As the Studies Turn...

From "Just-Food" at www.just-food.com/news

A team of scientists is advising people to eat meat, after conducting a nutritional and anthropological study into the dietary role of fat in the ancient hunter-gatherer societies. Led by Professor Bruce Watkins, university faculty scholar at Purdue University and Director of the Center for Enhancing Foods to Protect Health, and anthropologist Loren Cordain, professor of health and exercise science at Colorado State University, researchers conducted detailed chemical analysis of the meats eaten 10,000 years ago and compared those results to the most common meats people eat today.

They found that wild game, such as venison or elk meat, as well as grass-fed beef, contain a mixture of fats (omega-6 and omega-3) that are actually very healthy and essential in proper nutrition, and, the researchers say, lower cholesterol and reduce other chronic disease risk.

Watkins explained that the balance of fats has changed dramatically in the past century: "Generally, our modern diets, especially in the past 100 years, have changed. We're consuming excess amounts of omega-6 fat. Omega-6 is found in high levels in many of the oil seed crops that we consume. It's also found in the meat of the livestock that eat these grains, as this study shows."

As Watkins explains, this shows that "with the decline of fat in the [modern] diet, the amount of fat isn't as important as the relative amounts, or ratio, of specific fats in your diet. It's a qualitative issue, not a quantitative issue."

Just In (A feature of Environmental Nutrition - see www.environmentalnutrition.com)

Meat emerged as the bad guy yet again when it comes to cancer. The research, sponsored by the National Cancer Institute, compared the dietary patterns of 124 people with esophageal cancer and 154 people with stomach cancer with 440 healthy people.

People eating a "high-meat" diet - abundant in red and processed meats - had nearly four times the risk of esophageal cancer and more than double the risk of stomach cancer compared to those eating a "healthy" diet, which had less meat and gravy and more fruits, vegetables, dark bread, cereal and fish.

The difference? The researchers note that the so-called "healthy" diet offers more cancer-protective vitamin C, carotenoids, fiber, B vitamins and omega-3 fatty acids, while the high meat diet contains more fat and carcinogens that form during cooking.

Editors note: The two above stories as they appear in headlines, appear to be contradictory ("Eat meat - No, don't"). and may contribute to a sense of frustration by consumers - another case of "they can't make up their minds," but the stories are not about the same thing. The first story is about differences in meat that come from wild or grass-fed animals versus grain-fed animals, while the second is about the impact of diets high in (one presumes) grain-fed and highly processed meats. The second study also doesn't tell us if the "high meat" diets would be less risky if people added more fruits and vegetables to those diets. In other words, it is not an assessment of the total diet and shouldn't be taken as proof of anything. While interesting, it just provides direction for further study to determine if it is the presence of meat, or the kind of meat, or the absence of plant food that causes the increased health risks.