Nutrition Science VS Epidemiological Studies: Misleading Info Gets Airtime

Summary

This 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

• 🥩 Humans have been consuming meat for approximately 2 million years, suggesting a long evolutionary history with meat in our diets.
• 🚫 Common perceptions link red meat consumption with health issues like colon cancer and clogged arteries, but these concerns are often based on limited evidence.
• 📚 The article by David Clarfield from the US Department of Agriculture discusses the limitations and inaccuracies in epidemiological studies regarding meat and health.
• 🔍 Many nutrition epidemiology studies are not designed to determine causality and rely on self-reported food frequency questionnaires, which are often unreliable.
• 🍍 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.
• 🧬 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.
• 🐄 The domestication of cattle occurred over 8,000 years ago, indicating a significant period of human adaptation to consuming red meat.
• 📉 Recent studies show a decline in red meat consumption compared to the past, despite ongoing debates about its health effects.
• 🔗 The script challenges the accuracy of studies linking red meat to chronic conditions by highlighting the unreliability of food frequency questionnaires.
• 🧬 It emphasizes the importance of randomized control trials in nutrition research, acknowledging the difficulty in conducting such studies.
• 👤 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.
• 🏋️‍♂️ 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

00:00

🥩 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.

05:01

🔍 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.

Keywords

💡Red Meat

Red meat refers to meat from mammals, such as beef, pork, and lamb, which is typically high in protein and certain nutrients like iron and zinc. In the video, the speaker discusses the controversy surrounding red meat consumption and its perceived health risks, such as colon cancer and clogged arteries due to saturated fat. The script mentions that despite these concerns, there is a lot of misinformation and bias in the studies that link red meat to health issues.

💡Epidemiological Studies

Epidemiological studies are research methods used to identify factors that may cause diseases or health conditions in a population. The video script critiques these studies for their limitations in evaluating the relationship between meat consumption and health, pointing out that they often rely on self-reported data which can be inaccurate, and they may not adequately account for confounding variables.

💡Self-Reported Food Frequency Questionnaires

Self-reported food frequency questionnaires are tools used in nutrition research to gather data on an individual's dietary habits. The script highlights the inaccuracy of these questionnaires, as people often cannot accurately recall the quantity and frequency of their food intake, which can lead to unreliable data in studies examining the health effects of red meat consumption.

💡Causality

Causality refers to a relationship between an event (the cause) and a second event (the effect), where the second event is a result of the first. The video emphasizes that many epidemiological studies are not designed to determine the direction of causality, meaning they cannot definitively prove that red meat causes health issues, only that there is an association.

💡Bias

Bias in research refers to systematic errors that can lead to conclusions that are not representative of the true state of affairs. The script discusses how bias can occur in nutritional epidemiology, particularly when studies are not pre-specified with a hypothesis and when they rely on inaccurate self-reported data.

💡Nutrition Epidemiology

Nutrition epidemiology is a branch of epidemiology that focuses on the distribution and determinants of dietary habits in populations and their impact on health. The video script points out the inherent inaccuracies in this field, especially when it comes to quantifying the effects of specific foods like red meat on health outcomes.

💡Confounding Variables

Confounding variables are factors that can affect the relationship between the variables being studied. In the context of the video, confounding variables could be other aspects of diet or lifestyle that might influence health outcomes, which epidemiological studies may not be statistically powered to account for, leading to potential false positives.

💡Randomized Control Trials (RCTs)

Randomized control trials are a type of scientific experiment that aim to reduce bias by randomly assigning participants to either a treatment or control group. The script suggests that RCTs would be a more reliable method to study the effects of red meat on health, but acknowledges the difficulty in conducting such trials in the field of nutrition.

💡Personalized Nutrition

Personalized nutrition refers to the idea that dietary needs and responses to food can vary greatly among individuals. The video script encourages viewers to try different diets and observe their own health responses, rather than relying solely on broad epidemiological findings.

💡Omnivorous Diet

An omnivorous diet is one that includes a variety of foods from both plant and animal sources. The speaker in the video suggests that a healthy diet might be protein-forward and include a diverse array of whole foods, including red meat, which has been part of the human diet for thousands of years.

💡Creatine

Creatine is a naturally occurring substance found in muscle cells that helps to supply energy during high-intensity exercise. The video script mentions creatine as a nutrient found in red meat that can enhance workout performance, suggesting that avoiding red meat could mean missing out on this benefit.

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