Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

“Healthy” vs “unhealthy” foods?

lorib642
lorib642 Posts: 1,942 Member
in Debate Club
Study: small targeted dietary changes can yield substantial gains for human health and the environment
https://nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00343-4

They quantified minutes of life gained or lost by eating a variety of different foods.

I am hoping someone will point out a bias in the research because I happen to like red meat which supposedly takes 10 minutes off my life.

I apologize in advance if this study has already been discussed

Replies

  • goal06082021
    goal06082021 Posts: 2,130 Member
    Looks like the full study is behind a paywall for me, but it seems to me that exactly how many minutes I get to be alive is actually not completely up to me, and to try to control that number just by eating specific foods? That way lies madness.

    It sounds like, from the abstract, they also took into account factors beyond just the nutrition of the food within the body of the eater. So like with your red meat example, not all 10 of those minutes are taken off by the act of eating cow flesh as such; some of that comes from the environmental impact of raising beef cattle on a commercial scale, which is significant. The food industry and systems within it that currently exist have plenty of room for improvement for basically everyone involved at every stage of the process.
  • rileysowner
    rileysowner Posts: 8,328 Member
    10 minutes of life or eat red meat? Pass the beef.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 10,093 Member
    Behind a pay wall for me, too. The first question I would want answered is whether they reached their conclusion based on comparing people who eat none of the food in question (e.g., red meat) and people who eat it 2 to 3 three times a day, every day? Did they just assume a straight-line relationship -- i.e., that the first serving consumed had the same effect as the 10th serving consumed and the 20th serving consumed (I'm thinking per week with those numbers)? That would seem to be the case, given that the abstract mentions single numbers for minutes lost or added per serving in the extreme cases. Then I'd like to know their justification for making that assumption.
  • lorib642
    lorib642 Posts: 1,942 Member
    edited August 2021
    Sorry about that. Here is an article about the study. https://cnn.com/2021/08/27/health/hot-dog-could-shorten-life-trnd-wellness-scn/index.html

    I was able to view the study earlier, when I went through the link in the article.
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,626 Member
    i think they had this on the news one day last week.

    i dont think any of us here would debate the fact that there are certainly more NUTRITIOUS foods than others. You can't really compare the nutrition in say, a grilled chicken salad vs a hot dog and french fries as far as quality goes calorie per calorie.

    that said, I have a really hard time believing that there is any quantifiable way to determine that you are losing almost a half hour of your life every time you are eating a hot dog. Way too many variables and no way to control them. Should you eat them every day? No. Probably not. Just as you shouldnt eat a lot of things every day. Will a couple a month hurt you or take time off your life? Probably not, imo. unless you choke on it (i hate hot dogs, so theres that possibility with me LOL)
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,222 Member
    edited August 2021
    Poor cows, they just can't catch a break. The world is greener, more food is produced, less people are dying of starvation and maybe one of those people is the genius that will help and be instrumental in solving our energy situation. This is not a study this is an hypothesis based on random value indicators and that eating meat shortens your life as a given, right, where have I heard that before.
  • Speakeasy76
    Speakeasy76 Posts: 961 Member
    I don't even want to read the study, but I think most of us here can agree that the more junk you eat, the greater your risk of diseases that may shorten your life. However, doing a study like this seems can't take into account everyone's individual genetics--including their risk for certain diseases. I think it makes more sense to look at one's family history/risk of disease and maybe eat less of the stuff/chemicals that are correlated with increasing the risk and more of the stuff that may help lower the risk.
  • goldenxbeauty
    goldenxbeauty Posts: 154 Member
    Food is food.
    I try to make good choices generally but if I want dessert or I'm craving something specific, I'm not going to deny myself that most of the time because we deserve to enjoy life and one of the things I enjoy is food.🤷‍♀️
  • FinntheVeggie
    FinntheVeggie Posts: 74 Member
    edited August 2021
    I think it would be a mistake to take this finding at face value. It's a fun statistical model, but the headline of the article isn't meant to be taken literally. There's no countdown clock that jumps down 10 minutes when you order a burger, but there is probably some interesting things to learn from the model as a whole. The CNN article is phrased a certain way to make it "catchy", rather than 100% faithful to the underlying study. In the article it says their calculations were based on Global Disease Burden calculations, not individual people (like someone pointed out above, it would be impossible and quite silly to track thousands of people from birth to death and account for everything they ate)
  • FinntheVeggie
    FinntheVeggie Posts: 74 Member
    If anybody's interested in the full text article, it looks like it's available on Sci Hub:
    https://sci-hub.es.ht/?q=Small+targeted+dietary+changes+can+yield+substantial+gains+for+human+health+and+the+environment
  • suzleigh1
    suzleigh1 Posts: 19 Member
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Joey Chestnut is in big trouble then. :D He's the Nathan's Hot dog eating champion with 74 hot dogs in 10 minutes. I'll let you guys do the math.


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Joey Chestnut is in big trouble then. :D He's the Nathan's Hot dog eating champion with 74 hot dogs in 10 minutes. I'll let you guys do the math.


