Talk About Meat Consumption (1 Viewer)

[Terminalxylem]

These researchers have a serious beef with red meat studies

Saying something over and over again doesn’t make it true. Or does it? A psychological theory known as the “illusory truth effect” claims that people tend to believe information more after repeated exposure. The more and more they hear it, the truer it feels.

One such claim, that “red meat is bad for your health,” has been a steady drumbeat throughout the health and wellness industry for decades. However, a systematic review in Nature Medicine points out several weaknesses in the research supporting this claim.

The studies are mostly observational

While observational studies can provide helpful insights, these types of studies are very limited in the ability to prove one thing causes another. They are often filled with various assumptions and confounding variables that can distort the supposed cause-and-effect relationship.

When trying to find a causal link between two variables, the best option is a randomized clinical trial in which participants are randomly assigned to a control or experimental group (and aren’t told which one they are in). For ethical reasons, that is not possible to do here.

The studies often involved self-reporting

Many of these studies relied on participants to report on their own eating habits, which is rarely done accurately (or honestly). Do you remember what you ate for dinner last week? When you ordered steak and eggs at the diner on Sunday, did you really bring the food scale with you? Or did you eyeball it? People cut corners, and our memory is not as good as we think it is.

And who among us is prepared to disclose our secret “midnight ice cream” habit to a research team?

More research is needed to prove causation

While there is some evidence that eating unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of disease incidence and mortality, it is weak and insufficient to make stronger or more conclusive recommendations. More rigorous, well-powered research is needed to better understand and quantify the relationship between consumption of unprocessed red meat and chronic disease

Causation is not the same as correlation.

Yep. All that applies to just about every nutrition study. Randomized, doubled-blinded, placebo-controlled trials are impractical to conduct over periods necessary to determine a food/nutrient’s impact on health. So we work with the best available, albeit imperfect data.

And that data isn’t ambiguous regarding red meat consumption.

But it’s more compelling imo looking at what long lived population do/don't eat. Also riddled with confounders, but not without lessons to be learned.

Or you can just ignore everything and eat what you want.

 

[3C's]

ignore everything and eat what you want is how I roll (in moderation)

 

[Jutz]

These researchers have a serious beef with red meat studies

Saying something over and over again doesn’t make it true. Or does it? A psychological theory known as the “illusory truth effect” claims that people tend to believe information more after repeated exposure. The more and more they hear it, the truer it feels.

One such claim, that “red meat is bad for your health,” has been a steady drumbeat throughout the health and wellness industry for decades. However, a systematic review in Nature Medicine points out several weaknesses in the research supporting this claim.

The studies are mostly observational

While observational studies can provide helpful insights, these types of studies are very limited in the ability to prove one thing causes another. They are often filled with various assumptions and confounding variables that can distort the supposed cause-and-effect relationship.

When trying to find a causal link between two variables, the best option is a randomized clinical trial in which participants are randomly assigned to a control or experimental group (and aren’t told which one they are in). For ethical reasons, that is not possible to do here.

The studies often involved self-reporting

Many of these studies relied on participants to report on their own eating habits, which is rarely done accurately (or honestly). Do you remember what you ate for dinner last week? When you ordered steak and eggs at the diner on Sunday, did you really bring the food scale with you? Or did you eyeball it? People cut corners, and our memory is not as good as we think it is.

And who among us is prepared to disclose our secret “midnight ice cream” habit to a research team?

More research is needed to prove causation

While there is some evidence that eating unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of disease incidence and mortality, it is weak and insufficient to make stronger or more conclusive recommendations. More rigorous, well-powered research is needed to better understand and quantify the relationship between consumption of unprocessed red meat and chronic disease

Causation is not the same as correlation.

Yep. All that applies to just about every nutrition study. Randomized, doubled-blinded, placebo-controlled trials are impractical to conduct over periods necessary to determine a food/nutrient’s impact on health. So we work with the best available, albeit imperfect data.

And that data isn’t ambiguous regarding red meat consumption.

