Great article, thanks. A question that would be important to know: Is there is a difference between exposure to red meat from the uniquely American industrial style meat production vs. from wild game or traditional pasture raised beef or lamb? Most of the rest of the world raises beef and lamb in remarkably different environments than we do, and with a much different diet for the animals themselves.
Duration of exposure is the missing factor in all these studies. Lifespan has increased since prehistoric times, and considerably so in recent centuries and decades. Perhaps exposure mattered less when lifespan was 30 or 40; it's now 70, 80, and 90 years and congruent with a known decline in immune system function with aging.
I have always thought that Americans eat way too much red meat (along with far too much processed meats). I enjoy things like salami and sausage in small amounts and not too frequently. Same with items like bacon. I save them for treats. I cook mostly vegetarian dishes and eat more chicken and fish. I haven't had a steak for around 25 years and that was while visiting Texas where it was practically mandatory, but good. Since I'm diabetic, eating mostly vegetables and nuts helps maintain healthy glucose levels. Thanks for this article.
Former lipid biochemist (and probable pedant) here, so one small correction. You reference "small chain fatty acids (SCFA)", but I believe that acronym actually stands for Short-Chain Fatty Acids.
That you haven’t eaten red meat in four decades is worth more than decades of studies. Why? Because I know you are trustworthy and follow the science. While we do eat a little bit of red meat in our house, I am pleased to report that tonight (and this is typical of our diet), we are having leftovers of a scrumptious Tofu-mushroom-Japanese sweet potato noodles melange supplemented with a lovely bit of cod. Thank you so much for keeping on this beat!
There is more to the red meat story. The environmental destruction required to raise cows is enormous. The carbon footprint of red meat production is vast. The slaughter of animals in. abattoirs is cruel. I do not see how red meat production can be curtailed so long as it is so profitable. _
1. Isn't it weird that a serving of nuts per day could undo all that postulated harm? Or is that a non-reproducible result?
2. If this is such a strong negative effect, how do you explain the occasional studies that don't support it? Chance (probability)? Factors not asked about that affect the outcome? Remember that coffee doesn't cause cancer; it was the smoking done by coffee-drinkers that caused cancer. ..but that was denied for so long.
3. It is interesting that humans lost the genetic ability to make those "essential" amino acids that other mammals (and bird and fish) all make. Why didn't we need that ability? Perhaps that implies that eating animals was more common in our ancestors that we want to think.
4. Animals eat many plants we can't eat, that grow on land that won't support our food plants. Maybe we should eat more goats.
5. When we eat plants for protein, we eat a lot of extra amino acids that are left over, unused, as we make our proteins. ( remember Diet for a Small Planet, by Frances Moore Lappe) We deaminate them, excrete the urea nitrogen, and use the carbohydrate skeletons left over as a carbohydrate food source. But we don't count that as ingested carbohydrate when considering the carbohydrate content of food.
6. Remember the huge number of people who did eat meat, who now are living to a healthy, alert age of greater than 100. (just like Groucho Marx and his smoking, of course). I doubt that many of them stopped eating meat, although many probably decreased meat and added more plants to their diets. They are living longer because we learned to prevent and cure cancer, heart disease and diabetes in many other ways.
6. There's nothing wrong with nature...in which animals routinely eat each other without our feeling moral horror. A chicken has a less awful death with a farmer than with a fox.
7. Moderation in all things is often better than extreme avoidance.
8. It is very fashionable to collect all the data that shows the health risks (some probably real, some probably not) raised by eating meat. Beware confirmation bias.
9. Science is the attempt by experimentation to prove one's self wrong, not right. Scientists who forget that don't find the truth. It's the null hypothesis that you have to try to prove. If you disprove the null hypothesis, you still don't prove that your own hypothesis is correct.....just that it's one of many possible correct ones.
I wonder how this will all look 100 years from now.
Yes, we've eaten mammal flesh for millennia, why not evolved to live with it.
One of the chart dots is not labeled. Must reread to find what's wrong with eggs, also millennial.. ---evolution for effects after reproduction happens only very weakly.?
I've sent the link to my Flautist, elem. ed. teacher, in LA, who argued we'd evolved to eat eggs, (Keeps chickens, of course.) AND to my UCB nutrition PhD friend in Berkeley.
p.s. G. Hardin does suppose some evolutionary advantage will come from oldsters who survive who, thereby, can impart assistance and wisdom to the youth.
