@vegansie Uhh, nope. It doesn't say that. Not what it tested. So you're now dismissing out of hand 4 metanalyses showing sat fat and meat aren't problematic. Got it. https://t.co/I17r2qJwKW
Just wanted to put these 4 metanalyses on saturated fat/ meat in one place for easy reference. 1. https://t.co/oIeaJafbMX 2. https://t.co/YWPpeYKDHZ 3. https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
@VeganLinked @MaParment Metanalysis showing no to weak evidence implicating meat in any negative health outcomes and, in fact, the better the science the weaker the evidence against meat. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
@BeccaWaugh2 @UltimateXBT @AmyShircel @Kith3r @lisamohale The evidence against red meat is so weak as to be meaningless. Several recent metanalyses say the same thing. https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
@coconutcobain @veganuary @livekindlyco @BeyondMeat You ignore what NOVA is because of the site?🤦♂️ There aren't 'thousands of credible sources' & when the totality ofe vidence is looked at& we remove bias & use GRADE, the hype from your vega
@_VORK The study isn't suitable to support such claim, given its limited scope, but this one goes in that direction: https://t.co/O20ovq0tKo Risks are significant yet *very* small & based on (very) weak evidence - they may as well be (and probably are
@mdboogaloo Bu yüzden kabul etmeyen çalışmaları gönderdim zaten. Sırf Pubmed'den göndermediğim için bu Pubmed değil diyecek kadar zekasızsanız alın o zaman. https://t.co/GHMCDtQo77
@mdboogaloo Tıp okuyanlar bunu kanıt olarak kabul ediyorsa diplomaları çöpe atsınlar direkt. 🤦♀️ Buyrun bu da Pubmed, ve yeterli kanıt olmadığını söylüyor. https://t.co/8gYA2yyTcu https://t.co/VtPVuQQSL2
@balajis For anyone interested in this tangential subthread about a completely different way in which W.H.O. has demonstrated that they are not reliable: Official misinformation, resulting in vast harm to public health: https://t.co/B6sAfvSq67 Good scien
RT @Genlearnman: Animal sourced food in the diet seem to matter. If still are in doubt, take another look at Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5…
RT @Genlearnman: Animal sourced food in the diet seem to matter. If still are in doubt, take another look at Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5…
RT @Genlearnman: Animal sourced food in the diet seem to matter. If still are in doubt, take another look at Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5…
RT @Genlearnman: Animal sourced food in the diet seem to matter. If still are in doubt, take another look at Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5…
Animal sourced food in the diet seem to matter. If still are in doubt, take another look at Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5228j8RKL Johnson et al https://t.co/KBQiiDOEXg @fleroy1974 Leroy & Cofnas https://t.co/O8E4IdACHW #mmtdk @Ruokavirasto @Marthafor
@CholesterolIts @sibaburck Its epidemiology just like he was doing. Here's the actual science. When you break it down by strength of study, the evidence against meat is extremely weak to nonexistent. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
@sibaburck There's no such thing as scientific consensus. Two new metanalyses say differently. And Asian metanalyses show higher meat intake is associated with longer life. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
@purdygreenKC @MadPharmacist1 @EngineerDiet @AmandaZZ100 @bulkbiker @AllAboutHabit @AviBittMD The various studies of: "The Annals of Internal Medicine Meta-Analysis of Meat Consumption, November 2019" https://t.co/XNr8vlnLB1 https://t.co/YFot2cfe2Z htt
RT @bigfatsurprise: Leader of THI, David Katz (no longer at Yale: https://t.co/8DMPfortOF) is CEO/Founder of plant-based company DietID, wi…
@MNivoliez @DfxionAmatoriae @clairetlipide @Bakaarion @Acermendax @unadfi @LauwersTaty Consensus? Loin de là: https://t.co/O20ovq0tKo
@SteinarBL @sethpiper @SigridSollund @olemathis Kjøtt er sunn mat. Det er kun industrien for junkfood som forsøker overbevise om annet. se også denne tråden https://t.co/YrSXYU6MWL
