Alan K

You might recall that I have been consistently emphasizing moderation in meat consumption for that any single type of food consumption.

I will see if I can access the Eur J Epidemiol. The most crucial thing from my perspective is to see the exclusion and inclusion criteria for various original studies in this meta analysis - and what was exact amount of read meat consumption that various studies considered high.

I am reasonably sure, that would be very telling, without the need of going into statistical associations without establishing a causal effect.

For example, what would you think of the following statement: Ownership of an S-class Mercedes or a Lexus LS is positively correlated with reduced infant mortality.

MinnMan

The Eur J Epidemiol. article is behind the SpringerLINK paywall. I can access it via an institutional subscription, but it would violate copyright for me to post it here to a public site. PM me if you can't otherwise access it, and I can send you the pdf.

Alan K

I do have access to this journal and here’s what I have gleaned through.

A total of approx 165,000 publications identified by literature searches, of which 1,656 recognized by relevant identifiers (presumably read meat, processed meat, cancer development). For further selection, a category is simply stated “not relevant”, not fully spelled out. Finally, 148 studies are included in the meta-analysis.

If I understand their description correctly, a single serving meal includes 100gm red meat, 50gm processed meat - this could also be total daily amount (not very clear). The do claim that low and high amounts were inconsistent in various studies… big surprise!
The ration of low to high meat consumption was 2.56 (95% CI).

Now let’s get back to some simple math. A total of 700gm read meat and 350 gm of processed per week person. And the ones who eat “higher” amounts are consuming roughly 1.8 kg kg read meat and 0.9 kg processed meat per person per week. This is, by any stretch of imagination, overeating meat and specially processed meat.

And as I have already mentioned, it’s the excess of indulgence that is harmful for your health. Even drinking way too much water can mess up your electrolyte balance and ruin your kidneys!

If you want to get deeper, feel free to analyze whether or not other comorbidity factors, such as obesity, hypertension, diabetes etc were similarly represented in both groups (low meat versus high eaters) and if various medications for existing conditions, that themselves are carcinogenic, equally present in the two cohorts. And if any individuals were immnosuppressed due to an existing condition or immunosuppressed therapeutically to manage symptoms of their existing diseases, and if so, were they equally distributed all across the groups. If there were more immunosuppressed individuals in high meat eating group, that alone will explain high incidence of cancer in them.
In any event, here’s the conclusion from your trusted publication:

“Conclusion: Findings from this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies provide evidence that lower consumption of red meat and processed meat could be a key modifiable lifestyle factor in reducing the types of cancer identified in this paper.”

So it seems to me that if a person eats about 100gm red meat and 50gm processed meat a day and not eat 2.56 time more, he or she should be perfectly fine!

Please feel free to let me know if I misunderstood your trusted meta-analysis.

Thanks for all the fish! 😉

Alan K

I have copied only the conclusion here. Often some segments are made available to entice people to pay up… which fortunately, I don’t. I know that the abstract is always available from the NIH and if our federal funds were used for the study, authors must provide at least a version of full study, even if it isn’t the original publisher’s version.

In case if you or the admin here thinks, copying conclusion is violation, I shall delete it or paraphrase it.

Thanks for the offer, though.

PeteHski

I thought BPA had been largely phased out of cans in recent years. Is that not the case?

PeteHski

My cousin's ex-husband lived entirely on meat and would not eat a single vegetable, except for chips (as in fries). I remember discussing it with him when they got married and it stuck in my mind. Anyway he sadly died of some kind of stomach cancer (I don't recall exactly what type) in his mid 30s and I immediately recalled this conversation. Maybe his cancer was completely unrelated to diet, but I kind of doubt it!

Alan K

Probably not; but there is such a thing as eating a balanced diet with a large variety of nutritious items available to us in our area. I personally, try to consume as little food items as possible that is shipped across the nation or worse, across the globe (specially from China, the worst offenders when it comes to honest disclosures in food labeling). Unfortunately, in the interest of continued profiteering (and to fulfill whims of some of us to have what we want and when we want), our own government does not mendate declaring the origin of the food. Some stores, particularly coops, to their credit,, voluntarily provide this information.

wolfchild

That's a pretty extreme diet, doesn't sound healthy at all, fries are one of the worst things to eat...Human body needs foods high in fiber,.. I do eat meat daily but I buy it fresh and cook it myself at home. I avoid processed meats such as bacon, hot dogs, salami, fast food and cold cuts and I also make sure to include things such as black beans, various types of veggies and oatmeal daily in my diet...The latest craze out there is a fad diet called " carnivore diet ", I just don't know how anybody can live on meat alone and nothing else.

