[STUDY] Eating red meat raises 'substantially' risk of cancer or heart disease death

[Butler]

Well, this subject is as topical as ever. But, unless I'm mistake, no one seems to have brought up this recently published study on our very own D&S...

Sample: 121,342
Length of study: 28 years
Source: Harvard School of Public Health

From The Guardian (link)

Regularly eating red meat increases significantly risk of death from heart disease and cancer, according to a study of more than 120,000 people carried out over 28 years.

The findings show that each extra daily serving of processed red meat – equivalent to one hot dog or two rashers of bacon – raised mortality rate by a fifth.

Conversely, replacing red meat with fish, poultry, or plant-based protein foods contributed to a longer life. Nuts were said to reduce mortality rate by 20%, making a case for swapping roast beef for nut roast.

Data from 121,342 men and women taking part in two large US health and lifestyle investigations were analysed to produce the findings, published in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine.

The studies monitored the progress of their participants for more than 20 years and gathered information about diet.

Scientists documented 23,926 deaths, including 5,910 from heart disease and 9,364 from cancer, and there was a striking association in the data between consumption of red meat and premature death.

Each additional daily serving of unprocessed red meat, equivalent to a helping of beef, lamb or pork about the size of a deck of cards, raised the mortality rate by 13%, while processed meat increased it by 20%.

When deaths were broken down into specific causes, eating any kind of red meat increased the chances of dying from heart disease by 16% and from cancer by 10%. Processed red meat raised the risk of heart disease death by 21% and cancer death by 16%.

Senior author Professor Frank Hu, of Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, US, said: "This study provides clear evidence that regular consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, contributes substantially to premature death.

"On the other hand, choosing more healthful sources of protein in place of red meat can confer significant health benefits by reducing chronic disease morbidity [illness] and mortality." Previous research has linked red meat consumption to cancer risk.

The study found that cutting red meat out of the diet entirely led to significant benefits. Halving red meat consumption could have prevented 9.3% of deaths of men and 7.6% of women taking part in the study.

The researchers came to their conclusions after taking account of known chronic disease risk factors such as age, body weight, physical activity and family history.

The World Cancer Research Fund recommends that people avoid processed meat entirely and limit their consumption of red meat to 500g a week. Dr Rachel Thompson, the charity's deputy head of science, said: "This study strengthens the body of evidence which shows a link between red meat and chronic diseases such as cancer and heart disease.

"The study calculates that lives would be saved if people replaced red meat with healthy protein sources such as fish, poultry, nuts and legumes. We would like to see more people replacing red meat with these type of foods."

The findings were challenged by Dr Carrie Ruxton, of the Meat Advisory Panel, an expert body funded by the meat industry.

She said: "This US study looked at associations between high intakes of red meat and risk of mortality, finding a positive association between the two. However, the study was observational, not controlled, and so cannot be used to determine cause and effect."

Dr Ruxton pointed out that meat and meat products were significant sources of essential nutrients such as iron, zinc, selenium, B vitamins and vitamin D.

In the UK, red meat was "critically important" to zinc intake, contributing 32% of the total for men and 27% for women. Red meat also contributed about 17% of total dietary iron intake in the UK.

Victoria Taylor, a dietitian at the British Heart Foundation, said: "This study links red meat to deaths from CVD [cardiovascular disease] and cancer.

"Red meat can still be eaten as part of a balanced diet, but go for the leaner cuts and use healthier cooking methods such as grilling. If you eat processed meats like bacon, ham, sausages or burgers several times a week, add variation to your diet by substituting these for other protein sources such as fish, poultry, beans or lentils."

Bugger?

 

[Modern Warrior1]

Correlation does not imply causation.

 

[Taco Loco]

Shit I pretty much eat red meat everyday. FUCK!

 

[username111]

Correlation does not imply causation.

\thread

 

[MMAwisdom**]

Correlation does not imply causation.

This.


But red meat is definitely unhealthy, unlike what most people on fitness forums will make you believe.

 

[Butler]

Correlation does not imply causation.

i think the phds at Harvard have a pretty good grasp of causation

thanks though

 

[Endo]

i think the phds at Harvard have a pretty good grasp of causation

You and a lot of other people who don't know about the inaccuracies of correlated studies. They don't mean shit because you can draw a link between just about anything and CVD. Anyone of those people could have died from genetically inherited diseases, or poor dietary habits in general, etc..

