Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 10181920
Results 191 to 195 of 195

Thread: About to embark on a 30-day trial of meat and water

  1. Top | #191
    Veteran Member PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    3,739
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    8,128
    Rep Power
    56
    From a rapid response editorial to the posted study:

    One possible issue with the HNS/HPFS studies is the exposure of the participants to the opinions of the researchers. Medical personnel in the USA can hardly be unfamiliar with the idea that meat causes disease, which is communicated to them in various media, including from authorities such as the AHA and ADA, and mostly based on the earlier epidemiology of the Harvard Chan group. They are less likely to be made aware of research from other countries with different conclusions.

    This creates an exceptional risk of conscientiousness bias, as the subjects and researchers are caught in a feedback loop where the health-conscious are more likely to take the advice of the researchers. This is indicated by lack of an association in never-smokers and those who overall eat a "healthy diet" between higher meat intake and mortality.

    A further issue is the absence of baseline data and raw numbers. The first table that appears with subject characteristics (table 2) is already age-adjusted. Yet we know from enquiries made by my colleagues and I in 2017 that age differences between quintiles in Harvard analyses of the NHS/HPFS data can be very large as an artifact of the cumulative survey method unique to these studies,, for example: "participants in the lowest quintile of SFA intake were much older than those in the highest quintile (mean difference, approximately 15 years), resulting in a strong confounding by age."[2] This kind of information should be supplied in a transparent manner when an epidemiological paper is first published.
    All things considered, even a charitable reading of the data only gives a hazard ratio of 1.1, which is pretty low. If there is an effect somewhere in there, it's not a large one.

  2. Top | #192
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    2,096
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    5,958
    Rep Power
    70
    I wasn't looking for an article to add to this thread, but I read about this study in an email that I receive and it did make me think of this thread. It looks like a very detailed study.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l2110


    Results 14 019 deaths occurred during 1.2 million person years of follow-up. Increases in red meat consumption over eight years were associated with a higher mortality risk in the subsequent eight years among women and men (both P for trend<0.05, P for heterogeneity=0.97). An increase in total red meat consumption of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 10% higher mortality risk (pooled hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.17). For processed and unprocessed red meat consumption, an increase of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 13% higher mortality risk (1.13, 1.04 to 1.23) and a 9% higher mortality risk (1.09, 1.02 to 1.17), respectively. A decrease in consumption of processed or unprocessed red meat of at least half a serving per day was not associated with mortality risk. The association between increased red meat consumption and mortality risk was consistent across subgroups defined by age, physical activity, dietary quality, smoking status, or alcohol consumption.

    Conclusion Increases in red meat consumption, especially processed meat, were associated with higher overall mortality rates.
    I'm just putting it out there for more info. I'm not sure if this is related to any other study posted, but this actually gives the more minute details of how the study was done and how the results were determined. I don't care to discuss it, just offering it for those who choose to continue this discussion.

  3. Top | #193
    Veteran Member PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    3,739
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    8,128
    Rep Power
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by southernhybrid View Post
    I wasn't looking for an article to add to this thread, but I read about this study in an email that I receive and it did make me think of this thread. It looks like a very detailed study.

    https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l2110


    Results 14 019 deaths occurred during 1.2 million person years of follow-up. Increases in red meat consumption over eight years were associated with a higher mortality risk in the subsequent eight years among women and men (both P for trend<0.05, P for heterogeneity=0.97). An increase in total red meat consumption of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 10% higher mortality risk (pooled hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.17). For processed and unprocessed red meat consumption, an increase of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 13% higher mortality risk (1.13, 1.04 to 1.23) and a 9% higher mortality risk (1.09, 1.02 to 1.17), respectively. A decrease in consumption of processed or unprocessed red meat of at least half a serving per day was not associated with mortality risk. The association between increased red meat consumption and mortality risk was consistent across subgroups defined by age, physical activity, dietary quality, smoking status, or alcohol consumption.

    Conclusion Increases in red meat consumption, especially processed meat, were associated with higher overall mortality rates.
    I'm just putting it out there for more info. I'm not sure if this is related to any other study posted, but this actually gives the more minute details of how the study was done and how the results were determined. I don't care to discuss it, just offering it for those who choose to continue this discussion.
    Yup, this is the study that TG posted that we have been going over.

  4. Top | #194
    Formerly Joedad
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    PA USA
    Posts
    4,851
    Archived
    5,039
    Total Posts
    9,890
    Rep Power
    73
    Bulletproof Coffee

    A Bulletproof coffee has an unusual recipe that requires you to buy three separate products. It is a black coffee into which you add butter and a purified form of coconut oil.

    ...

    As part of a quest to improve his wellbeing, he went to Tibet to learn how to meditate. During a trek in the mountains, he was offered a cup of tea infused with yak butter. Native to the Himalayas, the yak is a long-haired relative of the bison and buffalo.

    "After I drank it I noticed my brain felt much better than it had in a long time, even though I should have felt bad at that elevation," he says.

    After returning home to California, Mr Asprey started experimenting to make his own version of the drink.
    This is interesting because I love coffee - though I do not drink it anymore - and I love butter - thought I have substituted olive oil these days. But it is an interesting combination of foods.

    Any thoughts on this, other than a successful businessman can be a bit wonky?

  5. Top | #195
    Veteran Member PyramidHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    RI
    Posts
    3,739
    Archived
    4,389
    Total Posts
    8,128
    Rep Power
    56
    Quote Originally Posted by T.G.G. Moogly View Post
    Bulletproof Coffee

    A Bulletproof coffee has an unusual recipe that requires you to buy three separate products. It is a black coffee into which you add butter and a purified form of coconut oil.

    ...

    As part of a quest to improve his wellbeing, he went to Tibet to learn how to meditate. During a trek in the mountains, he was offered a cup of tea infused with yak butter. Native to the Himalayas, the yak is a long-haired relative of the bison and buffalo.

    "After I drank it I noticed my brain felt much better than it had in a long time, even though I should have felt bad at that elevation," he says.

    After returning home to California, Mr Asprey started experimenting to make his own version of the drink.
    This is interesting because I love coffee - though I do not drink it anymore - and I love butter - thought I have substituted olive oil these days. But it is an interesting combination of foods.

    Any thoughts on this, other than a successful businessman can be a bit wonky?
    I've never tried it because I love coffee and don't want to spoil the flavor, but I eat butter pretty much every day, either by itself or as cooking oil for meat.

Similar Threads

  1. Beyond Meat's Mind Boggling Day
    By Jimmy Higgins in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-03-2019, 08:20 PM
  2. Heavily processed fake meat
    By lpetrich in forum Computers and Technology
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 04-23-2018, 04:23 PM
  3. Question about a supposed raw (and rotten) meat diet
    By Potoooooooo in forum Natural Science
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-07-2016, 07:54 AM
  4. $20 oil and $40 meat, how in the world can a poor man eat?
    By Bronzeage in forum Political Discussions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-05-2015, 04:02 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •