We must face facts - meat is the problem

[DrGriz]

Just as an aside (and a personal factor of mine), there are other endpoints than death of course. Dementia appears to have a reasonably strong vascular effect - more so than was discussed when I was in school. So the benefits of statins can fall into things other than death.
I honestly don't know if there is enough duration in the studies along with following all people to death that would tease out this effect - since when people die of dementia they mostly probably stop their statin or get removed from a study because of compliance/follow up issues. What I can tease out is that statins during middle age lower dementia risk. I know there have to be all-cause mortality numbers. I just don't know how clean the numbers are when in comes to dementia where death would occur many years after onset.

This article is certainly imperfect (observational and all) but interesting nonetheless. The one-liner is that both low carb and high carb diets had higher all-cause mortality than medium carb diets. When carbs where replaced by animal fat and protien, there was a mortality increase. When it was more plant based, it was not. 4 US communities despite published in England. And for those that don't know, The Lancet is about as good as it gets (and are great about on-line access with no paywall).

Dietary carbohydrate intake and mortality: a prospective cohort study and meta-analysis

Both high and low percentages of carbohydrate diets were associated with increased mortality, with minimal risk observed at 50–55% carbohydrate intake. Low carbohydrate dietary patterns favouring animal-derived protein and fat sources, from sources such as lamb, beef, pork, and chicken, were...

www.thelancet.com

I agree that there is evidence that statins have an positive effect on dementia risk. This, like their effect on CV disease in general, could be independent of their effect on serum cholesterol levels. For instance, they may reduce endovascular inflammation and scarring in susceptible individuals. Something much harder to measure than serum cholesterol, but with the outcomes we might expect.

Unless I missed something, in the Lancet article they based the categorization of the patient diets on how they filled out two surveys, one at year one and one at year 6, in a 25 year prospective study. Not that I don't agree with the recommendations, but one could easily imagine some confounding problems, as the authors did:

There are limitations to this study that merit consideration. This study represents observational data and is not a clinical trial; however, randomised trials of low carbohydrate diets on mortality are not practical because of the long duration of study required. Another limitation of this study is that diet was only assessed at two time intervals, spanning a 6-year period, and dietary patterns could change during 25 years.

Also, people who are willing to participate in these sorts of studies may be different from those who won't.

Diet studies are hard to do and should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[JRP3]

I've often wondered why diet studies aren't done in prisons, you literally have a captured population under complete control.

 

[mspohr]

I agree that there is evidence that statins have an positive effect on dementia risk. This, like their effect on CV disease in general, could be independent of their effect on serum cholesterol levels. For instance, they may reduce endovascular inflammation and scarring in susceptible individuals. Something much harder to measure than serum cholesterol, but with the outcomes we might expect.

Unless I missed something, in the Lancet article they based the categorization of the patient diets on how they filled out two surveys, one at year one and one at year 6, in a 25 year prospective study. Not that I don't agree with the recommendations, but one could easily imagine some confounding problems, as the authors did:


Also, people who are willing to participate in these sorts of studies may be different from those who won't.

Diet studies are hard to do and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Their paper also included a meta analysis.
We further examined this association, combining ARIC data with data for carbohydrate intake reported from seven multinational prospective studies in a meta-analysis.
This could strengthen their conclusions.

 

[DrGriz]

Their paper also included a meta analysis.
We further examined this association, combining ARIC data with data for carbohydrate intake reported from seven multinational prospective studies in a meta-analysis.
This could strengthen their conclusions

That's the trouble with Meta-analyses. They can combine multiple marginal studies and amplify a small effect. Or minimize an important one.

 

[mspohr]

That's the trouble with Meta-analyses. They can combine multiple marginal studies and amplify a small effect. Or minimize an important one.

Yes (and No)

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[K.I.T.T.23]

I agree that there is evidence that statins have an positive effect on dementia risk. This, like their effect on CV disease in general, could be independent of their effect on serum cholesterol levels. For instance, they may reduce endovascular inflammation and scarring in susceptible individuals. Something much harder to measure than serum cholesterol, but with the outcomes we might expect.

Unless I missed something, in the Lancet article they based the categorization of the patient diets on how they filled out two surveys, one at year one and one at year 6, in a 25 year prospective study. Not that I don't agree with the recommendations, but one could easily imagine some confounding problems, as the authors did:


Also, people who are willing to participate in these sorts of studies may be different from those who won't.

Diet studies are hard to do and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Well said. These studies are flawed inherently, but as more are conducted and more results are in; we will likely see some common trends. They are important, and hopefully we can come up with some metrics that make them more conclusive and easier to follow. That said, I imagine this:

Dr. One: "Hmm, looks like we lost patient 278, cause and sample group?
Dr. Two: "looks like he was in the high protein/low carb group... cause was TBI due to vehicular impact."
Dr. One: "Hit by a bus crossing the street?"
Dr. Two: "yep... well, wasn't a bus, was a cement truck but... that seems trivial"
Dr. One "Ok, well, why was he there?"
Dr. two: "there was a butcher on the side of the street he was coming from, looks like he had some fresh ribeye steaks... though hard to tell, he was quite the mess. We will have to check with the butcher."
Dr. One: "no need, death by dietary choice it is!"

While this is silly, mortality studies are difficult. Kudos to all who attempt them!

 

[DrGriz]

Yes (and No)

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

Good article. And a reminder in there that there are plenty of studies that were never published because they didn't show what the researchers had hoped.

 

[K.I.T.T.23]

Good article. And a reminder in there that there are plenty of studies that were never published because they didn't show what the researchers had hoped.

"ask the right questions to get the right answers" A quote I live by; and a cornerstone to hypothesis development. This isn't to say that we should ask questions to get the answers we want, but ask questions in the right way to reveal the right answer... like it or not. Sadly, between funding and personal biases, we tend to reject many conclusions.

I like this video game article, I remember when the fear/anger of promoting violence was focused on Death Metal and aggressive music in the late 1980's/90's. I always thought that was ironic because many of my friends that are metal heads are also pacifists (or in the infantry ironically), and they say that the music releases anger thus calming them down. I wondered the same about video games: does the competition and violence serve as an outlet for most people? How does it affect the extremes? How can we test that? Again, so glad I am not a psychologist. I will stick to engineering any day lol.

 

[cookiefactory]

Did you read the study you linked?

I don’t think that supports the position you’re advancing to the degree you seem to think.

First of all you’ve cherry-picked the most restrictive guideline out the three sources and even that only advises to limit intake to current levels (~1 egg per day).

The video you linked strongly advises eating “as little as possible” aka zero. “It’s okay to eat some eggs” is a very different position than “it’s not ok to eat any eggs”. The other two sources are even further down the spectrum toward “eat all the eggs you want”.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

More info on the influence of the meat industry on the IPCC reports, and how it just takes one well paid shill (with a PhD to help spread Big AG's misinformation for decades:

Leaked documents reveal the fossil fuel and meat producing countries lobbying against climate action

Leaked documents detail how some of the world’s biggest coal, oil and meat producing nations are lobbying to weaken a key UN climate report

unearthed.greenpeace.org

What makes this case so surprising is how easily he/UC Davis (a huge AG school) dismiss the financial input from Big AG--as if cash doesn't have a massive impact?

Revealed: How the meat industry funds the ‘greenhouse gas guru’

Internal documents chronicle the livestock sector's deep ties to leading academic Dr Frank Mitloehner

unearthed.greenpeace.org

 

[mspohr]

How This Food Tech Company Has ‘Cracked’ the Code on Sustainable Vegan Egg Whites

Schouten’s new vegan egg whites are made from a base of affordable ingredients such as soy protein and rapeseed oil and are suitable for people with egg allergies. No Egg White also helps future-proof the food system from egg shortages by removing reliance on the unstable chicken supply chain.

Grass protein has massive potential,” Grassa Director Rieks Smook said in a statement. “Grass yields 2.5 times as much protein per hectare as soy. Grass supplies are readily available.” The duo is specifically interested in exploring how grass proteins might outperform common plant-based meat bases such as soy. “Grass protein is a high-quality, local, and scalable alternative to soy,” Smook said. “When compared to other protein sources, it provides a huge reduction in the carbon footprint.And grass protein can be a source for modern milk production, as well. Innovative company Those Vegan Cowboys make animal-free casein—the functional proteins in cheese—using precision fermentation. Late last year, the cowboys unveiled their first vegan cheese made by feeding sugars to microbes instead of milking cows. The playful company revealed this cheese was made Margret, a steel cow.

