4 ms·

What do you see as the benefit of reducing red meat to once a month? There was a widely-publicized article recently questioning some "well-established" science

What do you see as the benefit of reducing red meat to once a month? There was a widely-publicized article recently questioning some "well-established" science that had, previously for decades, linked red meat to higher rates of heart disease, etc.

Double_a_92 4y ago
I don't think it's about health, it's about not having to unnecessarily farm cows.
hcks 4y ago
Could you or someone link this article please? Thanks
- effingwewt 4y ago
  Here[1] is the article post on HN and the OP[2] on case you want the article directly. Tangentially, seems to me the science on every food seems to change every few years. Sugar, fat, MSG, eggs, butter, meat, fish, milk, the list goes on. As others in both this and the linked article stated, I think just reducing consumption would drastically reduce the amount of necessary livestock, which would reduce everything else in the chain. I definitely became more conscious of what I consume from all the secondary and tertiary effects. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33655321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33655321 [2] https://bigthink.com/health/red-meat-cancer-not-health-risk/ https://bigthink.com/health/red-meat-cancer-not-health-risk/
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
    I tried to do a deepdive on nutrition a few years back when I went on a diet. My conclusion was that there are far too many confounding factors for any population studies to be taken too seriously. That's why the field is so vogueish like you point out. Long term, highly controlled trials are more useful, but much rarer.
willsmith72 4y ago
Not a vege, but that study doesn't really say say as much the article made it out. The core thesis was essentially: "Eating red meat at most causes increases in risks of cancer and similar by 15%. If people replace calories that could come from vegetables with red meat, that risk gets worse because they're eating less vegetables" So yeah, eating red meat isn't that bad, but if it reduces your vegetable intake significantly, it probably is worse for you. And it's harder to get the right amount of vegetables if you eat a lot of red meat (unless you just want to increase your calorie intake)
- hombre_fatal 4y ago
  Same with sugar. For most people, Sugar is either pushing you over your calorie threshold or it’s displacing healthier food you could have eaten instead which is reason enough to reduce it.

Double_a_92 4y ago

I don't think it's about health, it's about not having to unnecessarily farm cows.

hcks 4y ago

Could you or someone link this article please? Thanks

effingwewt 4y ago
Here[1] is the article post on HN and the OP[2] on case you want the article directly. Tangentially, seems to me the science on every food seems to change every few years. Sugar, fat, MSG, eggs, butter, meat, fish, milk, the list goes on. As others in both this and the linked article stated, I think just reducing consumption would drastically reduce the amount of necessary livestock, which would reduce everything else in the chain. I definitely became more conscious of what I consume from all the secondary and tertiary effects. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33655321 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33655321 [2] https://bigthink.com/health/red-meat-cancer-not-health-risk/ https://bigthink.com/health/red-meat-cancer-not-health-risk/
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
  I tried to do a deepdive on nutrition a few years back when I went on a diet. My conclusion was that there are far too many confounding factors for any population studies to be taken too seriously. That's why the field is so vogueish like you point out. Long term, highly controlled trials are more useful, but much rarer.

willsmith72 4y ago

Not a vege, but that study doesn't really say say as much the article made it out. The core thesis was essentially: "Eating red meat at most causes increases in risks of cancer and similar by 15%. If people replace calories that could come from vegetables with red meat, that risk gets worse because they're eating less vegetables" So yeah, eating red meat isn't that bad, but if it reduces your vegetable intake significantly, it probably is worse for you. And it's harder to get the right amount of vegetables if you eat a lot of red meat (unless you just want to increase your calorie intake)

hombre_fatal 4y ago
Same with sugar. For most people, Sugar is either pushing you over your calorie threshold or it’s displacing healthier food you could have eaten instead which is reason enough to reduce it.