Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Beginners Board
New Study, 30 precent more likely to die early
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Phil in Tupelo" data-source="post: 644259" data-attributes="member: 1425"><p>From the Editor of Drovers Journal</p><p>"As you might expect, this study drew harsh criticism from the folks who represent the folks who produce meat. But not for the reasons you might expect. James H. Hodges, executive vice president of the American Meat Institute, says single studies — such as this one — should not be used to draw major conclusions and cites results of several other studies showing that meat fits well in a balanced, healthy diet.</p><p></p><p>Hodges continues with some facts about meat that you might expect — that meat is part of a balanced diet, and is an excellent source of zinc, iron, B12 and other essential vitamins and minerals. But Hodges also sheds a little light on the way the study was conducted — which apparently was concocted in a very dark place by some very inexperienced researchers.</p><p></p><p>According to AMI, the researchers asked people to recall what they ate over the previous 12 months and to record it into a 35-page, detailed questionnaire. Notably, the front page of the questionnaire says "Answer each question as best you can. Estimate if you are not sure. A guess is better than leaving a blank." After 10 years and after receiving questionnaires only at the outset, the five-year mark and the 10-year mark, the researchers tried to correlate dietary factors with deaths.</p><p></p><p>"No doubt many participants guessed extensively in an effort to recall five years of habits and answer 35 pages of questions. Health conclusions and public policy recommendations should not be based on mere guesses," Hodges said.</p><p></p><p>I can't remember what I had for lunch yesterday — let alone over the past five years — although it's safe to say that lunch usually includes a little meat. I also took a college course on research, but, as with lunch yesterday, I don't remember the segment on how to include 5-year-old guesses in research results. — Greg Henderson, Drovers editor."</p><p></p><p>There are always two sides and it is best to hear both before taking action.</p><p>Phil in Tupelo</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Phil in Tupelo, post: 644259, member: 1425"] From the Editor of Drovers Journal "As you might expect, this study drew harsh criticism from the folks who represent the folks who produce meat. But not for the reasons you might expect. James H. Hodges, executive vice president of the American Meat Institute, says single studies — such as this one — should not be used to draw major conclusions and cites results of several other studies showing that meat fits well in a balanced, healthy diet. Hodges continues with some facts about meat that you might expect — that meat is part of a balanced diet, and is an excellent source of zinc, iron, B12 and other essential vitamins and minerals. But Hodges also sheds a little light on the way the study was conducted — which apparently was concocted in a very dark place by some very inexperienced researchers. According to AMI, the researchers asked people to recall what they ate over the previous 12 months and to record it into a 35-page, detailed questionnaire. Notably, the front page of the questionnaire says “Answer each question as best you can. Estimate if you are not sure. A guess is better than leaving a blank.” After 10 years and after receiving questionnaires only at the outset, the five-year mark and the 10-year mark, the researchers tried to correlate dietary factors with deaths. “No doubt many participants guessed extensively in an effort to recall five years of habits and answer 35 pages of questions. Health conclusions and public policy recommendations should not be based on mere guesses,” Hodges said. I can’t remember what I had for lunch yesterday — let alone over the past five years — although it’s safe to say that lunch usually includes a little meat. I also took a college course on research, but, as with lunch yesterday, I don’t remember the segment on how to include 5-year-old guesses in research results. — Greg Henderson, Drovers editor." There are always two sides and it is best to hear both before taking action. Phil in Tupelo [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Beginners Board
New Study, 30 precent more likely to die early
Top