There is an intriguing and potentially significant line of cancer and neurodegeneration research concerning small self-replicating loops of DNA known as Bovine Meat and Milk Factors (BMMFs): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_Meat_and_Milk_Factors.
I have not had time to understand or evaluate this, but here are some links to articles of potential interest:
Mobaraki et al. 2021 "Bovine Meat and Milk Factor-like Sequences Are Frequently Detected in Renal Cell Carcinoma Tissues": https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/16/9/1746.
de Villiers and zur Haussen 2021: "Bovine Meat and Milk Factors (BMMFs): Their Proposed Role in Common Human Cancers and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus": https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/21/5407.
Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung 2022 New Findings concerning “Bovine Meat and Milk Factors” (BMMF) : Joint Opinion No. 036/2022 from the BfR and MRI of 30 November 2022": https://www.openagrar.de/receive/openagrar_mods_00084549 They argue that there is no reason to think these BMMFs cause any problem.
The first line of defence against cancer - and against COVID-19, all infectious diseases, many chronic diseases, diabetes types 1 and 2, dementia, complications in pregnancy and mental retardation in newborns - is to supplement vitamin D3 in sufficient quantities to attain, all year round, the 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D which the immune system needs to function properly.
Please see the research cited and discussed at: https:// vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/. This begins with recommendations from New Jersey based Professor of Medicine, Sunil Wimalawansa on the average daily supplemental intake quantities of vitamin D3 which will attain least 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D, over several months, without the need for blood tests or medical monitoring. This includes higher ratios of body weight for those suffering from obesity - see the research on why this is needed: https://5nn.info/temp/250hd-obesity/.
Great article, thanks. A question that would be important to know: Is there is a difference between exposure to red meat from the uniquely American industrial style meat production vs. from wild game or traditional pasture raised beef or lamb? Most of the rest of the world raises beef and lamb in remarkably different environments than we do, and with a much different diet for the animals themselves.
YEs, likely, as we're seeing with the higher risk of processed vs unprocessed red meat
Duration of exposure is the missing factor in all these studies. Lifespan has increased since prehistoric times, and considerably so in recent centuries and decades. Perhaps exposure mattered less when lifespan was 30 or 40; it's now 70, 80, and 90 years and congruent with a known decline in immune system function with aging.
Agree. Good point.
Also as I wrote, if the effect occurs before menopause evolution may affect.
I have always thought that Americans eat way too much red meat (along with far too much processed meats). I enjoy things like salami and sausage in small amounts and not too frequently. Same with items like bacon. I save them for treats. I cook mostly vegetarian dishes and eat more chicken and fish. I haven't had a steak for around 25 years and that was while visiting Texas where it was practically mandatory, but good. Since I'm diabetic, eating mostly vegetables and nuts helps maintain healthy glucose levels. Thanks for this article.
thanks for your feedback! Good for you on your diet and glucose regulation
Excellent summary and analysis, Thanks!
Former lipid biochemist (and probable pedant) here, so one small correction. You reference "small chain fatty acids (SCFA)", but I believe that acronym actually stands for Short-Chain Fatty Acids.
That you haven’t eaten red meat in four decades is worth more than decades of studies. Why? Because I know you are trustworthy and follow the science. While we do eat a little bit of red meat in our house, I am pleased to report that tonight (and this is typical of our diet), we are having leftovers of a scrumptious Tofu-mushroom-Japanese sweet potato noodles melange supplemented with a lovely bit of cod. Thank you so much for keeping on this beat!
That dinner sound scrumptious! My reasons for not eating red meat are many, including concerns over risk of colon cancer which runs in my family
There is more to the red meat story. The environmental destruction required to raise cows is enormous. The carbon footprint of red meat production is vast. The slaughter of animals in. abattoirs is cruel. I do not see how red meat production can be curtailed so long as it is so profitable. _
In complete agreement!
and tastes so good. A failure of evolution.
Some nay-saying.
1. Isn't it weird that a serving of nuts per day could undo all that postulated harm? Or is that a non-reproducible result?
2. If this is such a strong negative effect, how do you explain the occasional studies that don't support it? Chance (probability)? Factors not asked about that affect the outcome? Remember that coffee doesn't cause cancer; it was the smoking done by coffee-drinkers that caused cancer. ..but that was denied for so long.
