The latest round of inaccurate media hype concerning health and disease is that red meat consumption causes diabetes. But is this really true and what about the study the media is quoting?
Big outlets
including the New York Times pounced on the study titled “Meat consumption and
incident of type 2 diabetes: an individual-participant federated meta-analysis….” Sounds like a done deal right? Not so fast!
The diet
information reviewed was all self-reported – huge red flag on this! Self-reported food intake is notoriously very
inaccurate. In addition, the study has
a common flaw – confusing correlation with causation. This is a frequent blind spot in many studies.
The idea
that red meat consumption causes diabetes is just one of many
possible explanations for the association the study found between red meat
consumption and diabetes.
There are literally
hundreds of other variables that could account for the increase in diabetes in
the study. For example, socioeconomic
factors are known to influence health
outcomes. For instance, high intake of
processed meats is often associated with lower income due to lower costs (think
hot dogs, cured meats). In addition,
lower income people tend to have lower access to quality healthcare which could
detect pre-diabetes and prevent progression to full diabetes.
Lower income
groups also tend to engage in lower levels of known healthy behaviors like
exercise, not smoking and not drinking alcohol. In addition, since many people believe that
meat is unhealthy, those most focused on being health often avoid meat – yet they
engage in many other healthy behaviors.
Studies
attempt to correct for these mitigating factors, but it is impossible to do this
completely or account for every factor which might play a role. Another significant factor that runs
contrary to the study conclusions is that when we adjust for BMI (body mass
index) the increased risk of diabetes is cut in half. This leaves a 10% increased risk for every
100 grams per day of unprocessed meat, 15% for every 50 grams of processed meat,
and 8% for every 100 grams per day of poultry.
Given that no study can account for all confounding variables, these
numbers are very small and cause plenty of doubt about any causal relationship
between red meat and diabetes.
In addition,
when you dig into subpopulations in the study many showed no significant
association between any form of meat and diabetes including Eastern Mediterranean
or Southeast Asian populations. More
significantly none of the regions in Europe showed significant positive association
between poultry intake and diabetes.
So long
story short – this study ads no value in terms of providing evidence that red meat consumptions causes diabetes.
At the same time this is not evidence that people should increase red meat
consumption – rather that in and of itself people should not fear that
consuming red meat will cause them to have diabetes.
As always the
best advice is to regularly exercise, avoid being overweight, avoid smoking,
moderate or eliminate alcohol intake, and focus on a whole food diet with minimal
amounts of processed foods!
No comments:
Post a Comment