[quote]Sxio wrote:
Reports like this have caused me to reduce my red meat intake. I used to eat it every day, now I’m probably down to once a week. I replaced it with chicken and tuna.
I don’t miss it that much. I do feel a bit healthier. I already avoided processed red meats and the like.
I think if you’re already eating pretty clean, that red meat’s probably not going to do you in, but reducing your intake’s not going to hurt as long as you’re not going low on all proteins. I think we all know that would be a mistake.
[/quote]
so bad reporting has caused you to change your habits. Good idea.
The only thing this study can show is that eating obese red meat with refined carbs is bad for you. The authors and clowns that gave opinions (Ornish) don’t see that. They have their own agendas.
[quote]Sxio wrote:
Reports like this have caused me to reduce my red meat intake. I used to eat it every day, now I’m probably down to once a week. I replaced it with chicken and tuna.
I don’t miss it that much. I do feel a bit healthier. I already avoided processed red meats and the like.
I think if you’re already eating pretty clean, that red meat’s probably not going to do you in, but reducing your intake’s not going to hurt as long as you’re not going low on all proteins. I think we all know that would be a mistake.
[/quote]
so bad reporting has caused you to change your habits. Good idea.
[/quote]
Agreed.
I always change my lifestyle based on what’s hawt right now.
I swear…my quest for strength and size trumps nonsense that goes against everything I’ve learned.
Yeah, if your “red meat” comes in the form of McGriddles, then yeah, you may want to cut back.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
The problem with these “observations” is that red meat is lumped together with numerous OTHER risk factors without even mentioning their dangers. Processed meats are the problem, not the natural cuts of flesh.
That asshole Dr Oz once did his own “study” where he was the subject. For one full day he gave up his usual veggie diet for an all meat diet. He felt sick and lethargic after a day eating like this. The problem with his “study” was that he only consumed processed meats and fried foods all day, then used his symptoms as an indication of impending ill-health. Well of course he felt like shit! Just changing one’s diet drastically for a day would make anyone feel ill, healthy meal or not.
[/quote]
He also ignores the fact that if you don’t eat red meat or most foods regularly your body is not going to have the same amount of enzymes to break it down. If i go vegatarian right now i will feel like shit for the next 6 months.
so bad reporting has caused you to change your habits. Good idea.
[/quote]
Noooo… the many, many studies over the years that have shown a correlation between red meat intake and health problems helped me change my habits.
Whenever I read those studies (and saw the reports on the news i’ll admit) i thought “well they’re not doing those studies on people like me, who eat grass fed beef, avoid crap and supplement with omega 3”.
But after a while I realised that I didn’t love red meat that much, that all of these studies mean that there is a correlation and that I’m not really losing anything if I cut down.
So i did.
Nothing to do with bad reporting or whatnot. I made a decision based on what I’ve learned from many sources. It’s called having a brain and using it.
You can be in denial all you want, but I think it’s pretty clear and has been for a long time. There is something about red meat itself that is not good for you. Twice a week is probably going to be fine. If you’re eating it twice a day, you’re putting your hand up for those negative consequences.
But I’m not trying to change anyone’s mind. This is just what I did. Even if Pavel says that avoiding red meat makes you weak, i still feel pretty good. I’m still hitting protein with every meal, i just adjusted the source. Spaghetti with chicken mince still tastes pretty good.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
since you read so much, until you read “Good Calories, Bad Calories” you can spout all you want, but you’re wrong.
and how the fuck can anyone deny that a natural food is good for us? fuck, this shit ain’t rocket science[/quote]
Hey man, there’s plenty of stuff out there growing on trees that is as natural as it comes and if you eat if you’ll die.
Sugar’s pretty natural. Saturated fat’s pretty natural. You think they’re health foods too? By your rationale, obviously they are.
But look, I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m just telling you what I’ve done. If you disagree, i really couldn’t care less. It’s your life, your body. You make your own decisions and i’ll make mine.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
since you read so much, until you read “Good Calories, Bad Calories” you can spout all you want, but you’re wrong.
and how the fuck can anyone deny that a natural food is good for us? fuck, this shit ain’t rocket science[/quote]
Hey man, there’s plenty of stuff out there growing on trees that is as natural as it comes and if you eat if you’ll die.
Sugar’s pretty natural. Saturated fat’s pretty natural. You think they’re health foods too? By your rationale, obviously they are.
But look, I’m not trying to change your mind. I’m just telling you what I’ve done. If you disagree, i really couldn’t care less. It’s your life, your body. You make your own decisions and i’ll make mine. [/quote]
sugar never was a staple of the human diet. Sounds good, I don’t think one must eat red meat, I just hate people changing their lives out of being scared based on shit science and people turning nutrition into religion.
sugar never was a staple of the human diet. Sounds good, I don’t think one must eat red meat, I just hate people changing their lives out of being scared based on shit science and people turning nutrition into religion.[/quote]
Who’s scared? You guys make it sound like you have to eat red meat or else become vegetarian. There’s so many good protein sources out there that don’t have all these negative associations with them…is the science a little questionable in some cases? Definitely, but usually where there’s smoke there’s fire
Hell yeah I eat a good burger or steak a couple times a week, but I just don’t think it’s optimal for health to make beef your main protein source. Go ahead call me a vagina or whatever makes you feel better.
And judging by some of the responses here, you guys are the ones turning your nutrition it into a religion. “Eat less red meat? What’s the point of living then???” LMAO
sugar never was a staple of the human diet. Sounds good, I don’t think one must eat red meat, I just hate people changing their lives out of being scared based on shit science and people turning nutrition into religion.[/quote]
Who’s scared? You guys make it sound like you have to eat red meat or else become vegetarian. There’s so many good protein sources out there that don’t have all these negative associations with them…is the science a little questionable in some cases? Definitely, but usually where there’s smoke there’s fire
Hell yeah I eat a good burger or steak a couple times a week, but I just don’t think it’s optimal for health to make beef your main protein source. Go ahead call me a vagina or whatever makes you feel better.
And judging by some of the responses here, you guys are the ones turning your nutrition it into a religion. “Eat less red meat? What’s the point of living then???” LMAO[/quote]
You’re scared, LOL. Tell me you’re not, or you’d eat it. And I even said, one doesn’t have to eat red meat (btw, ya know your muscles are red don’t ya). But to not eat it b/c of BS nutriligion (yes, I just coined that)
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
You’re scared, LOL. Tell me you’re not, or you’d eat it. And I even said, one doesn’t have to eat red meat (btw, ya know your muscles are red don’t ya). But to not eat it b/c of BS nutriligion (yes, I just coined that)
[/quote]
Well, I would prefer the term “concerned”…and I DO eat it, just in moderation.
As I said before, experimental studies are impossible in this case, so I’ll steer on the side of caution. Do you think these researchers have an agenda?
MODOK,
As a clinical researcher, I have to second your statements about bias.
There is no such thing as impartial research, only repeatable results and unrepeatable findings. And that means prospective control trials, preferrably blinded and randomized. As with all “studies” that are not repeatable prospective RCT’s, you have to “follow the money” to determine the bias and influence in the study design.
If you selected an age-, race-, and socioeconomically-matched cohort and gave half red meat and the other half an equivalent amount of free range organic poultry and fowl, you might see a difference, but you might not. If you followed them for a short period of time, my guess is that the biggest difference you’d see would be from the elevated creatine levels in the red meat. If you followed them for 30 years, who knows?!? I don’t think it would be very feasible in a free society to conduct that kind of research.
[quote]orcrist wrote:
MODOK,
As a clinical researcher, I have to second your statements about bias.
There is no such thing as impartial research, only repeatable results and unrepeatable findings. And that means prospective control trials, preferrably blinded and randomized. As with all “studies” that are not repeatable prospective RCT’s, you have to “follow the money” to determine the bias and influence in the study design.
