Its not research, its opinion - expert opinion to be sure, but still a opinion.
The quote you listed at the top talked about a single study, but didn’t name the study. That is the only thing I’m interested in reading.
We can cite experts at each other all day, all it will do is demonstrate the current literature is inconclusive with only observational relationships and even then very small relative risk ratios <1.4.
Many sources reporting on the health issues of red meat and a potential link to cancer often quote a report from the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
What is often under-appreciated is that this WHO report is not actually a study, but rather the interpretation of the overall science by a specific group of individuals. It is notable that the authors of the WHO report repeatedly state that the evidence linking red meat to colorectal cancer is weak and inconsistent, and the magnitude of any real effect may not be very large.
Furthermore, the few randomized trials available have found that diets restricted in red meat have little to no effect on the risk of colon cancer.
Several randomized studies have assessed the ability of a low-fat, high-fiber, and low red and processed meat diet to reduce precancerous adenomas, known as colon polyps. All revealed no reduction in polyps in the dietary intervention arms.Notably, these low-fat groups were randomized against a western diet arm, yet still revealed no benefit.
I’m happy to talk about science (so the paper referred but not named in the original quote), but appeals to authority are boring and wont move the needle. I’m genuinely happy about your concern for my health outcomes. My null hypothesis is the normal human diet is my default until proved otherwise.
Its not research, its opinion - expert opinion to be sure, but still a opinion.
The quote you listed at the top talked about a single study, but didn’t name the study. That is the only thing I’m interested in reading.
We can cite experts at each other all day, all it will do is demonstrate the current literature is inconclusive with only observational relationships and even then very small relative risk ratios <1.4.
https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/diet-and-cancer#red-meat
I’m happy to talk about science (so the paper referred but not named in the original quote), but appeals to authority are boring and wont move the needle. I’m genuinely happy about your concern for my health outcomes. My null hypothesis is the normal human diet is my default until proved otherwise.