 

[nwdiver]

 

[mspohr]

Meat And Milk Sales Drop In Europe As Vegan Versions Hit Record Highs

New report: Europe saw a huge increase in plant-based food sales from 2020-2022, with vegan meat and dairy-free milk leading the market.

plantbasednews.org

In a detailed report, GFI Europe reveals that vegan meat products saw a 21 percent increase in unit sales from 2020 to 2022. Plant milk garnered a 20 percent uptick. During the same period, animal-based meat and milk sales dropped by eight and nine percent, respectively. Nondairy cheese also enjoyed vast growth. As the market diversified to include more vegan cheese brands and products than ever before, the sector reached a total market value of €144 million. Representing a 102 percent increase in sales between 2020 and 2022, it eclipsed conventional cheese’s growth by more than 10 times. Similarly, unit sales for plant-based yogurt increased by 16 percent, while conventional yogurt’s fell by four.

 

[JRP3]

Another interesting Plant Chompers video, this one going into detail about a study covering animal based keto vs plant based low fat. Controlled groups in the study, many references and fact checking as he usually does.

 

[mspohr]

Another interesting Plant Chompers video, this one going into detail about a study covering animal based keto vs plant based low fat. Controlled groups in the study, many references and fact checking as he usually does.

Great, entertaining, solid science

 

[mspohr]

After the deluge: Floods may taint more drinking water in California

Nitrate contamination of well water has been a decades-long problem in the San Joaquin and Salinas valleys — and now stormwater has flushed more fertilizer and manure into aquifers.

 

[mspohr]

Video: Opinion | See the True Cost of Your Cheap Chicken

Modern poultry farming keeps chicken cheap but steals the dignity of both animal and farmer.

www.nytimes.com

 

[K.I.T.T.23]

Video: Opinion | See the True Cost of Your Cheap Chicken

Modern poultry farming keeps chicken cheap but steals the dignity of both animal and farmer.

www.nytimes.com

an interesting problem, solution's presented: guilt people into eating store-bought Stoffer's lasagna that contains beef... advertised on the box with 2x the meat!!

I was glad to see "Opinion" highlighted multiple times. It isn't debatable, we need a better method to mass-produce good quality meat. This is the current standard... which sucks. Come up with a solution or presenting the problem just creates another problem.

So here are two potential solutions which do have hurdles to overcome:
Just pay more -- I can afford to pay $6 per lb of chicken... but can everyone? probably not. So paying more/boycotting cheap is not a feasible solution.
Localize/normalize small farms (like gardens) -- I do like this solution. I read an article that had a strong argument which would reduce cost, is feasible and is environmentally friendly: we normalize raising our own chickens, providing our own eggs, thus localizing farming to consumption... but that will take a big government and social push that will be lobbied against.

Here is a link to a short article, not scientific, but has good points:

Why Everyone Should Keep Backyard Chickens

Backyard chickens contribute to the making of good soil, help promote sustainable food production, eliminate the need for factory-farmed food, and they make a wonderful (and natural) insecticide

www.environment911.org

 

[JRP3]

So here are two potential solutions which do have hurdles to overcome:

Or just eat more plants instead.

 

[mspohr]

an interesting problem, solution's presented: guilt people into eating store-bought Stoffer's lasagna that contains beef... advertised on the box with 2x the meat!!

I was glad to see "Opinion" highlighted multiple times. It isn't debatable, we need a better method to mass-produce good quality meat. This is the current standard... which sucks. Come up with a solution or presenting the problem just creates another problem.

So here are two potential solutions which do have hurdles to overcome:
Just pay more -- I can afford to pay $6 per lb of chicken... but can everyone? probably not. So paying more/boycotting cheap is not a feasible solution.
Localize/normalize small farms (like gardens) -- I do like this solution. I read an article that had a strong argument which would reduce cost, is feasible and is environmentally friendly: we normalize raising our own chickens, providing our own eggs, thus localizing farming to consumption... but that will take a big government and social push that will be lobbied against.

Here is a link to a short article, not scientific, but has good points:

Why Everyone Should Keep Backyard Chickens

Backyard chickens contribute to the making of good soil, help promote sustainable food production, eliminate the need for factory-farmed food, and they make a wonderful (and natural) insecticide

www.environment911.org

The solution is easy... Just don't eat meat.