Alan K

Yes, after major efforts, BPA was finally phased out. The canning industry now claims that the replacement synthetic polymer they use now is “safe”. Where have I heard that before! 😏

Masses are easily led… the same industry also asserted that cans with BPA were safe, the FDA even set a limit of “safe” amount of BPA at, I think, 40 or 50 microgram per kg body weight for a substance that has no business being in your body.

Let’s just wait and see few years or decades (I wouldn’t be there, surely dead for reasons other than eating canned food or cooking in plastic coated pans).

I recall my wife being quite happy when the first set of Teflon coated pans came out - with a drop of fat, you can cook and nothing sticks. We had the conversation that there is no such thing as completely inert synthetic polymer, which will not degrade at high temperature. She wasn’t too enthusiastic about getting rid of her Teflon coated pans and pots but she did. A couple of decades later, as this information became more commonly acknowledged, the clever advertising industry started selling pots and pans that are now ceramic coated, the more you pay, the more cleverly designed shapes on surface are given to you. In this hoopla, the majority suspends their critical thinking ability and simply not think how the ceramic layer is applied on aluminum - synthetic glues!

But everyone is using them, how can it possibly can be bad! 😉😜

As for my preferences, we use well conditioned cast iron pans (almost as good as most of the non stick pans with plastics). They do need a very small amount of oil (or fat of your choice), but fat really isn’t bad when used in small quantities. We also use laminated (copper or copper core) stainless steel pots and pans, though my favorite are thick (3-4 mm) copper pots/pans coated with Zinc. Unlike stainless steel, copper spreads heat quickly so they heat very evenly… and the best part is no plastics in any of them!

Alan K

There is something else in this diet - large quantities of fat.

This digest essentially programs your body into ketosis, which is very taxing to your system - liver and kidneys, particularly.
But it has caught on in some quarters because of its results that appear rather rapidly. Obese and morbidly obese people can lose significant amount of fat on this diet. But it should never be used without supervision of a competent physician to monitor various parameters critical for one’s health.

At some level, it is essentially like starving when your body starts consuming it’s own-self, with an added safety that in carnivore diet, you are providing proteins to it so your own muscle mass is not consumed for survival. The other significant difference is that your brain is still living off glucose, synthesized by the liver. In prolonged starvation (about two weeks), your brain finally switches to using ketones (degradation products of fats and amino acids) but if you have starved that long, you have a very limited time to be rescued from dying… not a good situation by anyone’s standards!

terrymorse 

I just checked a can of black beans from the pantry, "NON BPA":

MinnMan

BPA has been largely phased out. Other polymers are used. Safer? Not clear.

https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/ne...-food-phaseout

I know it's better to eat wholly from unprocessed foods - as in, not buying canned beans but cooking them from scratch. I do emphasize shopping around the market perimeter, as many would advise. But I'm going to have to retire before I forego all of the time-saving conveniences of modern packaged foods.

terrymorse 

For real? I thought this "ceramic coating" (it's not ceramic, just a thin layer of silica, aka "glass") was just a fancy term for baked on glass enamel (BTW, enamel is a sturdy and un-sticky surface found on pricey cookware like Le Creuset).

Why do they need glues when baking silica onto aluminum?

Trakhak

From a quick search (not that I don't trust Alan K, but):

Is ceramic non-stick cookware safe?
Is ceramic cookware non-toxic? Yes, ceramic pans are naturally nonstick and generally produced without PTFE, PFAS, and PFOAs. Quality ceramic pans will last a few years with proper care, and will only need to be replaced if the nonstick coating wears out.

rsbob 

Mr Robot says: “When baking silica onto aluminum, glues may be used to ensure a strong bond between the two materials. Gluing two pieces of metal together requires a different approach than using glue with paper, as pressure needs to be applied to ensure a secure bond . While the specific type of glue used may vary depending on the application, it is important to choose a glue that is suitable for bonding metal and can withstand the high temperatures involved in the baking process. The use of glues in this context helps to create a durable and long-lasting bond between the silica and aluminum surfaces.”