3. It is interesting that humans lost the genetic ability to make those "essential" amino acids that other mammals (and bird and fish) all make. Why didn't we need that ability? Perhaps that implies that eating animals was more common in our ancestors that we want to think.
4. Animals eat many plants we can't eat, that grow on land that won't support our food plants. Maybe we should eat more goats.
5. When we eat plants for protein, we eat a lot of extra amino acids that are left over, unused, as we make our proteins. ( remember Diet for a Small Planet, by Frances Moore Lappe) We deaminate them, excrete the urea nitrogen, and use the carbohydrate skeletons left over as a carbohydrate food source. But we don't count that as ingested carbohydrate when considering the carbohydrate content of food.
6. Remember the huge number of people who did eat meat, who now are living to a healthy, alert age of greater than 100. (just like Groucho Marx and his smoking, of course). I doubt that many of them stopped eating meat, although many probably decreased meat and added more plants to their diets. They are living longer because we learned to prevent and cure cancer, heart disease and diabetes in many other ways.
6. There's nothing wrong with nature...in which animals routinely eat each other without our feeling moral horror. A chicken has a less awful death with a farmer than with a fox.
7. Moderation in all things is often better than extreme avoidance.
8. It is very fashionable to collect all the data that shows the health risks (some probably real, some probably not) raised by eating meat. Beware confirmation bias.
9. Science is the attempt by experimentation to prove one's self wrong, not right. Scientists who forget that don't find the truth. It's the null hypothesis that you have to try to prove. If you disprove the null hypothesis, you still don't prove that your own hypothesis is correct.....just that it's one of many possible correct ones.
I wonder how this will all look 100 years from now.
Yes, we've eaten mammal flesh for millennia, why not evolved to live with it.
One of the chart dots is not labeled. Must reread to find what's wrong with eggs, also millennial.. ---evolution for effects after reproduction happens only very weakly.?
the link to the original graph and legend is in the post https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.1906908116#abstract
Thanks, but the labeling of the dots (circles) is still poor. May be able to use the XL.
I've sent the link to my Flautist, elem. ed. teacher, in LA, who argued we'd evolved to eat eggs, (Keeps chickens, of course.) AND to my UCB nutrition PhD friend in Berkeley.
Hej! Since you read these, of interest?
http://cleyet.org/eclipse/ AND
http://cleyet.org/glass/
p.s. G. Hardin does suppose some evolutionary advantage will come from oldsters who survive who, thereby, can impart assistance and wisdom to the youth.
Great article. 39 yrs ago I quit ever eating m eat meat.
There is an intriguing and potentially significant line of cancer and neurodegeneration research concerning small self-replicating loops of DNA known as Bovine Meat and Milk Factors (BMMFs): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_Meat_and_Milk_Factors.
I have not had time to understand or evaluate this, but here are some links to articles of potential interest:
Mobaraki et al. 2021 "Bovine Meat and Milk Factor-like Sequences Are Frequently Detected in Renal Cell Carcinoma Tissues": https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/16/9/1746.
de Villiers and zur Haussen 2021: "Bovine Meat and Milk Factors (BMMFs): Their Proposed Role in Common Human Cancers and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus": https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/13/21/5407.
Bundesinstitut für Risikobewertung 2022 New Findings concerning “Bovine Meat and Milk Factors” (BMMF) : Joint Opinion No. 036/2022 from the BfR and MRI of 30 November 2022": https://www.openagrar.de/receive/openagrar_mods_00084549 They argue that there is no reason to think these BMMFs cause any problem.
Habermann et al. 2024 "Current Research on Small Circular Molecules: A Comprehensive Overview on SPHINX/BMMF": https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/15/6/678.
The first line of defence against cancer - and against COVID-19, all infectious diseases, many chronic diseases, diabetes types 1 and 2, dementia, complications in pregnancy and mental retardation in newborns - is to supplement vitamin D3 in sufficient quantities to attain, all year round, the 50 ng/mL 125 nmol/L circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D which the immune system needs to function properly.
Please see the research cited and discussed at: https:// vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/. This begins with recommendations from New Jersey based Professor of Medicine, Sunil Wimalawansa on the average daily supplemental intake quantities of vitamin D3 which will attain least 50 ng/mL circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D, over several months, without the need for blood tests or medical monitoring. This includes higher ratios of body weight for those suffering from obesity - see the research on why this is needed: https://5nn.info/temp/250hd-obesity/.