Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Another attack on red meat

  1. #1

    Default Another attack on red meat

    in today's Times. This is the article.

    I commented:
    Every time the words say "red meat" some form of processed meat is shown. Processed meat and red meat are lumped together in such studies because there is an agenda.Real scientific papers are being held back by peer review, whereas the total cobblers sponsored by commercial interests are waved through because all the peers on the review panels have the sorts of conflicts of interests that should cause them to recuse themselves.This is not science it is propaganda!!
    This is what Zoe referred to in her post yesterday, I think.
    Gilli - DLTBGYD

  2. #2
    Super Member PerryPoole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Thornbury, South Gloucestershire
    Posts
    2,178

    Default

    I like to attack red meat with a knife and fork... (cooked meat preferably...)

  3. #3
    Club Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    South Norfolk
    Posts
    2,725

    Default

    However, when people cut back on red meat and ate more fish, chicken, eggs and vegetables, their risk of dying over the eight years fell. Substituting one 85g serving of red meat — about three thin slices of roast beef — per day for fish reduced the risk by 17 per cent. Switching from processed meat to fish cut the chance by 25 per cent.

    What genetic factors did they take into account for people living longer. My grandparents lived until nearly 90 and grandfather was a butcher, so we were or are big meat eaters.

    My hubby's father lived until 101, enjoyed ale in reasonable amounts when out a couple of times a week but never drunk, all his life, did not drink indoors. Did give up smoking in his 60s, did not bother too much about his diet but ate veg and some salad, cooked fish and meat for himself. Would cook chips and other friend foods, did do a weekly roast.

    Whilst Hubby's mother (parents divorced when he was very young) was in her 60s and so was her sister when they died. The sister took care of herself better than my MIL. Both smoked, both liked a drink of scotch. Food was not overly brilliant, much more processed than FIL. Neither took much exercise e.g. walked, whereas FIL was very active until mid-90s then his legs started to fail him. MIL had a rougher life than FIL, of her own making.

    So whey did FIL live 40 years longer than MIL and her sister.

    People make changes in the life as years roll by, how were these taken into account or controlled. What else happened to this study group over time?

    I very rarely read research these days or listen to news items which are food/life style studies supposedly.

  4. #4
    Club Member Hugh Mannity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    197

    Default

    Tracy Parker of the British Heart Foundation said: “While red meat is a good source of protein and certain nutrients such as iron, vitamins and zinc, too much processed meat is linked to a greater risk of heart and circulatory diseases as well as other long-term health issues. For those concerned about getting enough protein, there are plenty of healthier alternatives such as lentils, nuts, seeds and fish.”
    Now there's a great "bait and switch".

    The closest my red meat comes to being processed is getting ground into burgers. That's from a meat CSA which turns the "untidy" bits of their grassfed beef into ground beef.

  5. #5

    Default

    "Bait and Switch" is a new concept for me but I like it and may adopt the expression for use in future, with your kind permission.
    Gilli - DLTBGYD

  6. #6

    Default

    Someone, somewhere wants us all to stop eating red meat. This gets more and more obvious as time goes on.

  7. #7

    Default

    On the news on Wednesday we were hearing about the UK aim to be carbon neutral by 2050 - apparently we should all reduce our meat consumption by 20% to help with this effort.

    To quote Princess Margaret, not bloody likely.

  8. #8
    Club Plus Member Sarah(sjc)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Wiltshire
    Posts
    16,892

    Default

    However, when people cut back on red meat and ate more fish, chicken, eggs and vegetables, their risk of dying over the eight years fell. Substituting one 85g serving of red meat — about three thin slices of roast beef — per day for fish reduced the risk by 17 per cent. Switching from processed meat to fish cut the chance by 25 per cent

    Er - I don't know anyone who regularly eats 85g plus of red meat every day in the first place!

  9. #9

    Default

    Not each and every day, no, but I do exceed that most days.

    Been wondering how you were Sarah by the way!

  10. #10
    Super Member roseymary's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    12,318

    Default


    Sarah, given pork, lamb and beef are all red meats, I normally eat way more than that everyday. Bacon each day must be between 85 - 100g, today I had roast beef as well.
    One is too many a thousand not enough.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO