Another (potential) strike against red meat

bcattoes

I don't remember the study or the exact amount, but I read that the amount of red meat needed to cause such issues was quite high. I definitely remember the amount being higher than the amount of meat my carnivorous boyfriend eats in an entire day.

Well yes, surely one would not expect one day of eating red meat (or anything else) to have lasting health consequences. It's nearly always a pattern of eating over time that has consequences.

Perhaps I should have worded it better but the amount given was for red meat consumed per day. The study followed people who had a certain amount of red meat per day and found problems with their health. The amount was very high-- higher than I've ever seen anyone consume in a day. It also mentioned that a lesser amount consumed on a daily basis was not problematic. Doesn't worry me either way as I don't much enjoy the flavor of red meat anyway.

Are you sure it's the same study? This study was done on patients undergoing heart evaluations and found the link, rather at people eating red meat. Though, it did turn out that they ate red meat, that was not the focus.

neanderthin

I don't remember the study or the exact amount, but I read that the amount of red meat needed to cause such issues was quite high. I definitely remember the amount being higher than the amount of meat my carnivorous boyfriend eats in an entire day.

Well yes, surely one would not expect one day of eating red meat (or anything else) to have lasting health consequences. It's nearly always a pattern of eating over time that has consequences.

Perhaps I should have worded it better but the amount given was for red meat consumed per day. The study followed people who had a certain amount of red meat per day and found problems with their health. The amount was very high-- higher than I've ever seen anyone consume in a day. It also mentioned that a lesser amount consumed on a daily basis was not problematic. Doesn't worry me either way as I don't much enjoy the flavor of red meat anyway.

Are you sure it's the same study? This study was done on patients undergoing heart evaluations and found the link, rather at people eating red meat. Though, it did turn out that they ate red meat, that was not the focus.

Can you link the study? The one I saw today was on mice.

bcattoes

I don't remember the study or the exact amount, but I read that the amount of red meat needed to cause such issues was quite high. I definitely remember the amount being higher than the amount of meat my carnivorous boyfriend eats in an entire day.

Well yes, surely one would not expect one day of eating red meat (or anything else) to have lasting health consequences. It's nearly always a pattern of eating over time that has consequences.

Perhaps I should have worded it better but the amount given was for red meat consumed per day. The study followed people who had a certain amount of red meat per day and found problems with their health. The amount was very high-- higher than I've ever seen anyone consume in a day. It also mentioned that a lesser amount consumed on a daily basis was not problematic. Doesn't worry me either way as I don't much enjoy the flavor of red meat anyway.

Are you sure it's the same study? This study was done on patients undergoing heart evaluations and found the link, rather at people eating red meat. Though, it did turn out that they ate red meat, that was not the focus.

Can you link the study? The one I saw today was on mice.

I don't have the link but it says it was publiched in Nature Medicine. Maybe they have an online editition. But the NIH article says

Hazen's team looked at nearly 2,600 patients undergoing heart evaluations.

so it must be a different one.

Do you have a link to the mice study?

Edit: 'cause I can't type for *kitten*

bcattoes

Can you link the study? The one I saw today was on mice.

Maybe it is the same study. I found this http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nm.3145.html

neanderthin

I don't remember the study or the exact amount, but I read that the amount of red meat needed to cause such issues was quite high. I definitely remember the amount being higher than the amount of meat my carnivorous boyfriend eats in an entire day.

Well yes, surely one would not expect one day of eating red meat (or anything else) to have lasting health consequences. It's nearly always a pattern of eating over time that has consequences.

Perhaps I should have worded it better but the amount given was for red meat consumed per day. The study followed people who had a certain amount of red meat per day and found problems with their health. The amount was very high-- higher than I've ever seen anyone consume in a day. It also mentioned that a lesser amount consumed on a daily basis was not problematic. Doesn't worry me either way as I don't much enjoy the flavor of red meat anyway.

Are you sure it's the same study? This study was done on patients undergoing heart evaluations and found the link, rather at people eating red meat. Though, it did turn out that they ate red meat, that was not the focus.

Can you link the study? The one I saw today was on mice.

I don't have the link but it says it was publiched in Nature Medicine. Maybe they have an online editition. But the NIH article says

Hazen's team looked at nearly 2,600 patients undergoing heart evaluations.

so it must be a different one.

Do you have a link to the mice study?

Edit: 'cause I can't type for *kitten*

Here's the Natural Medicine link, but not the full study.

http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nm.3145.html

bcattoes

Here's the Natural Medicine link, but not the full study.

http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nm.3145.html

Yeah, that appears to be that same one. I would imagine the full study is or soon will be available on pubmed since the NIH published a release about it.

