Observational Nonsense
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Logging in or registering will improve your experience here
Main Navigation
Full-Text Search & Archives

Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.

Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2019-10-07 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Personal Health , 135 references Ignore this thread
Observational Nonsense
[Comments enabled]

Hahahahaha....

A new set of analyses published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine challenges the widespread recommendations to cut back on red and processed meats.

The prominent medical journal has also published a new recommendation from a panel of scientists, many of whom are not nutrition experts: "The panel suggests adults continue current processed meat consumption," according to the guideline paper. In other words: no need to cut back.

In response all the people who have made recommendations that have gotten you sick, given you cancer, caused obesity and diabetes at record rates are howling "oh no you're wroooooooong!"

Uh huh.

"This is perplexing, given the ... clear evidence for harm associated with high red meat intake," says Frank Hu, the chair of the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

No such evidence exists.

Observational studies are not evidence.  They can't be.  They're self-reported and cannot control for confounding factors because there is no control over the quality of the data.

"There may be a benefit [from] reducing your intake of red or processed meat, and people should know that," says Bradley Johnston, one of the authors of the new analyses.

On the other hand, "there may not be a benefit at all," Johnston says. "We're uncertain."

That's what science is; reporting, accurately, when you don't know.

But it's very hard to make money that way.

But this is completely impractical, says Harvard's Rimm. "Can you imagine the cost if you had to ... give patients red meat almost every day for a decade and then convince the other group ... not to eat meat for a decade?

Actually, is it?

We have people claiming that they're "lifetime traumatized" by a one time sausage inclusion in what they thought was a vegan dish.  I doubt it will be hard to find people that never eat meat.

Hu and his colleagues says there is a consensus already: "To improve both human health and environmental sustainability, it is important to adopt dietary patterns that are high in healthy plant-based foods and relatively low in red and processed meats."

Ah, there it is.

1% human health, 99% political bull**** aimed at yet another environmental scam.

Why aren't all these rat bastards in prison?

Go to responses (registration required to post)
 



 
Comments.......
User: Not logged on
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
User Info Observational Nonsense in forum [Market-Ticker]
Tdurden
Posts: 865
Incept: 2015-01-29

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
My bull**** detector lights up anytime the word "consensus" when what passes for "science" is discussed. I don't even want to cheapen time honored pseudo science like phrenology by lumping that dietary bull**** in with it. Maybe we call it McScience, since **** like that is to science as the McRib is to barbecue.

----------
"I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next 10 generations that some favors come with too high of a price." -Vir Cotto Babylon 5
Frat
Posts: 2077
Incept: 2009-07-15

NKY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
*Tdurden - phrenology is EXACTLY what I think of every time someone is spouting bull**** climate science and "carbon is a pollutant!" nonsense. Alchemy also comes to mind. What is it about the "opposition" that always have them dictating what someone ELSE should be doing? Can't we all just leave each other the hell alone to make our own decisions?

----------
We're ****ed. Where's Henry Bowman when you need him?
Smacktle
Posts: 1975
Incept: 2009-01-20

Texas
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I knew a vegan once. Pale as a ghost and seemed sickly all the time.

I like my meats. If I don't eat meat, I don't feel full.

PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals.

----------
The faults of the burglar are the qualities of the financier.
- George Bernard Shaw
Drifter
Posts: 354
Incept: 2016-02-11

Pacific Northwest
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Vegans/vegies are virtue signalling liars. They cheat on their diets-- google that, it's a high percentage, especially when drunk.

I'm putting my body on the line with my scientific observations: give me cholesterol, give me red meat, give me fat. Anybody that waives their finger at me can **** right off.

Colonoscopy last month was perfect.

Journalists that push this ****ing garbage, uncritically, should be in a soup line.
Thorvold
Posts: 267
Incept: 2013-09-12

NY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Per the NYT of 9/30/2019 and author Gina Kolata:

"The new reports are based on three years of work by a group of 14 researchers in seven countries, along with three community representatives, directed by Dr. Johnston. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest and did the studies without outside funding."

Non-conflicted reports will not go unpunished if the conflicted can help it:

"Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group advocating a plant-based diet, on Wednesday filed a petition against the journal with the Federal Trade Commission."

