https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TND6UIB6ng
Processed and red meat increases risk for type 2 diabetes, study finds …???
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TND6UIB6ng
Processed and red meat increases risk for type 2 diabetes, study finds …???
If that was true I would have type 2 diabetes, I have always been a heavy eater of good old red meat. I am 76 years old and eat my share of meat in general. And everytime my blood sugar is checked it is right at 90 and sometimes less.
Just another round of the same ol’ FUD. Ignore it. No shortage of studies have debunked the red meat causing problems in great detail.
Processed meat I don’t have many issues believing it’s bad for us, since it’s really not meat anymore, it’s a slim jim that you cook.
It doesn’t work. Never has, never will.
Just go look at the actual study and see how utterly flawed it is and then go look at all of the hundreds of thousands of diabetics who have completely reversed their T2 and the T1’s that have been able to reduce their medication substantially by eating ketogenic diet.
I’ll take the real world over what’s on paper delivered by a bought off agenda driven media source.
Does the study try to explain possible mechanisms? I would be fascinated to hear how they think this works….
Do they have any rationale for how the incidence of T2D has gone up tenfold at the same time as consumption of red meat has gone down by 30%?
In one Harvard study that Zoë Harcombe looked at, the “meat” category included hamburger and hot dog buns and French fries, because they go with the meal. “Meat” also included pizza, because people sometimes put pepperoni or sausage on top. Zoë says she challenged Dr. Walter Willet about that, and he thought that was an entirely reasonable way to look at food intake.
Without even reading this study, I’m confident you’ll find that it is essentially similar.
It is extremely tiresome to continually deal with the lies and falsehoods that epidemiologists come up with. In my book Willett is a charlatan and anything he says or writes should be absolutely ignored.
And who sponsored the study? Coca Cola? Nestle? Or one of the other major food companies that generally fund these fictitious studies?
I saw one like that, but for “processed meat”. They had a category where they had “processed meat” and a bunch of other stuff, like donuts. They of course singled out the “processed meat” because I guess that’s a better headline than “A category of foods with a lot of fried, processed, and high sugar foods, is indicated to be bad for you based on a study of infrequent food frequency questionnaires given not very often over a really long time period”.
Personally, I eat quite a bit of ham and other “processed meat”. By the way, for the study I saw, “processed meat” included sausage because it had added fat. As in fat + meat + spices + salt. Not even cured. I highly doubt many processed meats are bad for us, otherwise the Italians would be dropping like flies.
That’s my sausage, well, the best kind but it’s easy to get. Nothing else just pork, pork fat tissue, salt and spices. Good enough in my books And what does it matter that the fat is added or it is in the meat? It’s exactly the same as it’s pork fat itself
It’s nothing like many other processed meat items - and donuts are in a whole different world…
Still, I don’t like eating much processed stuff. I love them and I regularly eat them, they are a must for me - but I just don’t feel like half-living on them. My main meat is fresh meat.
Personally, I think one could live on sausage that was meat + fat + salt + spices (maybe with a casing) and be quite healthy.
Oh it’s not that I consider it not healthy, I just never desire much of that stuff for some reason. My normal meat is usually just fried pork with salt, I don’t use much spice there. The spicy, fatty sausages are lovely but a little is enough for me
Red Meat Bad… We all know it. The process is “Bad Stuff In = Bad Person = Bad Results” (Meh, Science dude).
ROTFLMAO. [Because I can picture it…]