(Reuters) -
Eating bacon, sausage, hot dogs and other processed meats raise the
risk of heart disease and diabetes, U.S. researchers said on Monday in a
study that identifies the real bad boys of the meat counter.
Eating unprocessed beef, pork
or lamb appeared not to raise risks of heart attacks and diabetes, they
said, suggesting that salt and chemical preservatives may be the real
cause of these two health problems associated with eating meat.
The
study, an analysis of other research called a meta-analysis, did not
look at high blood pressure or cancer, which are also linked with high
meat consumption."To lower risk of heart attacks and diabetes, people should consider which types of meats they are eating," said Renata Micha
of the Harvard School of Public
Health, whose study appears in the journal Circulatio."Processed meats such as bacon, salami, sausages, hot dogs and processed deli meats may be the most important to avoid," Micha said in a statement.
Studies rarely look for differences in risk between processed and unprocessed red meats, Micha said.
She and colleagues did a systematic review of nearly 1,600 studies from around the world looking for evidence of a link between eating processed and unprocessed red meat and the risk of heart disease and diabetes.
They defined processed meat as any meat preserved by smoking, curing or salting, or with the addition of chemical preservatives. Meats in this category included bacon, salami, sausages, hot dogs or processed deli or luncheon meats.
Unprocessed red meat included beef, lamb or pork but not poultry.
They found that on average, each 1.8 oz (50 grams) daily serving of processed meat a day -- one to two slices of deli meats or one hot dog -- was associated with a 42 percent higher risk of heart disease and a 19 percent higher risk of developing diabetes.
They found no higher heart or diabetes risk in people who ate only unprocessed red meats.
4 comments:
Renata's study was a meta-analysis of studies that usually rely on recall. Coupled together, one cannot say anything definitive about her study except that it's interesting and should be studied further.
That said, the definition of "processed" would have to be spelled out.
Meta-analyses have a few weaknesses. A good meta-analysis of a bunch of bad studies for example, will still produce poor results.
Anyway, it's an interesting topic. Not sure why you are running around "triumphant".
bla bla bla...one cannot say anything definitive about her study except that it's interesting and should be studied further...
bla bla bla...bla bla bla - DMG
HAHAHAHA! HA!
Anonymous, even our host agrees with me when I say get a goddamn name before you talk shit.
But I'll forgive that. Tell me all you know about results of meta-analyses and recall bias.
Or is that too difficult for you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7Id9caYw-Y&feature=email
kid is cool. baby dv lol.
Post a Comment