Here We Go Again: Another Meat Kills! Study

You’ve got to give the anti-meat hysterics credit for their creativity. Since they can’t prove directly that eating meat will kill you, they’ve become quite adept at stringing unrelated results together into what (almost) looks like a chain of causality.

As I explained in my Big Fat Fiasco speech, this technique is referred to as teleoanalysis. In a nutshell, it works like this: we can’t prove that A causes C, but if we can find evidence that A is linked to B and B is linked to C, we’ll go ahead and declare that A causes C.

Teleoanalysis is partly what has kept the Lipid Hypothesis alive. Studies have failed over and over to prove that a high-fat diet causes heart disease – and in fact, low-fat diets have failed to reduce heart disease in clinical trials over and over. So the anti-fat hysterics trotted out a version of teleoanalysis that looks like this:

  • High-fat diets (A) raise cholesterol (B)
  • Raised cholesterol (B) is associated with heart disease (C)
  • Therefore, a high-fat diet must cause heart disease

If this sounds logical to you, consider my own favorite version of teleoanalysis:

  • Drinking lots of water (A) causes frequent urination (B)
  • Frequent urination (B) is associated with diabetes (C)
  • Therefore, drinking lots of water causes diabetes

With that in mind, let’s take a look at yet another Meat Kills! study that’s making a splash in the media. Here are some quotes from a BBC article online:

A chemical found in red meat helps explain why eating too much steak, mince and bacon is bad for the heart, say US scientists.

A study in the journal Nature Medicine showed that carnitine in red meat was broken down by bacteria in the gut.

This kicked off a chain of events that resulted in higher levels of cholesterol and an increased risk of heart disease.

Can you spot the teleoanalysis? Here it is:

  • Red meat (A) contains carnitine, which when digested kicks off a chain of events leading to higher cholesterol (B)
  • Higher cholesterol (B) is associated with heart disease (C)
  • Therefore, red meat causes heart disease

Here’s the abstract for the study referenced in the BBC article:

Intestinal microbiota metabolism of choline and phosphatidylcholine produces trimethylamine (TMA), which is further metabolized to a proatherogenic species, trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO). We demonstrate here that metabolism by intestinal microbiota of dietary l-carnitine, a trimethylamine abundant in red meat, also produces TMAO and accelerates atherosclerosis in mice. Omnivorous human subjects produced more TMAO than did vegans or vegetarians following ingestion of l-carnitine through a microbiota-dependent mechanism. The presence of specific bacterial taxa in human feces was associated with both plasma TMAO concentration and dietary status. Plasma l-carnitine levels in subjects undergoing cardiac evaluation (n = 2,595) predicted increased risks for both prevalent cardiovascular disease (CVD) and incident major adverse cardiac events (myocardial infarction, stroke or death), but only among subjects with concurrently high TMAO levels. Chronic dietary l-carnitine supplementation in mice altered cecal microbial composition, markedly enhanced synthesis of TMA and TMAO, and increased atherosclerosis, but this did not occur if intestinal microbiota was concurrently suppressed. In mice with an intact intestinal microbiota, dietary supplementation with TMAO or either carnitine or choline reduced in vivo reverse cholesterol transport. Intestinal microbiota may thus contribute to the well-established link between high levels of red meat consumption and CVD risk.

Allow me to interpret that gobbledygook:

Humans who eat meat have more carnitine-eating bacteria in their guts and therefore produce more TMAO than vegetarians.  TMAO is associated with heart disease.  If we pump mice full of carnitine, they also produce lots of TMAO and get heart disease. So humans should cut back on meat.

More teleoanalysis. It’s just another version of this argument, which helped to establish the Lipid Hypothesis:  lard raises cholesterol, and rabbits get both high cholesterol and heart disease if they’re force-fed lard, so humans shouldn’t eat lard.

The only problem is that lard consumption was plummeting while heart-disease rates were skyrocketing.

The abstract also mentions the “well-established link” between meat consumption and heart disease. Since vegetarians are often more health-conscious in general and therefore less likely to consume sodas, donuts, candy and other junk, I’d expect them to have lower rates of heart disease than meat-eaters who consume the standard western (crap-filled) diet. But is that association consistent?

As I mentioned out in another post about yet another Meat Kills! study, here’s quote from a study titled Mortality In British Vegetarians:

The mortality of both the vegetarians and the nonvegetarians in this study is low compared with national rates. Within the study, mortality from circulatory diseases and all causes is not significantly different between vegetarians and meat eaters.