My favorite quote from the NYT article is this one:

"Despite flaws in the evidence, health officials still must give advice and offer guidelines, said Dr. Meir Stampfer, also of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health."

Kfell
Posts: 84
Incept: 2014-09-09

New Hampshire
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I agree that these studies would be incredibly difficult to partake in. Chris Kresser's point is that people who eat a lot of red meat also tend to drink more, smoke more, exercise less than folks who are vegan. It doesn't mean that a vegan has a healthier diet. the argument that a vegan diet is better for the environment, tell that to the millions of animals killed when the combined harvests the crops or the dead zone in the gulf of mexico from fertilizer run off. People can no longer think critically any more. Anyway, I took my 8 year old son out Bow hunting on Friday afternoon. Afterwards, we enjoy pork ribs that my brother raised on his farm after I slow cooked them all day. Vegans can f off.
Tickerguy
Posts: 159445
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Well that's true @Kfell -- you DO have to control for that to get reasonable comps. But it's not that hard to do.... the REAL problem is weeding out those who eat BOTH meat and fast carbs on a regular basis. That's tough, but if you don't then you haven't got a decent control group.

----------
Winding it down.
Stee_man
Posts: 209
Incept: 2011-12-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Ha ha. I just read the study these witch doctors use to claim meat is poisoning us.

First of all, the study DOES NOT say anything good or bad about meat. They are completely making that up. The study compares what they describe as high or low quality diets. But even the highest quality group derived 17-21% of calories from what they call "empty calories." Plus they ate refined grains, PUFAs, fruit and whole grains. In other words, even the healthiest groups ate a lot of junk.

The study authors seem honest. These fraudsters misrepresented that it somehow implicates red meat, when it was just one component that varied across groups. They could have made the same conclusion based on carb count. The healthier groups ate 1/3 to 1/2 as many empty calories.


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article....
Ajc1970
Posts: 1067
Incept: 2008-03-05

las vegas, nevada
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Every time I see a negative red meat study, I'll see them lump processed meats in with a good steak. And there's no mention of how the meat was prepared.

I eat steak, rare, with real butter (no veggie oils ever touch my meat). If I have a burger, no bun or 1/2 bun. If I make it myself (not always the case), no oils.

I suspect these studies are mixing in the folks like me with the folks who are eating meats like pepperoni, or eating hamburgers fried in veggie oils and surrounded by 2 big pieces of white flour.
Mjsmith
Posts: 206
Incept: 2011-12-08

United States
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Tdurden wrote..
My bull**** detector lights up anytime the word "consensus" when what passes for "science" is discussed. I don't even want to cheapen time honored pseudo science like phrenology by lumping that dietary bull**** in with it. Maybe we call it McScience, since **** like that is to science as the McRib is to barbecue.


I think you just revealed an epic branding opportunity.

From now on, everytime everywhere the opportunity comes up to publicly use the phrase "Climate McScience" use instead "Climate McScience"

.
Goldmanssack
Posts: 2318
Incept: 2009-07-08

38320 / 07849
Online
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
That linked article with the vegan is absurd. 20 year old, vegan for only 2 years, but somehow this one little sausage:

Quote:
My body is poisoned for life now, you know, she said in one of the videos, according to KentLive.com.

----------
"But like every one of the super-states that preceded it, it has one iron rule: Logic is an enemy and truth is a menace." - Rod Serling, 1961.
Mannfm11
Posts: 5602
Incept: 2009-02-28

DFW, Tx
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
The one thing that rarely gives me heartburn is a nice juicy steak. I have avoided 2 things, in my adult life. Low fat products and artificial sweetener.

I saw something once about the evolution of man into an intelligent being. It was centered around discovering fire and consuming meat. Maybe that is why we have so many Poindexter's who love fake science. Maybe, instead of drug testing, we should check to see, if they have has a ribeye lately.

----------
The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable.---John Kenneth Galbraith
Ckaminski
Posts: 5564
Incept: 2011-04-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
That's why I don't trust anyone who says they don't like bacon.

I know one vegetarian who gave up meat due to the horrible factory farming practices. She still loved bacon and admits she misses the hell out of it.

Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