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    9285851.png

    My husband had the same exact comment! Vegetarians don’t live forever. A friend of my husband literally dropped dead in a gym in the middle of a workout. He had lived a healthy life, ate all the right foods, and he had no known health problems. He was in his mid-60’s. My mother in law did no exercising, ate junk food like it was a circus every day, and never met a vegetable she liked. She lived to 98.
  • penguinmama87
    penguinmama87 Posts: 1,155 Member
    goldenxbeauty wrote: »
    Food is food.
    I try to make good choices generally but if I want dessert or I'm craving something specific, I'm not going to deny myself that most of the time because we deserve to enjoy life and one of the things I enjoy is food.🤷‍♀️

    I think enjoyment is actually really important for health, too, but happiness is very hard to quantify, so that part often gets left out. I do know some people who lived to very old ages who seemed awfully unhappy (also some very happy!)

    I would like to live a long time, sure, but quantity of years is far from the only measuring stick for whether or not it's a good life. The reality is none of us are guaranteed tomorrow and we'll all die someday. I'm far from a hedonist (so, SO far), but yes, there are in fact some things I am not going to give up just because it offers better statistical odds I'll reach a particular birthday.
  • ythannah
    ythannah Posts: 4,371 Member
    Speakeasy76 wrote: »
    I don't even want to read the study, but I think most of us here can agree that the more junk you eat, the greater your risk of diseases that may shorten your life. However, doing a study like this seems can't take into account everyone's individual genetics--including their risk for certain diseases. I think it makes more sense to look at one's family history/risk of disease and maybe eat less of the stuff/chemicals that are correlated with increasing the risk and more of the stuff that may help lower the risk.

    This is basically my approach, put more of an effort into shoring up the stuff that features heavily in my family history, like cardiovascular issues and osteoporosis. Then avoid the things that are generally known to cause problems, like smoking. And after that, let the chips fall where they may.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,225 Member
    It's . . . interesting . . . but I don't really see the practical implications of this level of (mostly imputed?) detail.

    Good overall nutrition is important. As a practical thing, I think there's a higher return on effort from focusing on getting good overall nutrition, not on feeding the click-bait beast that wants to convince people that individual foods are "good" or "bad", "junk" or "superfoods".

    Just my opinion, though.
  • russellholtslander1
    russellholtslander1 Posts: 285 Member
    The bias is in what people think is " good " food. Eggs & bananas have been good or bad several times in my life. Which is it? Nutritious, too carby, too much cholesterol, a balance of nutrients.. all depending on who was talking about it.

    Also, circumstances matter.. what do you eat together.. are high fats a problem, or is it due to combining them with starch, and sugar? Is red meat bad, or is it, if you also have pizza, pop, and ice cream in your diet. How about your health concerns? Diabetic.. cut that banana in HALF. That " good " banana will spike your blood sugar. I have A-Fib, and am on blood thinners, due to CHF.. if I eat a lot of greens, I will thicken my blood, and have a stroke..

    I think we can all pick out BAD food.. sweets, pop, fast food.. obvious stuff, but most food is GOOD for someone, eaten in the right way. I eat KETO, but don't eat bacon all day.. I eat fatty red meat.. and my doctors love my test results, and weight loss. I also eat veggies, and 5-6 eggs a day, cooked in butter. use mayo, and olive oil as well. Plenty, so I can get to 75% fat. My cholesterol is 105, my triglycerides are 75.

    Our bodies use fat, broken down into ketones, or glucose, derived from carbs for energy.. excess energy is stored as bodyfat.. so I think the problem is excess energy.. you can use the fat from a roast, or olive oil ( or both ), but also the glucose from carbs. There will be other health considerations.. salt for example... but I think we look at groups of people, and we see red meat eaters, and we never ask.. are they eating that with a salad and water, or a side of non-starchy vegetables, or do they have mashed potatoes, gravy, and a bowl of canned fruit in heavy syrup.. peaches are healthy, right?

    I could also eat very low carb, use just enough ketones to fuel my body, and reach a healthy weight, and eat so much bacon, I consume 5000 mg of Na.. and have high blood pressure, and be very unhealthy.

    Most food isn't bad.. it can be, paired with other things, but diet, and health are more complicated than simply saying veggies are good, red meat and eggs are bad. The whole diet matters. Results matter, which is why you go see your doctor, and find out if you are healthy.. if you ARE healthy, and staying healthy, not getting worse, or like me, getting healthier.. is the food I am eating bad? Or is it simply not what people recommend, when forced to back ONE way of eating.. the one they think works for the most people.. the one easiest to stick on, even if the results aren't that great for a lot of people.

    We should look at various diets, and what people like, and say things like.. yes, red meat is OK.. but be aware of WHAT you eat with it.. if you eat bread, and mashed potatoes, your body will have lots of fat it could break down into ketones for energy, but also lots of glucose, which the body prefers.. so you do NOT break down the fat.. you burn the glucose, and the fat gets stored.. which is unhealthy, as anyone who is obese knows.. because they tend to get health issues.

    I have chosen ketones, over glucose.. it controls my appetite, so I can eat below my caloric needs, and the excess is made up by breaking down my bodyfat, which I think is a major contributor to my other health issues.. 1 lb. of fat is 3,500 calories.. so if I eat 1800, and my body needs 3000 calories to operate.. there is plenty of fat to break down.

    Carbs make me crave more carbs. So for me, they are unhealthy. I'll enjoy a mushroom omelet ( 5 eggs ), fish and green beans for lunch, and a big steak, with a side of salad greens, black olives, 2 ozs. shredded cheddar cheese, olive oil and vinegar dressing for breakfast, and nothing but water to drink.

    When I ask my doctor if I'm getting healthier, they say yes, so if the food is not good.. all the tests, and my scale have not been informed yet.

Categories