Sophie ParkerSo it’s like this: a couple of weeks back a few posts came up at the Archives of Internal Medicine and spoke about how red and processed meat increases risks of mortality, especially if they are consumed at a higher proportion. A somewhat similar topic by Dr Yoni Freedhoff also showed up at theWeighty Mattersblog andat the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition website (it’s a research paper by Dominik Alexander from Exponent Health Sciences), though opposed by someone who felt it was against what the other research works are trying to prove. Now, something like that surely stirs up curiosity, and what came up as a conclusion is mentioned beneath.
The paper speaks about a meta-analysis, pooling together a total of six potential studies on how animal fat protein stays associated with carcinoma of the colon and the rectum. Interestingly, the finding seemed to go against the other papers in the archive that took off the stigma animal fat and protein bore on the context of carcinoma; in this paper, the subgroup analyses clearly showed that animal fat or protein intake is no way linked to the risks of colorectal cancer though the paper was intended to blame these two factors royally.
The paper of Dr. Alexander archives examined how consumption of all types of meat associates with increased chances of mortality by bundling together all types of fats (un-/poly-/saturated), though there are enough evidences that suggest the different subgroups opposing influences on general health. Therefore, overall, the bad effects are just an assumption, though the paper does make an interesting read.
Sikander@87
