Nutrition Science VS Epidemiological Studies: Misleading Info Gets Airtime
Summary
TLDRThis video script addresses the controversy surrounding red meat consumption and its alleged health risks. It highlights the limitations and inaccuracies in epidemiological studies, which often rely on self-reported food frequency questionnaires. The speaker encourages viewers to consider the personalization of nutrition and to observe the long-term health effects of different diets on influencers. The script also emphasizes the importance of randomized control trials for accurate nutritional research and suggests that an omnivorous diet rich in whole foods may be beneficial.
Takeaways
- đ„© Humans have been consuming meat for approximately 2 million years, suggesting a long evolutionary history with meat in our diets.
- đ« Common perceptions link red meat consumption with health issues like colon cancer and clogged arteries, but these concerns are often based on limited evidence.
- đ The article by David Clarfield from the US Department of Agriculture discusses the limitations and inaccuracies in epidemiological studies regarding meat and health.
- đ Many nutrition epidemiology studies are not designed to determine causality and rely on self-reported food frequency questionnaires, which are often unreliable.
- đ Examples given illustrate the difficulty in accurately self-reporting food intake, such as recalling the number of servings of pineapple or hot dogs consumed over a certain period.
- 𧏠The script mentions that changes in diet over time can affect study results, as people may shift between different dietary patterns like keto, paleo, and carnivore diets.
- đ The domestication of cattle occurred over 8,000 years ago, indicating a significant period of human adaptation to consuming red meat.
- đ Recent studies show a decline in red meat consumption compared to the past, despite ongoing debates about its health effects.
- đ The script challenges the accuracy of studies linking red meat to chronic conditions by highlighting the unreliability of food frequency questionnaires.
- 𧏠It emphasizes the importance of randomized control trials in nutrition research, acknowledging the difficulty in conducting such studies.
- đ€ Personalization in diet is crucial, as different individuals may respond differently to various dietary patterns, and observing long-term health outcomes in real people can provide valuable insights.
- đïžââïž The video concludes with a note on the importance of exercise and the potential benefits of supplements like creatine for enhancing workout performance.
Q & A
What is the main concern people have regarding red meat consumption?
-People are concerned that consuming red meat can lead to health issues such as colon cancer, clogged arteries due to saturated fat, and other chronic conditions.
Who is David Clarfield and what is his role in the discussion?
-David Clarfield is a researcher for the US Department of Agriculture, and he is discussed as the author of an article that highlights the limitations in epidemiological studies regarding the relationship between meat consumption and health.
Why are epidemiological studies criticized in the context of nutrition?
-Epidemiological studies are criticized because they often rely on self-reported food frequency questionnaires, which are inherently inaccurate and not well-equipped to determine the direction of causality.
What is the issue with self-reported food frequency questionnaires in nutrition studies?
-Self-reported food frequency questionnaires are problematic because they depend on individuals' memory and honesty, which can lead to inaccuracies in reporting dietary habits, making it difficult to establish strong associations or causality.
How do people's diets change over time, and how does this affect nutritional studies?
-People's diets can change significantly over time, with shifts towards higher fiber or low fiber diets, or changes to keto, paleo, or carnivore diets. These changes make it challenging to draw consistent conclusions from nutritional studies.
What is the significance of the domestication of cattle in relation to human health and diet?
-The domestication of cattle over 8,000 years ago indicates that red meat has been a part of human diets for a significant period, suggesting that humans have evolved with the consumption of red meat and its associated nutrients.
Why is it difficult to conduct randomized control trials in nutrition studies?
-Randomized control trials are difficult to conduct in nutrition studies because of the complexity of dietary habits, the influence of confounding variables, and the ethical considerations of controlling what people eat over long periods.
What is the importance of personalized nutrition and observing long-term health outcomes?
-Personalized nutrition is important because individual responses to diets can vary widely. Observing long-term health outcomes, such as body composition, blood work, mental health, and physical fitness, can provide more reliable insights into the effectiveness of different dietary approaches.
