Uproar after research claims red meat poses no health risk
One expert says findings by international experts represent ‘egregious abuse of evidence’
Ok:
Others said Johnston and colleagues were wrong to exclude environmental concerns about damage to the planet from clearing forests and animal farming from their work.
The lead author of the EAT-Lancet Commission, which in January advocated a plant-based diet for both environmental sustainability and health, excoriated the new work.
“This report has layers of flaws and is the most egregious abuse of evidence that I have ever seen,” said Walter Willett, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, himself a vegan.
Just who was it you were saying was egregiously abusing the evidence?
The one who is conflating the health of Gaia with that of our gut or not?
Walter Willett, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, himself a vegan.
Its that last bit that really calls his judgement into question.
Also, what does a professor of nutrition do?
Make sure you eat a reasonably balanced diet.
There ya go – all the nutrition advice 99% of the population will ever need.
The list of despicable things that apply to me seems to get longer by the day. ‘Carnivore’ now joins white, male etc. etc.
I don’t trust any of these people. Not one. They have pissed away their credibility until they have none left.
the most egregious abuse of evidence that I have ever seen
An actionable statement if I ever saw one. If he is wrong, sue him.
I remember, as a child, having read about the outrage of the church caused by Galileo’s use of a telescope and his brain, thinking “Thank God we’re over all that rubbish”.
Evidently, its an essential part of the human condition.
The BBC was doing some intellectual and linguistic gymnastics this morning trying to discredit this report and project the heath fascist position. Apparently consuming red and processed meat at the individual level poses little or no risk but at the population level it could mean 1000s of deaths.
They continue to patronise the general public whilst at the same looking aghast when polls show a decline in their popularity and a rise in people demanding an end to the BBC poll tax.
This is a stark example in the difference in reporting of a study with results the chattering classes like vs. studies with results the chattering classes don’t like.
Just eat more fish. Jeeves Knows.
@ Ted S
+ 1
not so long ago I read a report about studies showing those consuming most red meat, Americans and Australians, had higher cancer rates and it mentioned that burning meat created carcinogens, so the excess mortality from cancer may be attributed in its entirety to burning steaks on barbecues – the red meat consuming countries that didn’t have millions of barbecuers did not have the same excess cancer rates.
Apparently eating bacon (smoked pork) is much more dangerous than eating pork chops but no one mentions that eating kippers (smoked herring) is not dangerous at all.
The unforgivable conclusion of the new set of papers isn’t that it says “carry on chewing” (I paraphrase) it is that it says “the evidence is utterly feeble”.
Which, of course, anyone sensible knew anyway – but it’s always comforting when people with legit claims to expertise have a look at the evidence and agree.
Is the dietary propaganda scam a bigger deal that the statins and early death scam or the global warming scam?
Should people be taught to distinguish science from scamience?
@ dearieme
Without wishing any disrespect to your alma mater, I think that “Oxford teaches people to think” is the answer to pseudo-science.
@john77: what an excellent proposal. Any chance they’ll take it up?
@ dearieme
That was a statement, not a proposal.
The implied proposal was that other universities might follow their elder’s lead.
The Uproar/Outrage seems to be restricted to The Guardian
https://www.google.com/search?q=red+meat+poses+no+health+risk
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-7520483/You-DONT-need-cut-red-meat-scientists-claim-huge-controversial-study.html
“so the excess mortality from cancer may be attributed in its entirety to burning steaks on barbecues”
But we’ll die happy.
It was reputed that when Mark Twain’s doctor told him he’d live 10 years longer if he quit smoking, he said he couldn’t imagine what those years would be like without a cigar. And he kept smoking.
I’ll keep grilling my steaks on the barbie.
Didn’t St Greta say we have to listen to the scientists.
Screw the science. It’s how MPs feel.
https://www.safariclub.org/blog/sci-responds-uk-parliament-proposal-ban-trophy-imports
Kill south/central African conservation programs. You can feel good about it, and tell your grand children you saw a lion before they died out.
Grist
“Thank God we’re over all that rubbish”.
We’re governed on the basis of myth and superstition, our weather service is obsessed with signs and portents and we sacrifice virgins to foreign gods.
Stick a fork in Western Civ, it’s done.