Item — HN Reader

There's a quote from the original NYT article that I found interesting.

> “It is important to recognize that this group reviewed the evidence and found the same risk from red and processed meat as have other experts,” she said in a statement. “So they’re not saying meat is less risky; they’re saying the risk that everyone agrees on is acceptable for individuals.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/health/red-meat-heart-can...

1 comments

I don't think that's an accurate summary of the research. One key aspect of their review is that they don't give much weight to (blatantly confounded) correlational studies. Looking at RCTs that "same risk" is tiny and not statistically significant. For example, looking at all-cause mortality, correlational studies find a hazard ratio of .93, while RCTs find a hazard ratio of .99.

They are definitely saying meat is less risky.