not only goes against the prediction of mainstream medicine, it is something that is thought to be impossible under any circumstances whatsoever. Carnivore is insanely OP. People get ripped, shredded without ever going to the gym. They become slim and metabolically healthy. Men’s testosterone go up. Couples that have been trying to get pregnant for years are able to get pregnant. I’ve watched hundreds of those videos and it’s case closed in my mind. It’s the healthiest diet we know of.

That being said, it sucks. I tried it and I couldn’t do it. Not eating any of the foods you like fucking sucks. And the adjustment period is brutal, with nausea and watery stools. Electrolytes are a constant problem. Once you get past the one month mark it’s supposed to level out, but I’ve never been tough enough to last a month.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#222

Post by boatsie » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

So, fat is bad. Carbs are bad. Meat is bad. Assuming you eat calories (ie leafy vegetables are not a large source of calories), what are you left with? Plant based low fat, low carb lean protein? Peanuts are high in fat. Beans are high in carbs. There’s like nothing you really should eat.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#223

Post by andor » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:46 PM UTC

52-6F-62 wrote: post #187

__saykou wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you eat meat from industry chances are that your b12 vitamin comes from supplements. B12 supplement is very very cheap and everyone should supplement.

While I agree that taking some B12 supplement is probably a good idea for a lot of people, I don't think statements like that can be made so readily. For one, nutritional studies tend to point to whole foods being the way to go to gain the nutrients required by your body because of the vastly complex interplay of absorption and the related catalysts. And in many cases, it's easy to overdo it on specific vitamins, esp…

What the parent probably meant:

B12 is synthesized by bacteria, algae and yeasts, not directly by the animals we eat. There's a theory that due to the conditions that most animals are farmed in nowadays - the environment and standardized and monotonous feed - they would be B12-deficient themselves if not for supplementation.

So most of the B12 you find in factory-farmed animals might be from supplements in animal feed. Just like how farmed salmon and eggs have a nice color because of supplementation. Check this out: https://nutrition.basf.com/global/en/animal-nutrition/use-ar...

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#224

Post by fastball » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

diydsp wrote: post #139

fastball wrote: post #20

I'm just gonna say it: epidemiological studies suck and we need something better. Humans and their lives are just too multi-variate, even with nearly ~500k people in a study. All you end up with are correlations – I've basically never seen a study like this that manages to demonstrate causality convincingly.

The gold standard to establish causation is the 2x blind random placebo-controlled study. There are many of them assessing various types of foods, from meat to lychee to soy and everything in between. Many biomarkers in the body can be studied such as stress hormones, markers of inflammation, lipid panels, arterial wall thickness, etc. If you poke around on youtube, you can find smart people presenting this research!…

Double-blind random placebo-controlled doesn't automatically demonstrate causation either. Humans are just too multi-variate.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#225

Post by andor » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

andor wrote: post #223

52-6F-62 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree that taking some B12 supplement is probably a good idea for a lot of people, I don't think statements like that can be made so readily. For one, nutritional studies tend to point to whole foods being the way to go to gain the nutrients required by your body because of the vastly complex interplay of absorption and the related catalysts. And in many cases, it's easy to overdo it on specific vitamins, esp…

What the parent probably meant: B12 is synthesized by bacteria, algae and yeasts, not directly by the animals we eat. There's a theory that due to the conditions that most animals are farmed in nowadays - the environment and standardized and monotonous feed - they would be B12-deficient themselves if not for supplementation. So most of the B12 you find in factory-farmed animals might be from supplements in animal fee…

Here's another chemical company that recommends supplementation of B12 for cows:

https://www.dsm.com/anh/en_US/products/vitamins/vitamin-nutr...

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#226

Post by wrongdonf » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:56 PM UTC

Accacin wrote: post #188

simonsarris wrote: post #58

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…

I'll start by saying that I am vegan, but not ignorant. Thank you for the links to studies. I've never before read about B12 and mental health. I do make sure I supplement but I'm going to read these nonetheless.

