Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
did you see the article that came out yesterday about eating red meat (i think it said daily) increases the risk of early death? i was going to post it.
wait, here it is. what do you think?
i also heard there was a study that said posting daily hockey picks increases your insulin levels which is why you don't do it anymore. any truth to that one?
Here is where I got some of the numbers from this study.
The study is complete garbage. First of all it was done by Harvard who has been the spokespersons for anything related to obesity in the past 50 years in America. They wanted to and have made a name for themselves and have ignored all of the work regarding the alternative hypothesis to obesity which was going on in Europe in the 1950's. In the book Good Calories Bad Calories, Gary Taubes mentioned that these guys had the work of Hugo Rony and others who pointed to carbohydrates as the cause of chronic disease but ignored it and came up with the "eat less, move more" theory which obviously has not done anything for us. By the end of the 1970's they also determined what researchers and clinicians in the field would eventually believe in America and have preached it ever since.
Looking at the numbers, the study followed the diets of more than 121,000 middle aged women and men for up to 28 years. Each additional serving of red meat that a person consumed per day was linked with a 13% increased risk of dying during the study. Salami, bacon and hot dogs which fall under processed meats were determined to be more dangerous with a 20% higher risk of dying with each additional serving. They estimated that substituting one daily serving of red meat with low fat dairy, whole grains, nuts legumes, fish and poultry, would reduce the risk at this stage of life by 7-19%. If all participants had reduced their red meat intake to less than half a serving a day, the researchers state that 8% of deaths among women and 9% among men could have been prevented.
Here is why the above is almost meaningless. We are dealing with 120,000 people to start, are told that 20% of people died during the study but the causes of death are not mentioned. If they were to tell us the causes of death it would be prevalent that red meat was not the cause. Anyway, so 24,000 out of the 120,000 died during the study. We are talking about risk here and not actual death. Out of the 24,000 if 9% of these people consumed less red meat then maybe they could have lived longer. So we have about 2100 out of 120,000 which is less than 2%. If consuming red meat is that bad then why only 2100 of this whole group of 120,000. If 1 out of every 5 people is unhealthy and overweight then surely it should have been more if red meat was the culprit. I would like to know what else these people were eating during this time. The study also claims that eating meat raises cholesterol. It does but not in an unhealthy manner. Red meat raises your HDL and lowers your tri-glycerides and VLDL.
We don't believe that people sitting on the couch all day smoking and drinking and eating chips are just as healthy as someone who does not smoke and consumes moderates amounts of alcohol, just because they decided not to consume red meat. They study only mentioned the people who died without revealing the causes of death which is an important piece of information to exclude. My guess is that what was not mentioned was that the people who consumed more red meat were also the ones who made bad lifestyle choices such as drinking, smoking, being over-weight, high carbohydrate consumption, high sugar consumption ,no physical activity, etc. Correlation does not mean causation. This study is based on bad science and should be ignored.
Club--- Been busy the past few weeks so I haven't been able to put as much time as I would like into capping. I have more time now though so I should be making plays almost everyday. Looking forward to an exciting playoff race in both conferences.
lard
trying to figure this stuff out.
Hot Forum Topics
