• jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Not to mention most of the antimeat studies are observational food surveys with weak hazard ratio outcomes.

    Most annoyingly the classification of “meat” is infuriating and biased. In some of the studies any sandwich, any pizza, any sugar covered possible meat containing item counts as meat. It’s well established that sugar is very detrimental for health.

    The only people avoiding sugar at large care about their health, so there is tremendous healthy user bias, and the advice for the last 50 years or so has been to avoid meat if you want to be healthy… Reinforcing the healthy user bias.

    A high quality disciplined study to show the effect of meat on health would include metabolic markers like ketones, track sugar independently, and not use a once every 4 year food questionnaire.

    The key to knowing if the study is serious, or sensational, is if they use relative risk or absolute risk in their findings. Nobody publishes absolute risk with respect to meat consumption…

    https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/red-meat#potential-harm