And here’s the conclusion from a study titled Dietary protein and risk of ischemic heart disease in women:

Our data do not support the hypothesis that a high protein intake increases the risk of ischemic heart disease. In contrast, our findings suggest that replacing carbohydrates with protein may be associated with a lower risk of ischemic heart disease.

In that study, the women who consumed the most protein ate 16.1% more red meat than women who consumed the least protein, but had lower rates of heart disease.

No consistency, no validity.

Enjoy your steak.

Share

99 thoughts on “Here We Go Again: Another Meat Kills! Study

  1. neal matheson

    The health bit on BBC radio 4 featured a section on this study, I only caught the end but the potential “paradox” with fish was mentioned as was another marker of heart health. So expect a new drug soon then.
    I have been suprised at the reaction of many in the Paleo world at this article thanks Tom and Chris for your critical view of it.

    And the paradoxes just keep piling up.

    Reply
  2. Ted Hutchinson

    Here is another detailed rebuttal of this paper highlighting other aspects of bad science not discussed in other blogs on this paper.
    Are Red Meat And Your Gut Flora Killing You? Or Do I Smell Some Rotten Fish?
    http://syontix.com/are-red-meat-and-your-gut-flora-killing-you-or-do-i-smell-some-rotten-fish/
    It worth reading to the end of the blog where “Competing Financial Interests” of the researchers are discussed.

    So it’s not just the TMAO-raising fish that smells rotten.

    Reply
  3. neal matheson

    The health bit on BBC radio 4 featured a section on this study, I only caught the end but the potential “paradox” with fish was mentioned as was another marker of heart health. So expect a new drug soon then.
    I have been suprised at the reaction of many in the Paleo world at this article thanks Tom and Chris for your critical view of it.

    And the paradoxes just keep piling up.

    Reply
  4. Ted Hutchinson

    Here is another detailed rebuttal of this paper highlighting other aspects of bad science not discussed in other blogs on this paper.
    Are Red Meat And Your Gut Flora Killing You? Or Do I Smell Some Rotten Fish?
    http://syontix.com/are-red-meat-and-your-gut-flora-killing-you-or-do-i-smell-some-rotten-fish/
    It worth reading to the end of the blog where “Competing Financial Interests” of the researchers are discussed.

    So it’s not just the TMAO-raising fish that smells rotten.

    Reply
  5. Ted Hutchinson

    Just in case anyone has any lingering doubts that this red meat, carnitine, study has any validity at all you may care to read this study which comes from people totally outside the paleo/low carb community.

    L-Carnitine Significantly Improves Patient Outcomes Following Heart Attack

    http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=130204&CultureCode=en

    This systematic review of the 13 controlled trials in 3,629 patients, involving 250 deaths, 220 cases of new heart failure, and 38 recurrent heart attacks, found that L-carnitine was associated with:

    · Significant 27% reduction in all-cause mortality (number needed to treat 38)

    · Highly significant 65% reduction in ventricular arrhythmias (number needed to treat 4)

    · Significant 40% reduction in the development of angina (number needed to treat 3)

    · Reduction in infarct size

    There were numerically fewer myocardial reinfarctions and heart failure cases associated with L-carnitine,

    L-carnitine is proven to be safe and is readily available over the counter. The investigators agree that the overall results of this meta-analysis support the potential use of L-carnitine in acute myocardial infarction and possibly in secondary coronary prevention and treatment, including angina.
    If it was true that Carnitine, either as a supplement or in red meat was a factor in heart disease then giving carnitine to people who have just had a stroke would make matters (their survival) worse.
    In practice carnitine improves survival.

    Reply
  6. Ted Hutchinson

    Just in case anyone has any lingering doubts that this red meat, carnitine, study has any validity at all you may care to read this study which comes from people totally outside the paleo/low carb community.