What is the role of micronutrients like carnitine, creatine, zinc, and B12 in human health, as mentioned in the script?
-Micronutrients like carnitine, creatine, zinc, and B12 play crucial roles in various bodily functions, including brain health, energy production, and immune system support. They are often found in animal products like red meat and are highlighted as important for human health in the script.
What advice does the speaker give regarding the consumption of creatine and exercise performance?
-The speaker suggests that if you are exercising, not taking creatine could mean missing out on an opportunity to enhance workouts and exercise performance, and they promote a product by Myoscience as a way to supplement creatine.
What is the speaker's stance on the general approach to diet and health?
-The speaker advocates for an omnivorous diet that is protein-forward and enriched with whole, real foods, diverse vegetables and fruits, and fermented foods. They emphasize the importance of individualized dietary choices based on personal health markers and long-term health outcomes.
Outlines
đ„© Red Meat Misconceptions and Nutritional Research
This paragraph discusses the common misconceptions about red meat consumption and its alleged link to health issues such as colon cancer and clogged arteries. The speaker introduces an article by David Clarfield, a researcher for the US Department of Agriculture, which critiques the limitations of epidemiological studies on this topic. The article points out the unreliability of self-reported food frequency questionnaires, which are often inaccurate and make it difficult to establish causality. It also mentions how changes in diet over time can affect study results. The speaker encourages viewers to access the article for a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between red meat and health.
đ The Limitations of Nutritional Epidemiology
The second paragraph delves into the inherent inaccuracies of nutritional epidemiology, particularly when it comes to studying the effects of red meat on health. The speaker emphasizes the unreliability of food frequency questionnaires and the difficulty of conducting randomized control trials in this field. The paragraph also highlights the lack of pre-specified hypotheses in many nutritional studies, which can lead to false positives and misinterpretations of data. The speaker suggests observing the long-term health outcomes of individuals who follow certain diets, as a more personal and perhaps more accurate way to assess dietary impacts on health. The paragraph concludes with a call to consider the limitations of epidemiological studies when evaluating the health effects of foods like red meat.
Mindmap
Keywords
đĄRed Meat
đĄEpidemiological Studies
đĄSelf-Reported Food Frequency Questionnaires
đĄCausality
đĄBias
đĄNutrition Epidemiology
đĄConfounding Variables
đĄRandomized Control Trials (RCTs)
đĄPersonalized Nutrition
đĄOmnivorous Diet
đĄCreatine
Highlights
Humans have been consuming meat for approximately 2 million years, yet there is ongoing controversy regarding its health effects.
Perception issues exist around red meat consumption and its association with health problems like colon cancer and clogged arteries.
David Clarfield's article from the US Department of Agriculture discusses the limitations in epidemiological studies on meat and health.
Epidemiological studies often lack the power to determine causality due to biases and limitations in data collection methods.
Self-reported food frequency questionnaires are highlighted as a significant source of inaccuracy in nutritional epidemiology.
The difficulty in quantifying dietary exposure is compared to the ease of measuring habits like smoking or alcohol consumption.
Changes in diet over time complicate the analysis of long-term health effects in nutritional studies.
Domestication of cattle and the historical consumption of red meat is contrasted with current dietary trends.
Recent studies and USDA statistics show a decline in red meat consumption despite ongoing health controversy.
The role of micronutrients and macronutrients found in red meat, such as carnitine, taurine, zinc, and B12, is emphasized for cognitive and physical development.
Nichols et al. (2015) critique the accuracy of traditional dietary analysis in epidemiology, pointing out inherent inaccuracies.
Epidemiological nutrition studies often lack a pre-specified hypothesis, leading to potential false positives.
The call for randomized control trials in nutrition research due to the difficulty in conducting them and the limitations of current methods.
Personalized nutrition and observing long-term health outcomes in individuals following different diets is suggested as a more reliable approach.
The importance of an omnivorous diet rich in whole foods, including fruits, vegetables, and proteins, for overall health is discussed.
Bias in epidemiological studies and the unreliability of food frequency questionnaires are emphasized for future considerations.