But it’s more compelling imo looking at what long lived population do/don't eat. Also riddled with confounders, but not without lessons to be learned.

Or you can just ignore everything and eat what you want.

I completely agree. The data is imperfect. And all the information is helpful. Both things can be true.

I have come to believe that no one is 100% sure about anything when it comes to nutrition. And everyone is different. And you are the only person that can figure out what is optimal for you. My wife works in healthcare and would always say that you have to be your own advocate, and I think that is true for nutrition as well.

So do the research. Take in all the available information. Try different foods and approaches to diet. I honestly believe your body will tell you what works best for you over time.

 

[Northern Voice]

Vegan Butter Chicken

This vegan butter chicken is rich, buttery, and sweet tomato-based curry, packed with chickpeas and crispy tofu.

munchingwithmariyah.com

Made this last night and it was really good, we backed off the vegan butter to two tbsp (Miyokos brand discussed up thread), used light coconut milk and air fried the tofu without oil, all in the name of trying to balance the macros better, I'm trying to eat about 30% of my calories from protein.

We divided it into three servings which came out as 467 calories - 25g protein, 27g fat, 34g carbs.

It was a very strong flavour, I loved it, Mrs. NV almost found it too strong.

How’d you decide 30% protein as your target?

I'm doing a fat loss/body recomp program and the target is set there. I've seen your posts re: protein before and mostly agree that most people are consuming way too much of it but I've decided to pretty fully commit to this program for the time being until mid-June and see what the results are.

The program does involve four days a week of strength training, plus a day of body weight/core exercises, so I do believe a decent amount is required. So far over a few months I've come from 228 lbs/31.7 body fat to 210lbs/26.4% body fat, my visceral fat was 12.6 and now it's 8.2. basically I've been losing fat and maintaining or even growing my muscle/lean mass, it's working for me.

 

[Terminalxylem]

These researchers have a serious beef with red meat studies

Saying something over and over again doesn’t make it true. Or does it? A psychological theory known as the “illusory truth effect” claims that people tend to believe information more after repeated exposure. The more and more they hear it, the truer it feels.

One such claim, that “red meat is bad for your health,” has been a steady drumbeat throughout the health and wellness industry for decades. However, a systematic review in Nature Medicine points out several weaknesses in the research supporting this claim.

The studies are mostly observational

While observational studies can provide helpful insights, these types of studies are very limited in the ability to prove one thing causes another. They are often filled with various assumptions and confounding variables that can distort the supposed cause-and-effect relationship.

When trying to find a causal link between two variables, the best option is a randomized clinical trial in which participants are randomly assigned to a control or experimental group (and aren’t told which one they are in). For ethical reasons, that is not possible to do here.

The studies often involved self-reporting

Many of these studies relied on participants to report on their own eating habits, which is rarely done accurately (or honestly). Do you remember what you ate for dinner last week? When you ordered steak and eggs at the diner on Sunday, did you really bring the food scale with you? Or did you eyeball it? People cut corners, and our memory is not as good as we think it is.

And who among us is prepared to disclose our secret “midnight ice cream” habit to a research team?

More research is needed to prove causation

While there is some evidence that eating unprocessed red meat is associated with increased risk of disease incidence and mortality, it is weak and insufficient to make stronger or more conclusive recommendations. More rigorous, well-powered research is needed to better understand and quantify the relationship between consumption of unprocessed red meat and chronic disease

Causation is not the same as correlation.

Yep. All that applies to just about every nutrition study. Randomized, doubled-blinded, placebo-controlled trials are impractical to conduct over periods necessary to determine a food/nutrient’s impact on health. So we work with the best available, albeit imperfect data.

And that data isn’t ambiguous regarding red meat consumption.

But it’s more compelling imo looking at what long lived population do/don't eat. Also riddled with confounders, but not without lessons to be learned.

Or you can just ignore everything and eat what you want.

I completely agree. The data is imperfect. And all the information is helpful. Both things can be true.

I have come to believe that no one is 100% sure about anything when it comes to nutrition. And everyone is different. And you are the only person that can figure out what is optimal for you. My wife works in healthcare and would always say that you have to be your own advocate, and I think that is true for nutrition as well.

So do the research. Take in all the available information. Try different foods and approaches to diet. I honestly believe your body will tell you what works best for you over time.

While on the surface, this sounds good, our collective health, as reflected by BMI, chronic disease rates and life expectancy, suggests otherwise.

Now some of that is individuals who don't GAF, or whose circumstances make eating a healthy diet impractical. But there's a lot of misinformation out there as well, which may be difficult for the untrained eye to discern.

 

[Terminalxylem]

ignore everything and eat what you want is how I roll (in moderation)

Defining moderation is the tricky part, as evidenced by the alcohol discussion which inspired this thread.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Vegan Butter Chicken

This vegan butter chicken is rich, buttery, and sweet tomato-based curry, packed with chickpeas and crispy tofu.

munchingwithmariyah.com

Made this last night and it was really good, we backed off the vegan butter to two tbsp (Miyokos brand discussed up thread), used light coconut milk and air fried the tofu without oil, all in the name of trying to balance the macros better, I'm trying to eat about 30% of my calories from protein.

We divided it into three servings which came out as 467 calories - 25g protein, 27g fat, 34g carbs.

It was a very strong flavour, I loved it, Mrs. NV almost found it too strong.

How’d you decide 30% protein as your target?

I'm doing a fat loss/body recomp program and the target is set there. I've seen your posts re: protein before and mostly agree that most people are consuming way too much of it but I've decided to pretty fully commit to this program for the time being until mid-June and see what the results are.

The program does involve four days a week of strength training, plus a day of body weight/core exercises, so I do believe a decent amount is required. So far over a few months I've come from 228 lbs/31.7 body fat to 210lbs/26.4% body fat, my visceral fat was 12.6 and now it's 8.2. basically I've been losing fat and maintaining or even growing my muscle/lean mass, it's working for me.

Short term while actively building muscle sounds reasonable, but I wonder how that would hold up long term. What is the fat and and carbohydrate breakdown ? Looks like you're targeting 30:40.

 

[Northern Voice]

Vegan Butter Chicken

This vegan butter chicken is rich, buttery, and sweet tomato-based curry, packed with chickpeas and crispy tofu.

munchingwithmariyah.com

Made this last night and it was really good, we backed off the vegan butter to two tbsp (Miyokos brand discussed up thread), used light coconut milk and air fried the tofu without oil, all in the name of trying to balance the macros better, I'm trying to eat about 30% of my calories from protein.

We divided it into three servings which came out as 467 calories - 25g protein, 27g fat, 34g carbs.

It was a very strong flavour, I loved it, Mrs. NV almost found it too strong.

How’d you decide 30% protein as your target?

I'm doing a fat loss/body recomp program and the target is set there. I've seen your posts re: protein before and mostly agree that most people are consuming way too much of it but I've decided to pretty fully commit to this program for the time being until mid-June and see what the results are.

The program does involve four days a week of strength training, plus a day of body weight/core exercises, so I do believe a decent amount is required. So far over a few months I've come from 228 lbs/31.7 body fat to 210lbs/26.4% body fat, my visceral fat was 12.6 and now it's 8.2. basically I've been losing fat and maintaining or even growing my muscle/lean mass, it's working for me.

Short term while actively building muscle sounds reasonable, but I wonder how that would hold up long term. What is the fat and and carbohydrate breakdown ? Looks like you're targeting 30:40.

I'm in that 30/30/40 range right now mostly yes.

I do think there are some benefits to emphasizing (clean, plant based) proteins and a healthy balance of macros. The changes that I've made on this plan have mostly been good ones. I'll reach for the higher protein, seedy brown bread instead of an English muffin. I'll use a mustard or hot sauce condiment rather than margarine/butter, or cook with less oil or vegan butter as in the example above. I'm trying to cut back on cheese which is my big one non plant based vice.

I'm not really cutting carbs to any extent at all (I had a chickpea wrap for lunch today and we're having breakfast tacos with seitan sausage and just egg tonight).

