Red meat: Good or bad for health?

[rangerrebew]

Red meat: Good or bad for health?
Written by Honor Whiteman
Published: Wednesday 25 January 2017
email
4.5
379Share
5
Red meat contains numerous vitamins and minerals that are essential for a healthful, balanced diet. In recent years, however, its reputation has been severely blemished, with studies suggesting that red meat intake can increase the risk of cancer and other diseases. But is it really that bad for us? We investigate.
[A variety of red meats]
Intake of red meat in the U.S. has fallen dramatically over the past 4 decades.

Red meat is defined as any meat that comes from mammalian muscle. This includes beef, lamb, pork, goat, veal, and mutton.

For many households, red meat is considered a food staple, with some of us consuming beef, lamb, and pork in different variations on a daily basis.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/315449.php

[Smokin Joe]

They found that each 50-gram portion of processed meat - which primarily includes pork or beef - consumed daily increases the risk of colorectal cancer by 18 percent.

Well, I'm a dead man walking if that's true.

Considering 50 grams is only a twentieth of a kilogram, or .11 lbs, and I just don't feel right if I don't eat at least half a pound (a mere 8 ounces) of meat a day--most days two to three times that, that means I have an increased risk of colorectal cancer of between 92% and 276%.
Screw it, I'm going back to driving fast--after dinner, that is.

[SZonian]

Hmmm, had some leftover carnitas and carne asada last night...guess my chances of cancer went up by 72% overnight.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Everything.


Is.


Bad.


For.


You.

[Smokin Joe]

Everything.


Is.


Bad.


For.


You.

Yep. Life causes cancer, heart disease, etc. If you die young of trauma, you won't get any of that stuff.

[Free Vulcan]

Years ago all this stuff came out about how bad stuff like eggs, milk, red meat, chocolate, coffee, butter, salt and so on are bad for you. Then suddenly all these fake processed things came out to replace them, and guess what? They themselves are actually really bad for you. Now new research has debunked all those old saws and people are returning to the old ways of eating.

Properly grown, extracted, or produced, none of the above are bad for you. Red meat included. Basically go back to the old farm ways of eating and make sure it's not full of crap, you will be fine.

This book has become my new 'diet' book. Food wise it's how I roll now:



Add: she has a great website at www.nourishedkitchen.com

[Frank Cannon]

Intake of red meat in the U.S. has fallen dramatically over the past 4 decades.

While the number of Snowflakes has dramatically increased over the same time.

[skeeter]

Intake of red meat in the U.S. has fallen dramatically over the past 4 decades.

While the number of Snowflakes has dramatically increased over the same time.

According to a commercial currently running testosterone levels have been dropping generation to generation, too.

So it looks like its either manliness or a healthy colon, take yer pick boys.

[Frank Cannon]

So it looks like its either manliness or a healthy colon, take yer pick boys.

That's a no brainer.

BTW, http://www.1vigor.com/article/soy-decreases-men's-testoserone-levels-increases-estrogen/

[truth_seeker]

Not many decades ago, people worried about just getting enough to eat.

Now we are informed that poverty causes childhood obesity. (Not lack of exercise or bad parenting.)

Eating To Break 100

Hints, Greece and Italy, Okinawa, Loma Linda Calif. (Seventh Day Adventists), small meat portions, or fish but none go meat free.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/04/11/398325030/eating-to-break-100-longevity-diet-tips-from-the-blue-zones

 

[bolobaby]

So, let's be clear: the chance for a man to get colorectal cancer over his lifetime in the U.S. is 4.7%.

If we assumed that was the baseline (which it is not), an 18% increase in that chance would bring us to 5.55%.

The problem is, that 18% increase is already baked in to the 4.7% number. And, it's actually in there as a much higher percentage because no one eats just 50 grams of meat, unless you are a waifish supermodel. So, theoretically, someone who was eating the 106.6 lbs of meat a year, on average, is actually consuming 132 grams of meat a day.

Except, that 106.6 lbs of meat a year is for all Americans, so let's factor out the vegetarians. There's not a ton of them in the U.S., but it does bring our average meat-eater total consumption to 137 grams a day.

So, it terms of 50 gram portions, that is a multiplier of 2.74, which would mean that the 18% PER 50 gram portion becomes 49.3% higher chance.

BUT...

Another study from Harvard says that a vegetarian diet only reduces the risk of colon cancer by 22%. (http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/vegetarian-diet-linked-to-lower-colon-cancer-risk-201503117785)

Let's take a quick look at these two numbers, shall we?

If your chance was 1%, and the first study was right, your chance would go to 1.493%. Ok.

If your chance was 1% and the second study was right, your chance would go to .78%. Hm.

OK, what if we baseline at the higher chance of 1.493%? In that case, a 22% reduction on meat-eaters only comes out to 1.165%. Still not 1%

Bottom line: one of these studies has it's numbers very, very wrong since there is little correlation between the two final results. (Even though I fudged things a bit to keep it simple.)

My guess is that it is the study that makes the stronger case for eating less meat since we already know that is the agenda the lying left wants to push.

[Suppressed]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsQyru5ACmA

[Elderberry]

When I heard that eating meat cooked over an open fire was bad for you, that was the day I gave up on the So Called Health Experts.

[Smokin Joe]

When I heard that eating meat cooked over an open fire was bad for you, that was the day I gave up on the So Called Health Experts.

I was in college when I heard the mold on blue cheese was supposed to be carcinogenic. About then, I just ate what I wanted--I was the one to double down on the meat and leave dessert alone.  If I need something in my diet, I'll get hungry for it. So far, that has stood me in good stead.

[Cripplecreek]

Red meat good.

[geronl]

cook the red out and it keeps me alive

[EC]

I was in college when I heard the mold on blue cheese was supposed to be carcinogenic. About then, I just ate what I wanted--I was the one to double down on the meat and leave dessert alone.  If I need something in my diet, I'll get hungry for it. So far, that has stood me in good stead.

Yep. Your body knows what it needs. It's not great at the quantities though.

[Smokin Joe]

Yep. Your body knows what it needs. It's not great at the quantities though.

The only time I really might have overdone the beef was eating 54 ounces of steak at one sitting. Even then, I had a hankering to eat steak, and suffered no ill effects. On another occasion, the Priest kicked me out of an all you can eat church dinner (and I was only on my third plate full). I was much younger then and burned that caloric intake without any trouble. Now I try to keep the ribeye steaks down to a pound or so.
My BP is normal, I take no medications, and have eight great grandchildren. Something seems to be working so far.

[Silver Pines]

Red meat good.

@Cripplecreek

It's that simple.

[jmyrlefuller]

There are few foods that are as rich in digestible iron as red meat.

That's one of the problems with vegetarian and vegan diets: there are sources of iron in those diets, but they're not as easy to digest.

So I'm going to continue chowing down on that burger.

[Bigun]

Red meat good.

Indeed!  And I fully intend to continue making full use of the resources.