If you selected an age-, race-, and socioeconomically-matched cohort and gave half red meat and the other half an equivalent amount of free range organic poultry and fowl, you might see a difference, but you might not. If you followed them for a short period of time, my guess is that the biggest difference you’d see would be from the elevated creatine levels in the red meat. If you followed them for 30 years, who knows?!? I don’t think it would be very feasible in a free society to conduct that kind of research.
[/quote]
but, why do we even need it? Do lions need studies to show their natural food is good or bad? I konw you’re not arguing anything here, just irks me that everyone lives and dies (lol) by studies.
use logic and common sense. Nutrition doesn’t have to be this PhD type of school program to get it.
[quote]orcrist wrote:
MODOK,
As a clinical researcher, I have to second your statements about bias.
There is no such thing as impartial research, only repeatable results and unrepeatable findings. And that means prospective control trials, preferrably blinded and randomized. As with all “studies” that are not repeatable prospective RCT’s, you have to “follow the money” to determine the bias and influence in the study design.
If you selected an age-, race-, and socioeconomically-matched cohort and gave half red meat and the other half an equivalent amount of free range organic poultry and fowl, you might see a difference, but you might not. If you followed them for a short period of time, my guess is that the biggest difference you’d see would be from the elevated creatine levels in the red meat. If you followed them for 30 years, who knows?!? I don’t think it would be very feasible in a free society to conduct that kind of research.
[/quote]
but, why do we even need it? Do lions need studies to show their natural food is good or bad? I konw you’re not arguing anything here, just irks me that everyone lives and dies (lol) by studies.
use logic and common sense. Nutrition doesn’t have to be this PhD type of school program to get it.
[/quote]
Not only that, but science gets it wrong sometimes. The worst people for this are the ones who are just now understanding studies for the first time without that background. They don’t understand that for the 30 studies they just found saying one thing, there are 35 saying the opposite. The whos, whys, wheres and how much’s are the primary concerns.
I don’t eat steak often but I make a point to train the day I eat it. There is something about steak that makes me recover faster or do better in the gym. Steak=steroid
[quote]MODOK wrote:
I’m sure you know that correlation does not = causation.
I also can’t wrap my brain around choosing a food to eat based on its color. Beef is red, bison is red, ostrich is dark reddish reddish…pork is white. So is pork ok and bison not? What color is kangaroo meat down there in Australia? Good or not good?
[/quote]
True, but if someone said to you “Here’s a biscuit. It’s correlated with dying from Aids, but y’know, correlation doesn’t imply causation!”
Would you still eat it?
I agree with Proud Virgin. I’m not telling anyone else they have to cut down. I just think that where’s there’s smoke there’s fire.
I’ve only eaten kangaroo a few times. It has a very gamey, iron rich taste that I didn’t really like that much. It’s VERY red in colour before it’s cooked. Apparently pretty healthy though because it’s not commercially farmed in most cases, so it’s omega 3/6/9 ratio’s are closer to what nature intended.
I like where this conversation is going though. It’s good to examine why we make these choices.
I disagree that JF has a good point to make. He’s just telling me I’m wrong. Good for him. But if he was so sure it was safe, I don’t think he’d be jumping up and down so much about it.
I still love a good steak from a restaurant every couple of weeks or so. That’s one of life’s great pleasures. I just don’t eat one every day. It’s not rocket science. I’m not turning vegan or anything. But I do think that all of these studies saying there are issues inherent can’t all be wrong. There’s a clear trend being shown, but if you want to ignore it, or say it’s a conspiracy, then that’s your choice. I for one don’t mind cutting back a little. I was eating it every single day as spaghetti bolognese is my after workout meal of choice. Cutting back from that frequency is probably a good idea. Some of you are acting like it’s part of your religion to eat red meat or something.
Sxio- there is a whole lot of great evidence out there that validates what JF is stating. He isn’t being flippant or dismissive, he is saying that there is science out there that dismisses saturated fat as being bad and red meat as being bad. If you are interested I could recommend some reading to you. If not, it sounds like you’ve got your diet squared away and you are content, so no big deal. [/quote]