Alan K

Probably easier and cheaper… slurry is sprayed with synthetic glue and then baked at about 600F. The “ceramic” sticks to the metal at this point. Bulk of the excess glue is evaporated but I’m just not sure if nothing is left on the pan and layer between glass beads and aluminum never leaches their ingredients as they get heated repeatedly.
Metal oxides can interact with silica on a different level but for that to happen, temp has to be considerably higher, I think > 1000… which is more complex a process and complexity translates into higher cost and less profits. 😉

1. You can still buy 100 year old Griswold cast iron pans for about $100 or less.
2. Buy a cheaper contemporary cast iron from US, grind it smooth or mill it (if you have access to a setup), pay someone else to do it for you and then condition it.
3. Use stainless steel with a layer of of another metal (Al, Cu) for rapid heat dissipation.
4. Go gor solid Copper

Cost all of the 4 options would differ and will be higher than throw away non-stick pans but they will last you for the rest of life and beyond, if your children get interested in making their meals. 😉

Alan K

Give it a decade or two for them to admit that it is replacement to clam the people, not necessarily safer.

I agree that it does take effort and a bit of planning but when our children were very young, we became accustomed to making larger amounts of beans in a pressure cooker and other things that take time to prepare. We saved them in meal-sized portions and could take a pack out as and when needed. A 2-week usage was quite simple.
One of us will take care of gardening and cooking bulk things on the weekend and the other would run with children for their various team sports (soccer, baseball, swimming, skiing)- you reminded me, like a chicken with it’s head cut off… so there’s that!
But really didn’t mind… it was fun.

MinnMan

Solid copper pots release copper to the food, which is toxic. So-called "safe" copper pots are lined with stainless steel or some other metal with less reactivity. Yes, small amounts of copper actually have nutritional value, but large amounts are released from unlined copperware, particularly when in contact with acidic foods. Go ahead and read up on it.

Alan K

Yes, sorry didn’t make it clear enough.
Copper toxicity is a given and no one would cook in pots with exposed Cu. For hundreds of years people have known this and these pots are coated with Tin, Zinc or Silver. I prefer Zinc over Tin. Silver coating gets a little expensive. In recent years, a very thin layer of stainless steel is bonded on the inside.
I can imagine, getting them electroplated with gold (about 10-20 microns) where they would become virtually inert… a bit pricey and it will have to be a custom job. 😉

MinnMan

Gold would scratch too easily. Very soft.

wolfchild

Getting back to the topic of chocolate. What is your daily dose ?....For me it's 12 squares per day which is half of Cadbury Milk Chocolate Bar which I eat as a late afternoon snack at work... If I am having a really hard intense day at work I will eat 24 squares which is an entire chocolate bar.

Alan K

True, it is no softer than Silver or Zinc, in fact all three metals are equally soft. Copper is marginally harder but not much. Tin, which is/was conventionally used to coat copper pots is much more soft, yet successfully used for a very long time.

In our family, we have always preferred Zinc ever since I can remember (grand-parents)… and from stories grand-mother told us, stretching back to the turn of the previous century. Zinc and Silver both look very nice esthetically, silver does tarnish and requires more maintenance work. When it comes to cooking at higher temperatures, silver has a distinct advantage over tin and zinc coating, tin being the worst.

I should have gotten a few pots electroplated when gold was $250/ounce. Now at about $2,000/ounce, it would be impossible.
I do remember once figuring out that an 8 quart pot, when electroplated at 10 micron on the inside and 5 microns on the outside, would need about 2oz of gold, assuming I could find someone to undertake the project. 😉

And one could pass such kitchen implements from generation, inspiring them to eat good and healthy.

Alan K

At this point, a big fat zero. 😑

Around Christmas, we might get some good ones but those wouldn’t last long. So we always fall way below to qualify for any daily allowances.

MinnMan

What's that you say? Half a Cadmium bar?

Alan K

My two favorite chocolate sources:

1. https://www.chocolatefetish.com This is a local nice place in Asheville, North Carolina. They do ship but only when it’s not hot.

2. https://www.teuscher.com This place has been famous for a very long time and has stores all over the world. The interesting thing about this company is that have created an image of being small where only little old ladies are working to make chocolates for you. At least that is what is my impression when I went to their store in Geneva and Zurich at different occasions. I have not visited their stores in US and order online only around Christmas when it is cold.

Both places ship for next day delivery. Very good chocolates, fairly large selection but they are more of a treat for us and not for everyday consumption.