Another (potential) strike against red meat

Options
1…1314151719

Replies

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 9,967 Member
    Options
    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.

    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org
    That's a vegan website where physicians of the American Medical Association are trying to distance themselves from.......lol
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Options
    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org


    So, which is it? One meal, or multiple meals? Or are you just spouting nonsense?

    PCRM? lololololololololololol
  • FredDoyle
    FredDoyle Posts: 2,273 Member
    Options
    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org


    So, which is it? One meal, or multiple meals? Or are you just spouting nonsense?

    PCRM? lololololololololololol
    I'm going to choose nonsense. What do I win?
    and PCRM...what a joke.
  • bethany41h
    bethany41h Posts: 218
    Options
    I saw this on the news to.... I am vegetarian Monday through Friday lol so I thought I was in the clear with this one. But then I saw the vita pak I am using from GNC has one entire pill just for carnitine.... hmmmmmm. So apparently I am taking a giant dose of carnitine in spite of being predominantly meatless and about 95% red meatless. Yeeks.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org


    So, which is it? One meal, or multiple meals? Or are you just spouting nonsense?

    PCRM? lololololololololololol
    I'm going to choose nonsense. What do I win?
    and PCRM...what a joke.

    It's obviously nonsense.

    "...but we're consuming it again before ..." Just the assumption that "we" are all comsuming red meat with even close to the same regularity is nonsense.
  • horndave
    horndave Posts: 565
    Options
    Bacon is not red meat. Pork is the other white meat.
  • Joreanasaurous
    Joreanasaurous Posts: 1,384 Member
    Options
    Bacon is still better.

    Bacon is red meat.

    I thought pork was the other white meat?
  • tanniew78
    tanniew78 Posts: 602 Member
    Options
    I will still eat burgers and steaks! NO one will live forever so might as well die well. lol.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Bacon is not red meat. Pork is the other white meat.

    If you ask the pork council marketing department it is. But try asking most nutrition experts.

    But white or red, the disease risk association with processed meats is even stronger than with unprocessed red meat.
  • polandtyler
    polandtyler Posts: 4
    Options
    Please research further.
    Here are the pros and cons:
    PROS:
    Combat kidney disease (Wei Huang, et al, (October 1999). "Carnitine transport and its inhibition by sulfonylureas in human kidney proximal tubular epithelial cells". Biochemical Pharmacology 58 (8) )

    Combat male infertility ( Lenzi A, et al., (2003). "Use of carnitine therapy in selected cases of male factor infertility: a double-blind crossover trial". Fertility and Sterility 79)

    Combat asthma ("L-Carnitine Improves the Asthma Control in Children with Moderate Persistent Asthma". J Allergy. 2012.)

    Reduce fatigue resulting from chemotherapy: (Graziano, F, et al. (2002). "Potential role of levocarnitine supplementation for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced fatigue in non-anaemic cancer patients". British journal of cancer 86)

    Treat symptoms of hypothyroidism: (Benvenga, Salvatore; et al (2004). "Effects of Carnitine on Thyroid Hormone Action". Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1033)

    Slowing reduction in bone density due to osteoperosis: (Claudio Cavazza, Composition for the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis due to Menopause Syndrome (2002) )

    Cons:
    Potential link to artherosclerosis: (Koeth, Robert; et al (2013). "Intestinal microbiota metabolism of L-carnitine, a nutrient in red meat, promotes atherosclerosis". Nature Medicine.)


    ...I'd say all-in-all, moderation is key (just like anything else). Oh, and Wikipedia can be useful if used properly :)
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Please research further.

    Always good advice! Though I'd say your post was a little one sided with only the "con" listsed as "potential". :wink:
  • MSeel1984
    MSeel1984 Posts: 2,297 Member
    Options
    Why does it seem like the vast majority of people that post on threads such as this are those OPPOSED to the idea posted?

    I'm a meat eater so honestly this isn't really going to affect my opinion, but...

    I'm curious. It always attracts those who are vehemently against the idea proposed.
  • deb3129
    deb3129 Posts: 1,294 Member
    Options
    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.

    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org

    One meal causes what kind of damage, exactly?

    It causes damage to your endothelial cells lining your veins and arteries
  • polandtyler
    polandtyler Posts: 4
    Options
    Please research further.

    Always good advice! Though I'd say your post was a little one sided with only the "con" listsed as "potential". :wink:

    I only say potential because the extraneous variables have not been invalidated yet.
    For example, the people who generally have a diet rich in energy drinks and red meat don't (for the most part) practice healthy habits in other parts of their lives as well.

    Really hard to say that l-carnitine causes the artherosclerosis without further clinical research.
  • K_Serz
    K_Serz Posts: 1,299 Member
    Options
    Why is this thread still going, when the same topic from 2 days ago isnt?

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952664-red-meat-doesn-t-matter-if-lean-clogs-arteries

    "a new study suggests"

    So apparently people have been discussing a topic for 14 pages of something that just "might be" Ill just keep eating meat while waiting for confirmation. Thanks.
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    Options
    Actually one meal of red meat causes damage to our bodies. Our bodies try to heal from it (takes 6 hours) but we're consuming it again before it gets the chance. Thus the damage over time (long time) causes cancer and heart disease. This has been studied extensively. A great nutrition website that is not paid for by big corporations (is trustworthy and nonprofit) is THE PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE. Their site is pcrm.org. Another is nutrtitionfacts.org


    So, which is it? One meal, or multiple meals? Or are you just spouting nonsense?

    PCRM? lololololololololololol
    I'm going to choose nonsense. What do I win?
    and PCRM...what a joke.

    No kidding. PCRM are *exactly* the type of people who want the FDA to make our decisions for us.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Why is this thread still going, when the same topic from 2 days ago isnt?

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952664-red-meat-doesn-t-matter-if-lean-clogs-arteries

    "a new study suggests"

    So apparently people have been discussing a topic for 14 pages of something that just "might be" Ill just keep eating meat while waiting for confirmation. Thanks.

    Maybe I had a better headline? Maybe because of the silver, reflux and antibiotic tangents? Who knows why one thread goes on and anther doesn't.

    No one is suggesting you do or do not eat meat. I shared what I thought was an interesting study. And yes, I'll admit I purposely worded the topic line to attract debate, without making it untrue.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Options
    Please research further.

    Always good advice! Though I'd say your post was a little one sided with only the "con" listsed as "potential". :wink:

    I only say potential because the extraneous variables have not been invalidated yet.
    For example, the people who generally have a diet rich in energy drinks and red meat don't (for the most part) practice healthy habits in other parts of their lives as well.

    Really hard to say that l-carnitine causes the artherosclerosis without further clinical research.

    I wasn't questioning the word potential in the con (I used it myself in the topic), so much as the absence of it in the pros.
  • aaronlawrenc
    aaronlawrenc Posts: 666 Member
    Options
    Bacon is still better.

    Bacon is red meat.

    I thought pork was the other white meat?

    i am the other white meat
  • aaronlawrenc
    aaronlawrenc Posts: 666 Member
    Options
    Why is this thread still going, when the same topic from 2 days ago isnt?

    http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/952664-red-meat-doesn-t-matter-if-lean-clogs-arteries

    "a new study suggests"

    So apparently people have been discussing a topic for 14 pages of something that just "might be" Ill just keep eating meat while waiting for confirmation. Thanks.

    agreed

Categories