Active Low-Carber Forums - Substituting healthy plant proteins for red meat lowers risk for heart disease

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)

- Low-Carb War Zone (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=137)

- - Substituting healthy plant proteins for red meat lowers risk for heart disease (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=482285)

Substituting healthy plant proteins for red meat lowers risk for heart disease

Quote:

Substituting healthy plant proteins for red meat lowers risk for heart disease

Diets that replaced red meat with healthy plant proteins led to decreases in risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD), according to a new study from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and Purdue University.

The study is the first meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials examining the health effects of red meat by substituting it for other specific types of foods.

The study was published in the journal Circulation.

"Previous findings from randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of red meat on cardiovascular disease risk factors have been inconsistent. But our new study, which makes specific comparisons between diets high in red meat versus diets high in other types of foods, shows that substituting red meat with high-quality protein sources lead to more favorable changes in cardiovascular risk factors," said Marta Guasch-Ferré, research scientist in the Department of Nutrition and lead author of the study.

The study included data from 36 randomized controlled trials involving 1,803 participants. The researchers compared people who ate diets with red meat with people who ate more of other types of foods (i.e. chicken, fish, carbohydrates, or plant proteins such as legumes, soy, or nuts), looking at blood concentrations of cholesterol, triglycerides, lipoproteins, and blood pressure -- all risk factors for CVD.

The study found that when diets with red meat were compared with all other types of diets combined, there were no significant differences in total cholesterol, lipoproteins, or blood pressure, although diets higher in red meat did lead to higher tryglyceride concentrations than the comparison diets. However, researchers found that diets higher in high-quality plant protein sources such as legumes, soy, and nuts resulted in lower levels of both total and LDL ("bad") cholesterol compared to diets with red meat.

The results are consistent with long-term epidemiologic studies showing lower risks of heart attacks when nuts and other plant sources of protein are compared to red meat, the authors said. The findings also suggest that the inconsistencies found in prior studies regarding the effects of red meat on cardiovascular risk factors may be due, in part, to the composition of the comparison diet. They recommended that future studies take specific comparisons into account.

"Asking 'Is red meat good or bad?' is useless," said Meir Stampfer, professor of epidemiology and nutrition and senior author of the study. "It has to be 'Compared to what?' If you replace burgers with cookies or fries, you don't get healthier. But if you replace red meat with healthy plant protein sources, like nuts and beans, you get a health benefit."

The authors recommended adherence to healthy vegetarian and Mediterranean-style diets, both for their health benefits and to promote environmental sustainability.

Excuse my emphasis. Don't know what came over me. :lol:

If you replace burgers with cookies and fries, yes that might not work. But if you replace cookies and fries with red meat, that might work, depending on what's left in the diet.

Replacing red meat with plant protein sources, nuts and beans--oookay. Are there studies where nuts, for instance, are just added to the diet, without worrying over its red meat content, and similar improvements in blood lipids are achieved? Is the effect from the removement of red meat, in which case, how come no benefit showed up replacing red meat with fish or chicken? Or are the improvements due to inclusion of something--"good" fats or even protein in nuts and beans, or particular types of fiber, or micronutrients that are rich in these foods?

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_rele...n-nrs010615.php

Quote:

New research shows snacking on almonds instead of a high-carb snack reduced belly fat and other heart disease risk factors

Asking what you can eat instead of red meat to make you healthier might be a decent question. Maybe almonds and other high fat nuts work. The other question asked here is, what can we eat almonds instead of to make us healthier? Are we better off eating almonds instead of red meat, or instead of "high carb snacks?"

I see people going out of their way to find something wrong with red meat. And me going out of my way to find reasons to shrug. We all have our bias. :lol:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas...90409141808.htm

Quote:

"Previous findings from randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of red meat on cardiovascular disease risk factors have been inconsistent. But our new study, which makes specific comparisons between diets high in red meat versus diets high in other types of foods, shows that substituting red meat with high-quality protein sources lead to more favorable changes in cardiovascular risk factors," said Marta Guasch-Ferré, research scientist in the Department of Nutrition and lead author of the study.

The study included data from 36 randomized controlled trials involving 1,803 participants. The researchers compared people who ate diets with red meat with people who ate more of other types of foods (i.e. chicken, fish, carbohydrates, or plant proteins such as legumes, soy, or nuts), looking at blood concentrations of cholesterol, triglycerides, lipoproteins, and blood pressure -- all risk factors for CVD.

The study found that when diets with red meat were compared with all other types of diets combined, there were no significant differences in total cholesterol, lipoproteins, or blood pressure, although diets higher in red meat did lead to higher tryglyceride concentrations than the comparison diets. However, researchers found that diets higher in high-quality plant protein sources such as legumes, soy, and nuts resulted in lower levels of both total and LDL ("bad") cholesterol compared to diets with red meat.

The underlying measures are false, so what's the point? These Harvard researchers are just relying on people continuing to believe outmoded ideas that have been comprehensively disproven. Cholesterol is not a risk factor for CVD!

I'll take the red meat!! And the nuts, and the sauted veggies!!!!

Do most people really eat a full steak as a meal??? Not in any families I know!! Lots of chips, whole grains, ice cream bars and such is what I see. Try just knocking those items off the grocery list.

Any one who doesn't want their red meat--send it my way. :wave:

The benefits of red meat is over looked in this reguard.

Quote:

Iron is a fundamental element for human health, and its deficiency is one of the main dietary deficiencies worldwide.[47] Red meat is one the most important source of heme iron, which is the absorbable form of this metal.[48] The iron content of red meat is estimated to vary from 5.8 mg in beef liver, braised (3 oz) to 2.9 mg in lean sirloin, broiled (3 oz).[49]

Can I piggy back this study here Teaser?

Quote:

SUMMARY Red meat has been associated for a long time to an increased the risk of CVDs. However, recent findings demonstrated that despite the presence of heme iron and carnitine, red meat does not significantly increase cardiovascular risk when it is assumed in recommended doses. Visible fat and preservatives are the major issues in the link between red meat and increased cardiovascular risk, thus leading to a significant causal role for preserved red meats, especially if they are consumed daily. Despite some other links have been advocated, there is still debate regarding their role

Source-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5474906/

They still caved on the sat fat angle!!

I think there are a couple of generations that don't even know how to use a fork and knife. They've grown up with nugget, highly processed mystery food.
Then there are those that don't know how to chew. Nuggets don't need much!

On plant proteins vs. red meat:
Source: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

More pablum from the usual suspects.

I'd love to unleash an analysis by Richard D. Feinman or Zoe Harcombe on the validity of the meta analysis and conclusions.

Here's an informative analysis on the health benefits of fruit and vegetables compiled by DietDoctor.com:

https://www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb...6d37d-465973449

The value here is that readers can make their own decisions regarding the plant-based portion of their diets with this information. Red meat? It's definitely a lightning rod for emotional, subjective evaluations. I have a problem with "research" claims where "studies" claim the ability to isolate and accurately characterize health outcomes for red meat consumption. Evaluating lipids, particularly LDL tests, in light of the question of whether lipids are remotely a valid health marker for heart disease renders much of this discussion moot. Then, linking this to red meat as a root cause is creativity of association at best.

Quote:

Do most people really eat a full steak as a meal???

Along these lines, I was thinking that the majority of consumed beef is probably hamburger on a bun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tess9132

Along these lines, I was thinking that the majority of consumed beef is probably hamburger on a bun.

Along with fries and a fountain drink or shake.

This is garbage science. Just move on.

https://feinmantheother.com/2015/11...eat-and-cancer/
A commentary on the WHO's red meat position, who did not post evidence,so these guys went to the research.

Quote:

So how much do you gain from eating red meat? “A useful way to look at this data is from the standpoint of conditional probability. We ask: what is the probability of dying in this experiment if you are a big meat‑eater? The answer is simply the number of people who both died during the experiment and were big meat‑eaters …. = 0.0839 or about 8%. If you are not a big meat‑eater, your risk is …. = 0.109 or about 11%.” Absolute gain is only 3 %. But that’s good enough for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meme#1

Then there are those that don't know how to chew. Nuggets don't need much!

Years ago - back in the 70s, I worked with a woman who wouldn't eat meat because she didn't like to chew. Maybe she had some tooth or jaw issues I didn't know about, but all she ever mentioned was not liking to chew. :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dodger

Along with fries and a fountain drink or shake.

That was my main complaint about Forks Over Knives; they would show a fast food meal with bun, fries, soft drink, dessert - and blame the little patty of beef for health problems. :rolleyes:

I'd better stop posting on this subject - I think my eyes are going to roll out of my head! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonnie OFS

Mush, pablum and shakes. Literally haven't been taught how to eat adult food!

Look
https://mic.com/articles/152361/how...-out#.aFFh1ubmU

Because no one knows how to cook, nor has the time!!

Best friend invited me to lunch at her house--and opened a can of soup. :lol: