According to new research, the data is insufficient to support advising people to consume less beef and pork. Critics claimed that the findings “erode public trust.”
What the Research Says?
Because of worries that these foods are connected to heart disease, cancer, and other illnesses, public health experts have long advised Americans to reduce their consumption of red meat and processed meats. To know about the Cancer Risk in Meat we are discussing a lot facts on this post.
But in a surprising turn of events, a group of researchers from around the world came to the conclusion on Monday that the advice—which forms the basis of practically all dietary recommendations—is not supported by reliable scientific data.
Bradley Johnston, an epidemiologist at Dalhousie University in Canada and the head of the team that published the new research in the Annals of Internal Medicine, stated that “the certainty of evidence for these risk reductions was low to very low.”
The New Findings
The new findings, which rank among the largest such reviews ever performed, could affect nutritional advice in the future. They highlight a number of unsettling issues regarding dietary recommendations, nutritional research, and the kind of criteria that should be applied to these studies.
Public health researchers have already criticized them harshly. The results and the journal that published them have drawn criticism from the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and other organizations.
Some More Reviews
In a statement, academics at Harvard warned that the findings “harm the credibility of nutrition science and erode public trust in scientific research,” and several called for the journal’s editors to postpone publication completely. -Research.”
Dr. Frank Sacks, former chair of the American Heart Association’s nutrition committee, called the research “fatally flawed.” Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an organization that promotes a plant-based diet, filed a petition against the journal with the Federal Trade Commission on Wednesday.
Particularly beef is more than simply another food item; it served as a beloved emblem of post-World War II wealth and was firmly placed in the middle of the American dinner plate. But from the middle of the 1970s, consumption of beef has progressively decreased, mostly being replaced by poultry as worries about its health implications have grown.
The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston’s nutrition department chair, Dr. Frank Hu, stated that red meat was once a sign of high socioeconomic class, but that this was changing. He pointed out that Americans today consume less red meat the more educated they are.
The Final Take
The new papers are the result of three years of effort by a team led by Dr. Johnston, which included 14 researchers from seven different nations and three community leaders. The studies were conducted without any outside support, and the scientists disclosed no conflicts of interest.
Although supporters of popular high-protein diets are likely to be pleased with the latest findings, they are almost certain to increase public concern over dietary recommendations that seem to alter every few years. The findings add to a long list of startling dietary changes affecting salt, lipids, carbohydrates, and more.