The recommendation to critically assess new nutritional research and mainstream media claims about food and health.
A parting note on the benefits of creatine for exercise performance and a promotion for Myoscience's creatine-enhanced electrolyte sticks.
Transcripts
as you likely know humans have been
eating meat for the better part of 2
million years but a lot of people are
still scared and think or have their
perception that if they have red meat
they will get colon cancer they will
have all these health related issues
clogged arteries from the saturated fat
but I want to share with you an article
that I think might help clear up some of
the controversy this is from David
clarfield who is a researcher for the US
Department of Agriculture now what I
like about this article titled research
gaps in evaluating the relationship of
meat and heal is he talks about a lot of
the limitations in the epidemiological
studies and as many of you know and I
just wanted to share this with you um I
would encourage you if you have the
interest to download this article which
I will link in the show notes in the
description of this YouTube video as
well as the iTunes podcast below but he
talks about a lot of the issues with
nutrition epidemiology because it turns
out that these studies are not powered
and set up to look at the direction of
causality suggesting that there is a lot
of bias and limitations in the data
because many epidemiological studies
rely upon self-reported food frequency
questioners and many of these
questioners are inherently inaccurate
like for example how many servings of
pineapple have you had in the last month
how many hot dogs have you had in the
last two weeks how many servings of red
meat have you had it's really hard for
people to look and hard for
epidemiologists as he talks about in
this to quantify the effect of this
exposure whether that and that exposure
is really simple in the context of
alcohol or smoking if someone were to
serve a me how many cigarettes have you
had in the last year it would be zero
very easy to do but when they if I were
to be asked how many servings of mango
have I had in the last year I I couldn't
honestly tell you maybe it's 10 15 three
I have no idea and that gets really
really uh hard to make any strong
associations in terms of the direction
of causality because he highlights
multiple studies there's the nurses
health study as many of you know uh and
how individuals change their diet over
time so even some of these follow-up
studies whether there is an intervention
or people are uh tracked over time
oftentimes people change their diets you
know they have higher fiber diets uh for
a month or two or a year and low fiber
diets maybe they go keto and paleo and
then carnivore and back and you know a
lot of people change their diets over
time so we we don't really have good
data on the fact and again these studies
like to highlight the fact that red
meats is the driving factor for all
these uh chronic conditions and so forth
but he highlights in the study that
domestication of cattle occurred 8 thou
over 8,000 years ago so as I mentioned
numerous studies I remember anthrop
anthropology class and so forth uh in
college you know we we talked about how
humans our brains got bigger because we
developed tools to eat uh animals and
and consume red meat and the the
micronutrients and macronutrients and so
forth in the meat carnitine torine zinc
B12 all these things are not found uh in
in most plant products that enhanced the
size and the cognition of ancestral
humans and then we started to
domesticate cattle around 8,000 years
ago so we've been having red meat for a
long period of time but as you can see
from this image here this was a recently
published study looking at USDA
statistics we are having less and less
red meat in compared to years past we're
having a lot more poultry and other
sources of protein but not red meat and
yet we still see these studies that come
out and say that red meat consumption is
really problematic it's linked with
colon cancer I have friends of friends
who often reach out to me saying you
know hey look I've been told that I
should go on a plant-based diet because
it will lower my cholesterol and it will
not raise my risk of having cancer and
you're promoting or advocating for all
the different you know nutrients
conditionally essential nutrients torine
creatine zinc and so forth uh in red
meat that's not found in plants well
people are confused by this and they
don't often realize that most of the
studies that these policy makers and
census statement papers uh talk about
are using data from food frequency
questionnaires and these are inherently
inaccurate and now he highlights a paper
by Nichols at all in 2015 he says the
authors who are epidemiologists
concluded by writing that all
traditional dietary analysis in
epidemiology share one strong but
incorrect assumption that exposures such
as Foods or nutrients were measured with
great accuracy so as I mentioned you
might hear data from the en Hayes
follow-up study the nurse's health study
the health professionals follow-up study
that found that red meat is linked with
increased risk of Cancer all cause