A huge number of diehard carnivores are decades long vegans. Because vegans are the most health conscious people on the planet. This includes Paul saladino, The Godfather of carnivore.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#227

Post by jgowdy » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

bookmarkable wrote: post #98

They'll keep coming after meat eating with every angle - health, ecology, economics, emotional appeals - but humans can live a long, healthy life with meat in their diet. That doesn't mean industrial burgers daily or portions that look like a carnival hot dog eating contest, but 4 to 6 oz of quality meat from animals is healthy. I think the US especially would be far better served to appeal to people to reduce portio…

You're absolutely right. There's a whole subset of people who have declared war on meat. They want to replace meat with a diet desperately low in B12 so you have to supplement to be healthy. They want to replace meat with ingredients most similar to the ingredients they use to make dog food. They want to replace meat with extremely processed vegetables made to taste like meat, just like they did with margarine replacing butter, and hydrogenated vegetable oils replacing lard (both of which have killed millions prematurely). They want to replace meat with something very high in phytoestrogens and then demand that you believe that the massive endocrine disruption we're seeing all across humanity isn't related to this push towards foods high in xenoestrogens. They won't even allow for the possibility because it doesn't fit their agenda.

There are issues with our industrial food production particularly around meat. They should be addressed. I would be perfectly happy with lab grown meat if it was proven to be safe over time. I would prefer real meat without massive pollution or cruelty. But I'm not going to shift my diet to something proven to require pills to be healthy.

Just watch, the next phase will be trying to shame people for eating meat. It's only a matter of time.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#228

Post by thaumasiotes » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

galangalalgol wrote: post #205

thaumasiotes wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vegetarianism has been a (mandatory!) prestige marker in India for at least several hundred years; a traditional diet of that type will be adequately healthy[1]. What's hard is cutting meat out of a meat-based diet. You can't expect to just intuit how to fill the holes it leaves. [1] As with all traditional practices, partial adoption may result in loss of any amount of the benefit, including amounts greater than 100…

Also applying diets from one genetic cluster in a different one from another climate is asking for trouble. I can process lactose fine, but many can't. Chickpeas and lentils I do not absorb well.

It is a risk, but it's still true that the Indian vegetarian diet will cover all major dietary needs. And while that's not the most ringing endorsement, it's more than you can say for cutting meat out of a diet that features a lot of meat.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#229

Post by wrongdonf » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:02 PM UTC

bena wrote: post #113

simonsarris wrote: post #58

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…

The bit about a vegetarian diet being associated with a higher incidence of cancer is kind of jarring to me. As I've always heard that leaning more towards whole/raw foods and more vegetables were better for avoiding cancer. Now that may be because of your top point, most of the meat consumed in the US is processed in some way. I think the biggest culprit of meat-related cancer (?) is preserved meats. I don't know. I…

It’s really not surprising. You’re almost sure to be eating pesticides or weird chemicals even if you go fully organic. You can’t get it off by rinsing or washing. Plus, as has just become clear recently, carbohydrates are highly inflammatory, and inflammation plays a key role in cancer, heart disease, psychiatric disease and almost every other modern malady. It turns out that when you go from eating few carbs to zero carbs, tons of health problems, all centered around inflammation, go away. Carnivore is a miracle for allergies and skin problems. It’s really one of the biggest medical/diet revolutions that’s currently in the pipes. Certainly so when it comes to bang for buck.

Re: Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide analyses of 475K people

#230

Post by ChrisRR » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

ddorian43 wrote: post #210

tasty_freeze wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I deny it. I just disproved your assertion. Bill Gates spends lots of his money trying to develop technologies such as clean burning stoves for developing countries, inexpensive toilets for the same, funding advanced nuclear technology. How is this shoving it down our throats? Your single sentence is brimming with emotion: belittling him with the batman moniker, shoving it down our throats, whatever the fuck, scare q…

He is doing it by force. Paying ads, paying politicians, paying experts, paying democratic party, insisting on vaccines, insisting on removing meat (have you seen healthy athletic vegans ? extremely rare). You have to look at things that he wants to be applied by force, not things that he "generously creates and you can optionally use it". If I want to eat meat and Bill wants to raise taxes on meat by force (using hi…

No-one is forcing you to stop eating meat, and yes in fact I have a powerlifter vegan friend.

You're clearly brimming with emotion, and you seem to have drawn your own conclusion that bill gates is forcing you to stop eating meat. I'll be honest, that's a new conspiracy theory that I've not heard.

Why don't you think about it logically. What would Bill gates, a man who statistically only has 13 more years to live, gain from stopping you from eating meat?