The meat is not pecadoComer red meat and processed (even walking) increases the risk of death how Much meat we eat per week?
how Much meat we can eat? The answer seemed to be clear, but, according to a new study published in the “Annals of Internal Medicine”, there seems to be a single response .
After years of warnings about the potential harm of the red meat and the processed meat, including links with cancer and heart disease , a panel of experts from seven countries, has published an article which stated that people do not need to reduce your current consumption of products such as ham, sausages or red meat .
The recommendations come from the Consortium of nutritional recommendations (NutriRECS), a group of experts-canadian, Spanish, and Polish – which describes its mission as to generate nutritional guidelines reliable “based on the values, attitudes and preferences of patients.”
The new guidelines that propose arise after you have made a thorough review of previous research on how the consumption of meat, red and processed affects the risk of developing the disease. According to their work, they found the relationship between meat consumption and the risk of heart disease, diabetes or cancer is from non-existent to small or very small .
Then, what should consumers do? The majority of the people living in North America and Western Europe eat, on average, two to four servings of red meat and processed the week . And, although it has been suggested that there would be that to reduce it, the authors of this work point out that the adults could continue to eat at their current levels, unless they decide to make a change.
A panel of experts from seven countries, has published an article which stated that people do not need to reduce your current consumption of products such as ham, sausages or red meat
For the report, researchers conducted four reviews of previous studies: a meta-analysis of 105 studies it was concluded that diets with less red meat and processed can lead to reductions small or very small in the risk of premature death from heart disease, cancer or other causes; another meta-analysis of 118 studies that also saw the possible impact of the intake reduced of meat was very small; a meta-analysis of studies that analyzed the consumption of meat and its relationship with mortality for all causes and the results cardiometabólicos and that he concluded that any association was very small; and another analysis of 12 randomized trials that compared diets with various amounts of red meat for at least six months and came to the conclusion that “diets restricted in red meat, may have little or no effect on the main results cardiometabólicos and the mortality and incidence of cancer.”
The work also included a review of studies that found that people were ‘attached to the flesh,’ and did not change their habits even when they were informed about the potentially harmful effects to the health.
In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, classified the red meat as “probably carcinogenic to humans” and the processed meat as a carcinogen
therefore, 11 of the 14 experts on the panel nutriRECS believed that, for most people, the desirable effects for the health to eat less meat , a risk potentially lower cancer and heart disease, “probably” not exceeded the undesirable effects such as the impact on quality of life or the burden of changing food preparation and eating habits.
“The study is of a depth and completeness scientific unquestionable. It is a very important job,” says ABC Health Clotilde Vázquez, head of the Service of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz. “One of the most important conclusions of all this tremendous work is to highlight the enormous difficulty of the associations-health food, by the vast number of confounding factors and other elements that make up diets various, which can mask the effect of a food group in the concrete.”, points.
Of all the analysis of hundreds of jobs with hundreds of thousands of individuals that the Panel has reviewed, added Vazquez, “they conclude that the association of the intake of meat and processed meat, with disease ( cancer, obesity, diabetes….) is weak. And, in another sense, the studies that have analyzed the patterns of power that are low in meat and meat products do not demonstrate more than soft associations with the protection of health”.
This work is not to be understood as ‘open bar’ for the t-bone steak pound journal
By that, he adds, “the weakness of the associations makes them conclude that there is that ‘put the record straight’ in the sense that it has been too much the disclosure of the association of meat-cancer, flesh-disease, now that it’s back to prudence”. Therefore, “believe there is no why to recommend a reduction in the intake of meat and meat products “.
however, the expert warns that, despite these data, “the intake of meat and meat today is much higher than the recommendations . Therefore, this work should not be understood as ‘open bar’ for the t-bone steak half a kilo daily. On the other hand, always insist that the most important thing is not to stop eating fruits ( whole), vegetables, legumes, and vegetables, whose association with the health has no controversy”.
There’s that ‘put the record straight’ in the sense that it has been too much the disclosure of the association of meat-cancer, flesh-disease, now that it’s back to prudence
But it seems that the story continues, because one of the researchers of the study shows contrary to these recommendations.
The answer was not slow in coming.
The Committee of Physicians for Responsible Medicine of EE.USA . submitted yesterday a request to the Federal Trade Commission to “correct false statements” contained in the report, characterizing them as as “a serious detriment to the public health.”
to Say that people who eat large amounts of meat will enjoy good health and do not need to change their habits is inaccurate, pointing from this committee.
For its part, the American College of Cardiology noted that it was “alarmed by the dietary recommendations imprudent” established by the study. There is strong evidence that replacing saturated fat, such as that found in the flesh, with no saturated fat is associated with a lower risk of heart disease, assure
to Affirm that people who eat large amounts of meat will enjoy good health and do not need to change their habits is inaccurate, point out from this committee
In 2015, International Agency for Research on Cancer , part of the World Health Organization, qualified red meat as “probably carcinogenic to humans” and the processed meat as a carcinogen.
For the Spanish Foundation of the Heart, with the red meat, “better less than more”. From this entity warn that the consumption of meat red should be controlled and replaced by other foods if you want to avoid the bad consequences for the cardiovascular health.
The intake of red meat, remember, is associated with an increased risk of total cardiovascular disease and cancer mortality.
