A LONG THREAD
๐๐๐๐๐๐
https://t.co/Z29AhuiiBC (all hyperlinked to the original public statements in this Google Doc)
More from Health
I applaud the #EUCancerPlan *BUT* caution: putting #meat ๐ฅฉ (a nourishing, evolutionary food) in the same box as ๐ฌ to solve a contemporary health challenge, would be basing policy on assumptions rather than robust data.
#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!
THREAD๐
1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).
But, letโs have a closer look at all this! ๐
2/ First, meat being โassociatedโ with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.
Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.
3/ Thatโs because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).
Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they
4/ Whatโs captured here is sociology, not physiology.
Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who donโt adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.
That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.
#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!
THREAD๐
\U0001f534LIVE \U0001f4c5Today \u23f012:00 CET
— EU_HEALTH - #EUCancerPlan (@EU_Health) February 3, 2021
We are presenting today the #EUCancerPlan as part of a strong \U0001f1ea\U0001f1fa#HealthUnion
Follow the presentation live here: https://t.co/Cr8ATvzNkg#WorldCancerDay pic.twitter.com/zdByuklWV6
1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).
But, letโs have a closer look at all this! ๐
2/ First, meat being โassociatedโ with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.
Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.
3/ Thatโs because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).
Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they
4/ Whatโs captured here is sociology, not physiology.
Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who donโt adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.
That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.
