SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Consuming red meat in amounts above what is typically recommended does not affect short-term cardiovascular disease risk factors, such as blood pressure and blood cholesterol, according to a new review of clinical trials from Purdue University.
"During the last 20 years, there have been recommendations to eat less red meat as part of a healthier diet, but our research supports that red meat can be incorporated into a healthier diet," said Wayne Campbell, professor of nutrition science. "Red meat is a nutrient-rich food, not only as a source for protein but also bioavailable iron."
The recommendations to limit red meat from the diet come mainly from studies that relate peoples' eating habits to whether they have cardiovascular disease. While these studies suggest that red meat consumption is associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, they are not designed to show that red meat is causing cardiovascular disease. So Campbell, doctoral student Lauren O'Connor, and postdoctoral researcher Jung Eun Kim, conducted a review and analysis of past clinical trials, which are able to detect cause and effect between eating habits and health risks. They screened hundreds of related research articles, focusing on studies that met specific criteria including the amount of red meat consumed, evaluation of cardiovascular disease risk factors and study design. An analysis of the 24 studies that met the criteria is published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
Total red meat intake of >=0.5 servings/d does not negatively influence cardiovascular disease risk factors: a systemically searched meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. DOI: 10.3945/ajcn.116.142521
(Score: 5, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday January 03 2017, @11:00PM
A few details are probably important to highlight here from TFA:
For example, the length of time these experiments were done ranged from a few weeks to a few months as opposed to the years or decades that it could take people to develop cardiovascular disease or have a cardiovascular event.
In other words, they were just focusing on a few blood indicators for studies that were a few months at maximum. There was no actual measurement of frequency of cardiac events or disease.
"We found that consuming more than half a serving per day of red meat, which is equivalent to a 3 ounce serving three times per week, did not worsen blood pressure and blood total cholesterol, HDL, LDL and triglyceride concentrations, which are commonly screened by health-care providers," O'Connor said.
In other words, this meta-analysis divided people only into two groups: those who ate more than 9 ounces of red meat per week and those who ate less.
9 ounces per week is not very much at all. A lot of Americans tend to eat that much in a single meal with one steak or one burger. So, even for short term indicators, this study is only really claiming eating SOME amount of red meat is not significantly worse than eating little to no red meat (by American standards). It's not exactly telling you to eat a giant burger for lunch and get the 20-ounce ribeye for dinner and "you'll be fine..."
Not a criticism -- just clarifying what was really claimed here. Basically, my takeaway is that vegetarians or those who claim they only ever eat chicken or fish are probably not going to see better blood indicators at their next doctor's visit than those who eat a moderate amount of red meat. How much of an impact that might have on actual disease and mortality outcomes (or whether larger amounts of meat are correlated with something bad) is not addressed.