mortality heart disease specific
mortality these food frequency
questioners are inherently inaccurate
they're an imprecise measure and another
aspect that David brings up here is
these epidemiological nutrition studies
don't have a pre-specified hypothesis
meaning they just run the numbers and
often times these false positives can
occur in the data and they are not
statistically power to account for all
of the confounding variables that might
lead to false positives in the research
so I think that's really important that
we understand that epidemiology
especially as it's related to nutrition
is inherently inaccurate so when people
start to talk to you about well red meat
is linked with cancer well if you uh
don't eat enough fiber all these bad
things are going to happen uh many of
these epidemological studies um are
relying upon measurements that are not
so ACC accurate and that's why we do
need randomized control trials but it
really is hard to conduct randomized
control trials so where does that leave
us I like to look at people on the
internet influencers people who are
eating a certain way and just see how
they look over time is this individual
do they reflect a healthy body
composition look at their blood work see
how their mental health uh is going over
time their hair loss or uh uh various
aging objective biomarkers of Aging
start to look at these proxies over time
their Fitness parameters are they
increasing or decreasing body
composition all these things are proxies
to see if a way of eating is promoting
health and I think this is where getting
a little bit personalized here we can
all eat a certain way for a short period
of time and it won't necessarily acutely
affect our long-term Health but when we
start to see uh you know people age over
time and there's been many influencers
over the years and so um there was a Dr
John McDougall who recently pass passed
away who was a a real big proponent of a
high starch diet towards the end of his
life it was pretty obvious that he was
suffering from cognitive decline there
was an interview with John duard who is
a promotant of a vegetarian diet but
acknowledges in this interview and I can
cut to that clip that some people just
don't do well on a on a vegetarian diet
and McDougall uh was adamant that he's
never seen a single person that didn't
do well on a vegan diet here's that
clip I could go on and on and on and on
if you you you say they have their
research on their site and they're
articulate fine put them on
video don't look at their words don't
listen to their words let's see what
they look like they look like they're
dying because of what they believe and
eat so as you can see here nutrition is
very personalized and this is why I
implore many of you to try on different
diets and see what works for you I think
most of of the evidence suggests that we
should be eating an omnivorous style
diet eat fruits vegetables that agree
with you if you can eat grains and not
gain body weight and have good metabolic
health and a healthy body composition
then so be it but I think most healthy
omnivorous diets are protein forward and
enriched in whole Real Foods in a
diverse array olives fermented foods
different vegetables and fruits again
that agree with you in your gut health
and Foster healthy digestion so as David
talks about here there is a lot of bias
that can occur in epidemiological
studies so going forward when you're
presented with a new article or there's
a a mainstream media article about how
red meat is bad or this food is great or
or there was something about sweeteners
recently most of these are
epidemiological studies that as he talks
about here by Hill itall uh as well as
uh Nicholas at all epidemiology doesn't
have really good accurate measur ments
we cannot rely upon food frequency
questionnaires so I just wanted to share
this with you hopefully you have access
uh to this paper a really good review so
that you can have these tools at your
fingertips when you're health
professional or someone that you work
with or someone in your family is saying
hey I know you've lost weight I know
you've improved your blood work you're
getting stronger you're getting more fit
but the foods you're eating are really
really bad you can say hey look uh the
way that the so-called experts and
pundants are saying these foods are bad
is they're relying upon inherently
inaccurate food frequency questioners so
I wanted you to understand some of the
limitations of this way of analyzing the
data hopefully you found this video
helpful and because exercise is really
important just wanted to have this
parting words of advice if you are
exercising you're not taking creatine
you're really missing out on an easy way
to enhance your workouts and your
exercise performance you can save on the
creatine enhanced electrolyte sticks by
myoscience this is a phenomenal intra or
preworkout there's close to 900 reviews
from people just like you who take this
around exercise and get great benefits
you can check that over over at
myoscience dcom and save with good
podcast at checkout we'll catch you on a
future video down the road
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)