Matt_Wild

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

bcattoes

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

It's just one study. But since the problem appears to be the carnitine I wonder how much some of those variables matter. Does grass fed meat have less carnitine than factory farmed?

WendyTerry420

That's interesting. I read a study a while back that L-carnitine is good for your heart.

ETA: I think this is the one that I read.
http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/carnitine-l-000291.htm

Matt_Wild

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

It's just one study. But since the problem appears to be the carnitine I wonder how much some of those variables matter. Does grass fed meat have less carnitine than factory farmed?

Yes it does, different nutrient levels in food = different results possibly.

And indeed, who were the people tested? What ethnicity etc?

No every race, ethnicity etc have the same digestive setup down to natural variances based on foods consumed in area. Which then moves you into another question - is the area the test done new to the types of red meat or levels of it?

To make a good assessment, these variances must be taken into account.

bcattoes

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

It's just one study. But since the problem appears to be the carnitine I wonder how much some of those variables matter. Does grass fed meat have less carnitine than factory farmed?

Yes it does, different nutrient levels in food = different results possibly.

And indeed, who were the people tested? What ethnicity etc?

No every race, ethnicity etc have the same digestive setup down to natural variances based on foods consumed in area. Which then moves you into another question - is the area the test done new to the types of red meat or levels of it?

To make a good assessment, these variances must be taken into account.

And you think for some reasons the researchers did not take this into account?

Matt_Wild

And you think for some reasons the researchers did not take this into account?

Yes, I think they did not take this into account.

No suggestion that they did.

bcattoes

That's interesting. I read a study a while back that L-carnitine is good for your heart.

It very well may be in certain scenarios. This is just one study and done on people being evaluated for heart disease, and mice. That could mean they had symptoms or were of a certain age (I'm guessing here and refering to the humans). Then again, maybe it's not good. I would imagine more study is needed to really know the answers.

bcattoes

And you think for some reasons the researchers did not take this into account?

Yes, I think they did not take this into account.

No suggestion that they did.

So you've read the actual study? Can you post a link?

Melissa22G

I eat my steak with a bottle of red wine. This way I am assured that all bacteria is alcoholized and neautralized! :drinker:

Haha! Agreed!:drinker:

mmapags

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

It's just one study. But since the problem appears to be the carnitine I wonder how much some of those variables matter. Does grass fed meat have less carnitine than factory farmed?

Yes it does, different nutrient levels in food = different results possibly.

And indeed, who were the people tested? What ethnicity etc?

No every race, ethnicity etc have the same digestive setup down to natural variances based on foods consumed in area. Which then moves you into another question - is the area the test done new to the types of red meat or levels of it?

To make a good assessment, these variances must be taken into account.

Naw, it's easier just to fear monger with insufficient data. What a joke.

1brokegal44

Sounds more like a problem with energy drinks.
Eat the meat.
Ditch the energy drink.

ldrosophila

Why can't I find the study abstract? I've looked at Nature's Medicine journal for the April 2013 issue and cant find a thing.

Oh NVM see you found it.

bcattoes

How were the animals fed? What was in the feed? What hormones were added to the meat? Where was the meat from? What was the source of drinking water? etc etc.

Lots of variables, not covered by the study. No doubt there was also variance in the diets of said people... which again, could cause a variance in how they respond to the meat (e.g. natural variances in the populace across the world due to foods they consume(d) in that area over last 50-100 years etc.

All a bit simple IMO.

It's just one study. But since the problem appears to be the carnitine I wonder how much some of those variables matter. Does grass fed meat have less carnitine than factory farmed?

Yes it does, different nutrient levels in food = different results possibly.

And indeed, who were the people tested? What ethnicity etc?

No every race, ethnicity etc have the same digestive setup down to natural variances based on foods consumed in area. Which then moves you into another question - is the area the test done new to the types of red meat or levels of it?

To make a good assessment, these variances must be taken into account.

Naw, it's easier just to fear monger with insufficient data. What a joke.

Publishing a study is not fear mongering.

WendyTerry420

That's interesting. I read a study a while back that L-carnitine is good for your heart.

It very well may be in certain scenarios. This is just one study and done on people being evaluated for heart disease, and mice. That could mean they had symptoms or were of a certain age (I'm guessing here and refering to the humans). Then again, maybe it's not good. I would imagine more study is needed to really know the answers.

Oh, ok. There have been a few studies showing it's beneficial in preventing heart disease, as well as an adjunct in conventional medicines. This is the first time I've seen something suggesting that carnitine could be detrimental. I've always seen it otherwise, as being beneficial for more than just the heart. In fact, I always cite the l-carnitine as my reason for choosing some energy drinks over others. I like to choose ones that contain B-12 and B-6 as well as carnitine and taurine. (I tend to avoid the high caffeine ones.)