    L-Carnitine Significantly Improves Patient Outcomes Following Heart Attack

    http://www.alphagalileo.org/ViewItem.aspx?ItemId=130204&CultureCode=en

    This systematic review of the 13 controlled trials in 3,629 patients, involving 250 deaths, 220 cases of new heart failure, and 38 recurrent heart attacks, found that L-carnitine was associated with:

    · Significant 27% reduction in all-cause mortality (number needed to treat 38)

    · Highly significant 65% reduction in ventricular arrhythmias (number needed to treat 4)

    · Significant 40% reduction in the development of angina (number needed to treat 3)

    · Reduction in infarct size

    There were numerically fewer myocardial reinfarctions and heart failure cases associated with L-carnitine,

    L-carnitine is proven to be safe and is readily available over the counter. The investigators agree that the overall results of this meta-analysis support the potential use of L-carnitine in acute myocardial infarction and possibly in secondary coronary prevention and treatment, including angina.
    If it was true that Carnitine, either as a supplement or in red meat was a factor in heart disease then giving carnitine to people who have just had a stroke would make matters (their survival) worse.
    In practice carnitine improves survival.

    Reply
  7. Fauna V

    Follow the money…

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=WO_2009_073839_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=US_2010_0285517_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=US_2012_0157397_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    Reply
  8. Fauna V

    Follow the money…

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=WO_2009_073839_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=US_2010_0285517_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    http://www.patentlens.net/patentlens/patents.html?patnums=US_2012_0157397_A1&language=en&query=%28%28Bruce%20S.%20Levison%29%20in%20inventor%29&stemming=true&returnTo=structured.html%3Fquery%3D%2528%2528Bruce%2BS.%2BLevison%2529%2Bin%2Binventor%2529%26stemming%3Dtrue%26collections%3DUS_B%2CEP_B%2CAU_B%2CUS_A%2CWO_A%2CAU_A%26language%3Den%26pageLength%3D10%26fields%3Dpublication_number%2Ctitle%2Cabstract%2Cinventor%2Capplicant

    Reply
  9. Nowhereman

    This reminds me of Chris Masterjohn’s analysis of T Colin Campbell’s studies of rats being fed casein protein where he pointed out that Campbell came to a false conclusion that the protein casein and therefore all animal-based proteins by extension caused cancer because he fed the rats a purified casein and combined it with aflatoxin to form a complete protein that then induced tumor growth. However, in order to come to this conclusion, he ignored many other factors that came up during this test and subsequent other ones, such as the control rats on minimal protein levels dying of liver failure much sooner than the aflatoxin/casein rats. Campbell also ignored that while wheat protein when combined with aflatoxin did not cause cancer, when combined with lysine it also produced carcinogenic effects very similar to what the casein-aflaxtoxin did.

    It’s really just amazing what hoops a person who’s come to a foregone conclusion will do to force the data to fit their preconceived view, even going to the point of lying about their results.

    Sad but true.

    Reply
  10. Nowhereman

    This reminds me of Chris Masterjohn’s analysis of T Colin Campbell’s studies of rats being fed casein protein where he pointed out that Campbell came to a false conclusion that the protein casein and therefore all animal-based proteins by extension caused cancer because he fed the rats a purified casein and combined it with aflatoxin to form a complete protein that then induced tumor growth. However, in order to come to this conclusion, he ignored many other factors that came up during this test and subsequent other ones, such as the control rats on minimal protein levels dying of liver failure much sooner than the aflatoxin/casein rats. Campbell also ignored that while wheat protein when combined with aflatoxin did not cause cancer, when combined with lysine it also produced carcinogenic effects very similar to what the casein-aflaxtoxin did.

    It’s really just amazing what hoops a person who’s come to a foregone conclusion will do to force the data to fit their preconceived view, even going to the point of lying about their results.

    Sad but true.

    Reply
  11. Juia Wilson

    It’s getting to the point where you can’t believe anything. Any study can be skewed to whatever result they want, plus like you have mentioned the analysis is usually being done to benefit one side. Hey, I don’t want to live to be 90 anyway so give me some steak!

    Reply
  12. Juia Wilson

    It’s getting to the point where you can’t believe anything. Any study can be skewed to whatever result they want, plus like you have mentioned the analysis is usually being done to benefit one side. Hey, I don’t want to live to be 90 anyway so give me some steak!

    Reply
  13. WesSeid

    In case anyone missed the most interesting part of this study, here it is:

    The study found that saturated fats and cholesterol aren’t a major cause of heart disease! …Who knew?

    You’d think that little revelation would be the headline of every newspaper.

    I keep waiting for that …

    Reply
  14. WesSeid

    In case anyone missed the most interesting part of this study, here it is:

    The study found that saturated fats and cholesterol aren’t a major cause of heart disease! …Who knew?

    You’d think that little revelation would be the headline of every newspaper.

    I keep waiting for that …

    Reply

Leave a Reply to WesSeid Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.