And there are many different kinds of doctors, so just because you have a PHD doesn't mean that you know a fucking thing about nutrition. If I had a PHD and told you that fucking yourself in the ass with an 18v drill and a 3 foot auger bit attached to it was good for your health, would you do it?

 

[username111]

i think the phds at Harvard have a pretty good grasp of causation

thanks though

No one said they didn't have a grasp of it. Their own abstract admits that no causal relationship can be inferred.

 

[Modern Warrior1]

You and a lot of other people who don't know about the inaccuracies of correlated studies. They don't mean shit because you can draw a link between just about anything and CVD. Anyone of those people could have died from genetically inherited diseases, or poor dietary habits in general, etc..

And there are many different kinds of doctors, so just because you have a PHD doesn't mean that you know a fucking thing about nutrition. If I had a PHD and told you that fucking yourself in the ass with an 18v drill and a 3 foot auger bit attached to it was good for your health, would you do it?

This.

 

[Modern Warrior1]

No one said they didn't have a grasp of it. Their own abstract admits that no causal relationship can be inferred.

And this.

 

[Butler]

You and a lot of other people who don't know about the inaccuracies of correlated studies

Wrong. I get paid quite a lot of money by some really, really big companies to discern correlation and causation across some rather large data sets.

But enough about me.

At no point did I say that there was a causative relationship, only that one is suggested by the (rather substantial) data. As such, it's worthy of note, if nothing else.

 

[Endo]

Wrong. I get paid quite a lot of money by some really, really big companies to discern correlation and causation across some rather large data sets.

That's nice. I don't care.

 

[Butler]

So you're that ass hole responsible for all of the bullshit blasted by the media, spreading misinformation from poorly executed studies about nutrition? Thanks bro, because of you, we have hundreds of people who come in here weekly saying don't eat eggs, they're high in cholesterol and will killz youz. Ohnoes!!!!1one!

Sorry, not me, wrong industry.

edit: totally quoted that post before you deleted it.

 

[Endo]

Sorry, not me, wrong industry.

edit: totally quoted that post before you deleted it.

I'm aware. But I don't really care. If you don't want to eat red meat, that's fine with me.

 

[PoundUmOut2]

no it doesnt.

 

[ValveBJJ]

Here's an interesting critique / dismemberment of the study by Mark Sisson

Will Eating Red Meat Kill You? | Mark's Daily Apple

 

[kpt018]

I see a lot of backlash against the study, but thats a good thing. Critisism is required for good science.

With that said, as much as it sucks, I think there is a lot of work out there that is pointing to the same conclusions. This shit is bad for us and should be cut out of our diets.

You also have to consider the intentions of the critics.

 

[hardheart]

Studies this large typically get nuked from orbit when it comes time to peer review.

 

[Endo]

Abstract

Red meat is long established as an important dietary source of protein and essential nutrients including iron, zinc and vitamin B12, yet recent reports that its consumption may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and colon cancer have led to a negative perception of the role of red meat in health. The aim of this paper is to review existing literature for both the risks and benefits of red meat consumption, focusing on case-control and prospective studies. Despite many studies reporting an association between red meat and the risk of CVD and colon cancer, several methodological limitations and inconsistencies were identified which may impact on the validity of their findings. Overall, there is no strong evidence to support the recent conclusion from the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) report that red meat has a convincing role to play in colon cancer. A substantial amount of evidence supports the role of lean red meat as a positive moderator of lipid profiles with recent studies identifying it as a dietary source of the anti-inflammatory long chain (LC) n-3 PUFAs and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). In conclusion, moderate consumption of lean red meat as part of a balanced diet is unlikely to increase risk for CVD or colon cancer, but may positively influence nutrient intakes and fatty acid profiles, thereby impacting positively on long-term health.

Red meat consumption: an overview of the risks and ... [Meat Sci. 2010] - PubMed - NCBI

 

[kpt018]

Studies this large typically get nuked from orbit when it comes time to peer review.

I'm glad that these studies, if not up to par, get torn up in peer review. Unfortunately, stories get published before the process can identify legitimate v weak studies.

I think you also need to consider what else comes along with eating processed meats. You may have high carb diets (sandwiches or burgers) or poor choices as side dishes. But the things they point out seem to make sense. So food that is highly processed, eating with bread (mayo, ketchup, etc.) or other bad choices, leads to cancer or heart disease? Makes sense to me at least.