In terms of meals. It's a lot of beans and tofu (and seitan which is a huge help) for sure, to try to hit 25-30g protein at each meal, plus a shake at some point.

I'm doing all these things in the name of hitting a set amount of protein within a defined amount of calories but I think they're all decent habits. Once I'm at more of a maintenance stage, I'll cut out the shakes and probably land in a 70-80g protein area which would be more like 16% daily based on 2000 calories.

 

[3C's]

ignore everything and eat what you want is how I roll (in moderation)

Defining moderation is the tricky part, as evidenced by the alcohol discussion which inspired this thread.

No doubt. 6 pack a day is not moderation.

 

[Chaos34]

Today is a good example of what a decade+ of one meal a day intermittent fasting has done to my appetite. i've been busy with a few projects all day, just looked at the clock and was surprised it's almost 7:30. I haven't had a bite of food. I'm not hungry. One of the projects was pretty physical for this old dude. It's weed season in the desert and I ran the whacker for an hour. Bagged it all up then ran the tiller for another hour prepping beds for veggies. I decided to put my supply of microgreen seeds to use growing full sized outdoors for a change. I then did my semi-daily 5 miler in the desert. Walked it kind of slowly. No appetite?

I could eat just because, but I'm gonna wait for an appetite. Might be late night, might be morning. I'm going under 190 this week one way or another.

 

[Terminalxylem]

ignore everything and eat what you want is how I roll (in moderation)

Defining moderation is the tricky part, as evidenced by the alcohol discussion which inspired this thread.

No doubt. 6 pack a day is not moderation.

Neither is 3, though I’m sure many would disagree. This is one of the reasons the WHO changed to zero tolerance for alcohol consumption.

 

[3C's]

ignore everything and eat what you want is how I roll (in moderation)

Defining moderation is the tricky part, as evidenced by the alcohol discussion which inspired this thread.

No doubt. 6 pack a day is not moderation.

Neither is 3, though I’m sure many would disagree. This is one of the reasons the WHO changed to zero tolerance for alcohol consumption.

Yeah, I use to call 2 pints a night "moderation" but it wasn't. My 1 pint during the week and 2 pints on "non-school" nights is good enough for me.

 

[Chaos34]

I get it. I've been a form of vegan/vegetarian 5.5 years now. And I despise vegan (or dairy free ) cheese for the most part. However, Field Roast has a brand of cheese called CHAO Creamy Original that I find that I like even better than some of the regular cheese that I grew up on. Some markets even have the shredded version of this as well. If you haven't tried, I would suggest giving it a try just to see.

JShare87 said:

I've tried that cheese and agree, it's good. Follow Your Heart has some amazing feta crumbles and parmesan shreds that I put in my salads. By far the best Vegan cheese I've tried.

I'm still meatless. Needed to do more shopping and bought the Field Roast Creamy Original and the Follow Your Heart Feta crumbles. I always liked Feta but it's never been regular in the fridge. This is a surprisingly good product. It was on sale for 5.99, the same price as normal Feta. So I s'pose it will be my go to Feta when I go to Feta. Nice. On the other hand the CHAO Creamy Original slices fall into a much more competitive category than Feta, and well, it's way way better than the Daiya I tried long ago, but it falls well short of similarly priced cheeses. The texture is fine, which was a problem with Daiya. It has a subtle coconut flavor which disappears with most of the flavor when melted. Kinda Gouda-ish. Price was also 5.99 for 7 oz. But in my store today 5.99 bought 8 oz of Nicosia Valley's award winning San Geronimo. One of the most delicious soft cheeses ever. I'm gonna have to worry more about pregnant cows than gourmet cheese to be a convert.

 

[Instinctive]

Because of this thread, my CAVA bowl I opted for roasted vegetables instead of grilled chicken. I gotta say, I didn't enjoy it as much (I think their brussels were a bit bitter) but it wasn't the end of the world either.

 

[Moe.]

gotta go with the falafel at cava