@PCRM Actually, the evidence is far from clear cut. “...the organizations that produce guidelines did not conduct or access rigorous systematic reviews of the evidence...raising questions regarding adherence to guideline standards for trustworthiness” ht
Just reviewed the recent dietary meat guidelines published in @AnnalsofIM (https://t.co/5E5wsSi79E). Please be sure to read the recent response by @HarvardChanSPH (https://t.co/571aQqc5ml). The scientific oversights in these recommendations are disappoin
Unprocessed #RedMeat and #ProcessedMeat Consumption https://t.co/CfgnXIJfmT
@bobhewitt17 @DaleWil39870290 @DrAseemMalhotra @KailashChandOBE @JoannaBlythman @FatEmperor @SBakerMD @lowcarbGP @ProfTimNoakes @bigfatsurprise @FructoseNo @garytaubes @LDLSkeptic @tednaiman Medical experts might agree, but the science doesn't. Metanalyses
@FabsPasses @ZeroCarbSarah @MaureenStroud @TallRedhead1014 @Engineer4Health @philipippy @RyanBErickson @sharkthelion @TheWizardofTofu Here are the links to the new analysis which has dismissed previous "anti-red-meat" junk-science. https://t.co/XNr8vlnLB1
(White & Hall, 2017: https://t.co/WQd3MWUw2K) or health (Johnson et al2019, https://t.co/KBQiiDOEXg; .@fleroy1974 @nathancofnas https://t.co/O8E4IdACHW), but rather a premise for children's health (Adesogan et al https://t.co/a5228j8RKL). In India,
@vgnbern @FastMaster001 @SBakerMD Metanalyses don't bear that out, and even if they said that, that's not veganism . So where's the studies saying vegans live the longest and healthiest when you just stated veganism hadn't even been in existence before 19
@RiosRodriSilva @jalozaro Nuevamente cito un trabajo científico del 2019 que explica a detalle lo que no has entendido https://t.co/TEam0ZHfnT
@ProfWhelan @EUFIC Oh the irony.... from @EUFIC Meta analysis deemed the highest standard (see below) yet still with the slogan; 'reduce red meat intake to prevent cancer'.... https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX https://t.co/WdoADiRbLW
@EUFIC @cancercode @CR_UK @wcrfint @WCRF_UK @paula_vassallo @WHO_Europe @CRUK_BI @BNFEvents Limit consumption of red and processed meat? Based on what? Epidemiological studies?? https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
RT @bigfatsurprise: Red/processed meat papers this week were most rigorous-ever review of the science. Top paper linked here. Please read a…
RT @JRPenha: Então essa decisão é contraditória a tudo que foi escrito e divulgado? Como é decisão duma comissão, isso não é ainda provido…
Então essa decisão é contraditória a tudo que foi escrito e divulgado? Como é decisão duma comissão, isso não é ainda provido de interesses comerciais ??? É a nova antítese similar ao ovo?? Tudo que se falava de mau virou do bem?? Quantos anos durou essas
1 of 3- This is a really bad study (this is the one that @cpn0 linked in his email to us last weekend- https://t.co/Mo72rBiKUJ. How is it that people's opinions formed a basis of whtr or not processed/unprocessed meat should continue to b eaten 4 health re
@RiosRodriSilva @jalozaro Estos trabajos del cáncer son muy inconclusos pues no toman en cuenta hábitos, forma de preparación ni condicionante genética y otras variables adicionales que determinan la expresión de estos genes. Lo dice este estudio https://t
@Alexglover456 @NanciGuestRDPhD OK. So I should ignore that study as it's only hypothesis level evidence. 🤷♂️ We should hold nutrition to good standards like GRADE. 😉 https://t.co/TCLXQh73jN
You do realize that was in 2015 right? The largest meta analysis on red/processed meat was conducted a few months ago, they found no evidence that either were carcinogens. Link to that paper: https://t.co/uPRl4RUv8g We go in depth on this in our vid on r
@RiosRodriSilva @jalozaro Datos de deportistas amateur sin efectos por dieta https://t.co/LwMzApaTQQ Datos que carne roja o procesada no es cancerígena https://t.co/TEam0ZHfnT
@Yasna_A @CarlosEsDelAlbo @denissemalebran Los veganos tienen carencia de nutrientes esenciales, etc. Omnívoros consumen alta cantidad de CHO y azucar, y por ello culpan a la carne? Ya hay asociaciones internacionales que entendieron el problema. https://t
