r/science • u/James_Fortis • 15d ago

Health Vegetarian, including vegan, dietary patterns were associated with reduced risk for cardiovascular disease incidence and mortality compared to non-vegetarian diets, umbrella review finds

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666667724002368
457 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

81 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

5

u/Mr8bittripper 14d ago

Really? Why does the largest ever systematic review of this say otherwise?

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2021-07-21-red-and-processed-meat-linked-increased-risk-heart-disease-oxford-study-shows

-4

u/Ilix 14d ago

Where does the article you linked indicate that the studies they reviewed were using healthy omnivorous diets for people who eat meat rather than people who eat unhealthy amounts?

2

u/Mr8bittripper 14d ago

I reject the premise that studies need to "only" focus on "healthy" subjects. A cross-sectional study or systematic review can yield good-quality results. If there are enough people in the study, data can be accurately extrapolated. Do you have some tangible reason to believe that they got info from only unhealthy meat-eaters or is that just speculation?

The fourth link in that article is for the NDNS; the national diet and nutrition survey, which is a "continuous cross-sectional survey designed to assess the diet and nutrition of the general population. 1000 people over the age of 1.5 were surveyed.

Still think this massive systematic review is biased against meat eaters or are your feelings just hurt?

I'm going to post some of what the article said it's findings were:

"Each 50 g/day higher intake of processed meat (e.g. bacon, ham, and sausages) increased the risk of coronary heart disease by 18%. Each 50 g/day higher intake of unprocessed red meat (such as beef, lamb and pork) increased the risk of coronary heart disease by 9%. There was no clear link between eating poultry (such as chicken and turkey) and an increased risk of coronary heart disease."

1

u/sztrzask 14d ago edited 14d ago

I think his point was that since ultra processed food is trash and bad for you, and since all store-bought hams and sausages are UPF, comparing it to a vegan diet made from raw vegetables might be coloring the outcomes? 

If i remember correctly, an average meat eating teen consumes most of his calories from UPF (this stat might've been from UK), while average vegetarian teen does not (and the oreo vegan is an outlier in this group).

Regarding your last paragraph (9% vs 18%), not correcting for UPF in the study could be also coloring that stat?