Monday, May 24, 2010

Red Meat Study - Some of the Issues

"The study was a meta-analysis, which combines the results of several studies looking at the same issue. Like others of its kind, the study "is limited in terms of scientific value," Dr. Eckel said. None of the studies in the analysis, for example, was a randomized controlled clinical trial, just one factor affecting the strength of the findings. The report is helpful in raising issues for further study, but "it doesn't answer any questions," he said.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704314904575250570943835414.html
==These are great points and should be taken to heart as regards all study results.  If the study is not an intervention trial, it cannot be used to establish causality, but it may be useful to form or refine a conjecture/hypothesis for further study.

"The American Meat Institute Foundation took issue with the findings [regarding processed meat products], saying they conflict with national dietary guidelines. "The body of evidence clearly demonstrates that processed meat is a healthy part of a balanced diet," James H. Hodges, president, said in a statement. He said the study didn't "achieve the standard threshold that would generate concern" and that "it is no reason for dietary changes." "
==Mr. Hodges is correct in this case - this study is no reason for dietary change. 

Current U.S. dietary guidelines call for limiting saturated fats-the kind found in red meats and dairy products such as milk, cheese and butter-to less than 10% of calories consumed each day-while keeping overall fat consumption to under 30% of calories. A big reason is that saturated fats are associated with higher levels of cholesterol in the blood. Dr. Eckel said that "is still a reasonable recommendation."
==The thing to keep in mind when hearing this bit of drivel - that saturated fat intake raises cholesterol levels -  is that it's true but irrelevant, as Taubes covers in delicious detail in "Good Calories Bad Calories."  Saturated fat intake raises both HDL and LDL, and almost always improves the total cholesterol to HDL ratio that is a far more significant (if imperfect) predictor of CVD.  Saturated fat, as we've covered many times, has a significant health benefit, and virtually no negative health impact (except for a few folks who are sat fat sensitive).

"The report is the second meta-analysis in recent weeks to question just how much of a culprit saturated fats are when it comes to cardiovascular risk. In March, a meta-analysis (involving 21 different studies) by a team headed by Ronald Krauss at Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute, Oakland, Calif., found that intake of saturated fat wasn't linked to a statistically-significant increased risk of heart disease, stroke or cardiovascular disease."
==More on that study here:  http://fireofthegodsfitness.blogspot.com/2010/02/meta-analysis-considering-impact-of-fat.html

"That's not necessarily a license to unleash your inner carnivore. Calorie control as well as a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, fish, whole grains and nuts remain the mainstay of heart-healthy eating, he said."
==They have to advocate something - but be advised they do not have anything like scientific certainty for much of what they advocate.  Eat fruit and vegetables if you like them, nuts are great, fish is great, but don't let them convince you they KNOW (I think they have their head in the sand if they think grains, whole or otherwise, are a significant part of a healthy diet).  They are making a guess.  You are perfectly capable of sorting through the issues and coming to your own conclusions, testing and experimenting with what works for you.  The recommended prescription remains the same - "Eat meat and vegetables, nuts and seeds, some fruit, little starch and no sugar." 

1 comment:

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete