Pro Scientist Explains Meat Headlines

Pro Scientist Explains Meat Headlines


You probably saw the headlines today. red meat: is it bad for us is it fine is it no biggie can scientists agree on anything so a series of statistical analyses came out this weekend and the message that’s coming out in the media is essentially that Red meat is fine. It’s no big deal. Just keep eating it. No worries Now we could go in-depth into the studies and what they mean and what they don’t but I’ll probably put you to sleep Plus, it won’t really help you because six months from now another headline is gonna come up and you’ll be confused again So instead of discussing that my new shia of these specific papers i’m gonna try to give you the tools to not be confused anymore we’ll try to inoculate you against confusion and media headlines kind of teach you how to fish instead of just Handing you this big tuna, by the way, many experts have written at length about these studies and all the specific issues So i’ll put all the links below in case you want to go in-depth the broader issue here Is this pattern? We see it every so often a new study comes out that makes a somewhat surprising claim the media jumps all over it They sound the alarm Red Alert red alert people are confused and they conclude scientists can’t agree and it’s all a joke And I’ll just keep doing what I’ve always done. How do we stop this cycle? By understanding that science is built incrementally by gradual accumulation of evidence Usually over decades the data just piles up higher and higher and a certain idea gets stronger and stronger or weaker And weaker, but that’s boring, right? No journalist wants to report on that process new study vegetables are still healthy. Just like last year This study adds to the body of evidence confirming what we already knew. Yeah Nobody’s reading that what gets views is sensationalists stuff, like everything you’ve been told about food is wrong it gets attention But it doesn’t help you experts make dietary recommendations based on all the available evidence the totality of the evidence that’s why the recommendations barely change a new study coming out gets added to that pile and interpreted in the context of all the evidence It doesn’t eliminate fifty years of knowledge If I published a study tomorrow where people who smoked more and people who smoked less have the same rate of lung cancer It doesn’t exonerate tobacco. It doesn’t mean that everything. We thought we knew about tobacco is wrong It doesn’t mean that smoking is fine after all and scientists. Can’t agree Maybe I looked at a very small number of people. Maybe I didn’t follow them long enough cancer doesn’t show up overnight Maybe they had other risky behaviors that also increase their risk of cancer we would need to look at the details of how he was done and try to understand why this Isolated study shows seemingly surprising results that seemed to go against all the available evidence. We don’t go that study from yesterday shows No difference, so ignore a century of evidence Smokey’s fine science doesn’t flip back and forth with the seasons. It’s not a fashion show Once you understand this basic idea the confusion around nutrition Largely dissipates the guidelines are essentially the same now as they were a decade ago Lots of fruits and vegetables go easy on the red meat go easy on the high fat dairy They’re identical for every major medical organization and they’re the same in every country So the next time you see that flashy headline new study broccoli now gives you cancer and bacon is now good for you Just remember it wasn’t written by a scientist. It doesn’t reflect the totality of the evidence and it was written to get views Not to improve your health knowledge is power and understanding saves lives I’ll see you on the next one