@Yasna_A @CarlosEsDelAlbo @denissemalebran Te dejo este mientras tanto https://t.co/GHC7Iui24a
@BkindBloveBnow @SteakAndIron The evidence for meat causing any ilness is ridiculously small, w interventional studies never showing such problems. https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
@mimib85092099 @Dravidica And two new metanalyses debunk and idea meat causes cancer. You're just lying. .. https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
@NutritionMadeS3 Even if you could, that association is still less than the RR 2.0 that indicates actual significance, so it would still be imaginary, unlike the associations w/ carbohydrate and cancers which are stronger than 2.0... https://t.co/rsD3eFVnH
@Smaknificent @Alsyem @KemMinnick @VeganRecovering Two new metanalyses say otherwise...you're playing make believe and repeating. https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
RT @SteadyImproving: The largest collection of data ever collected on red and processed meat on mortality and cancer was done a few months…
The largest collection of data ever collected on red and processed meat on mortality and cancer was done a few months ago, showing no evidence that either are carcinogens: https://t.co/uPRl4RUv8g This study on carb consumption was much more significant, t
@SandiNypaver The number of studies considered does not make it more evidence and science based. They are mostly observational studies with low scientific evidence. Did you even read this article here: https://t.co/6IsZMqxqFd The really big studies you
@Haneye @KrHoaas Dette er politikk. Næringspolitikk og ikke ERnæring. En burde heller fokusere på kvaliteten av sjømat - og kjøtt. Ellers, se denne tråden: https://t.co/YrSXYUooll
@paleocanteen @martinbarr3 @davemacleod09 @BBCJohnBeattie You’ve got more patience than me with these folks...https://t.co/JUALwaStki
@andyswarbs And that has got what to do with anything? https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@veggieville @BBCJohnBeattie @BBCRadioScot You are lying. Not robust evidence. Quite the opposite actually. Very weak and statistically insignificant https://t.co/XJJEKbsPzI
@drricharddean Nonsense! Here's the Science ⬇️ https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@SandiNypaver While I agree with the fact that excessive protein intake is not a good idea long term, I am not sure about red/processed meat consumption and its proven connection to health problems. 🤷🏽♂️ Here is a recent article from the „Annals of intern
Backlash Over Meat Dietary Recommendations Raises Questions About Corporate Ties to Nutrition Scientists https://t.co/iDGJjYgoot https://t.co/DnWJV7Rzjn https://t.co/NQcRsepENm #nutrition #conflictsofinterest #statistics #ethics #research https://t.co/Ow5B
@C_Anderson1998 @OurCompass "Red meat has no link to cancer; reports which suggest so ‘weak’. Look at listing into which they put processed meat. You have arsenic, diesel exhausts, plutonium. No serious scientist would do this." - Prof Robt Pickard, Cardif
@samcoyi Not true! Health claims against meat are rubbish! Humans are omnivores, as are baboons! Eat what you like but when organisations/sound bites/policy points to plant based with biased data written by vegans (Poore, Springmann, etc.) then we have a p
@324cat I per què no paren de dir que la carn no és saludable? https://t.co/p5ubpboeVe
@Lisa0Sullivan Evidence? https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@scharleb toi tu dois vraiment aimer ton boulot avec toutes ces informations souvent contradictoires sur l'alimentation!!!! « The panel suggests that adults continue current unprocessed red meat consumption » https://t.co/zGbXHK48U9
RT @BeefLambNZ: A new report from an international panel of independent experts reveals the supposed benefits of abstaining from meat aren'…
NUTRITIONAL GUIDELINES: Here's the new guideline on eating meat https://t.co/8ypna145YB Here is the backlash summarised: https://t.co/1lL9pMaY65 A plethora of weak evidence in nutrition!
@davemck2 Maybe @CancerCouncilOz should have a look at these findings ⬇️⬇️ https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@mnixon05 @jameshaskell @CranswickPlc Proven fact? https://t.co/N4qmjrhmpQ
RT @fleroy1974: @ItalyUN_Geneva @WHO With some more info here: 6/n https://t.co/WXqWheeVBa
Fightback against junkscience, biased misinformation continues...."powerful forces out there that will stop at nothing to end animal agriculture; the first step we as producers need to take is share the original study far and wide." https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@Ligdibacoola Not so.... https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@AmyCountryside @DMDent Sure it is.... Based on 2.4mn years of evolution, we have arrived here because of meat.... https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@andyswarbs Unquestionable? Utter nonsense! Meat provides a complete amino acid profile as well as DPA, choline, EPA, etc. Health claims against meat cite; chem. additives, overcooking.. but look at seed oils 🤦♂️ .. Humans are omnivores after all, like ba
NUTRITIONAL GUIDELINES: Here's the new guideline on eating meat https://t.co/ndSbtXWhsS Here is the backlash summarised: https://t.co/gPCpXjirrh A plethora of weak evidence in nutrition!
RT @bigfatsurprise: Red/processed meat papers this week were most rigorous-ever review of the science. Top paper linked here. Please read a…
@herbieharry @Shazcostagliola Based on language u used ("meat sausages r carcinogenic and actual corpses"), you are not friend with knowledge & critical thinking. But just in case, here is the review of studies confirming that there is no definite link
og her https://t.co/gmYiKl2AR0
@tofufortea @ISDedal @pippa_hackett @greenparty_ie @Bordbia A fallacy! Red meat consumption is not linked to disease. The richer a society becomes for example, more junk food and excesses of alcohol and tobacco. Hong Kong and Okinawa are but two examples o
@NIvanov_v @CarnivoreMD @kevinnbass "potentially unfavourable association ....causality cannot be proven"... Lol. Boy, super strong ...then there's two metanalyses saying there's the associations are too weak to draw conclusions from https://t.co/B7rgkF
@LawrenceCooke13 @ToSylvie These are all metanalyses saying you're wrong. They are far more credible than hypothetical mechanisms. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
It’s not all over the place at all. The Times writer gave the finding and the critics point of view. If you want to cut them out look at the actual study and methodology. Amazing what can be learned when you cut out special interests, huh? https://t.co/HL6
@LawrenceCooke13 @ToSylvie Wrong again. Stop lying.. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
Después de tanta controversia, al final la evidencia que hay sugiere que no hay mayor riesgo de cáncer, enfermedades cardíacas o diabetes por el consumo de carnes rojas. Falta mejorar la calidad de aquella, pero con lo que hay se concluyó esto. https://t.
@tbuklijas @grant_farquhar @CubaRaglanGuy Pleased you say that dietary changes are complex, but would just like to point out an important meta-analysis that resulted in no significant correlation found between higher meat consumption and bowel cancer: http
@LawrenceCooke13 @ToSylvie It doesn't ...and why would it when every other animal that eats meat doesn't get cancer. Stupid vegan propaganda to hope gullible people will fall for their cult nonsense. https://t.co/B7rgkFn9QY
@LawrenceCooke13 @CarnivoreIs @ToSylvie Specifically? Where? #idiotic Read this, if you can.... https://t.co/ugk0XVZkEX
@whsource Solid, carefuly crafted paper on „Unprocessed Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption: Dietary Guideline„ from the article https://t.co/4tDfr2yydt
@LawrenceCooke13 @ToSylvie Again, you parrot outdated info... https://t.co/B7rgkFELfy
@kevinnbass Ok so then there’s very little harm when it comes to red meat intake? https://t.co/Hq3ywfJQez
@Perrin_Cam @PilarGalan10 @GemmaTrigueros @Gearoidmuar @EUPerspectives @michaelpollan @GeorgeMonbiot @wbcsd @OpenFoodFactsFr @T_Fiolet @santeprevention "Recommendations: The panel suggests that adults continue current unprocessed red meat consumption. Simi