Classic Theme Restorer brings back the drop down search engine list that they removed. I'm not one of those people who critiques every decision that Mozilla makes, but I was disappointed when they removed the about:config string that allowed you to retain the search engine list.
By issuing randomized queries to common search-engines, TrackMeNot obfuscates your search profile(s) and registers your discontent with surreptitious tracking.
You don't need Disconnect any longer since Firefox integrated Tracking Protection into the browser.
Enable Tracking Protection about:config
privacy.trackingprotection.enabled = true
For that matter, the OP contradicts earlier studies that showed overweight (but not obese) people live longer than normal weight. This matches with the obesity paradox, where obese people are more likely to have problems, but when they do, they are more likely to survive than a normal weight person with the same problem.
For that matter, the OP contradicts earlier studies that showed overweight (but not obese) people live longer than normal weight. This matches with the obesity paradox, where obese people are more likely to have problems, but when they do, they are more likely to survive than a normal weight person with the same problem.
It's hard to respond directly to this claim, since you only cite heresay and not any sort of clinical studies with equally adjusted population controls. However, we are discussing obesity and not simply being "overweight". If you are simply stating that a slightly above normal BMI doesn't equate to higher overall mortality, then you are relatively correct since this class would fall below class 1 and higher obesity. The majority of studies however find a positive correlation between any increases in BMI (above the mean), and overall mortality.
Association of All-Cause Mortality With Overweight and Obesity Using Standard Body Mass Index Categories: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Katherine M. Flegal, PhD; Brian K. Kit, MD; Heather Orpana, PhD; Barry I. Graubard, PhD
JAMA. 2013;309(1):71-82. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.113905.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1555137+
Overweight, Obesity, and Mortality from Cancer in a Prospectively Studied Cohort of U.S. Adults Eugenia E. Calle, Ph.D., Carmen Rodriguez, M.D., M.P.H., Kimberly Walker-Thurmond, B.A., and Michael J. Thun, M.D.
N Engl J Med 2003; 348:1625-1638April 24, 2003DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021423
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021423
Overweight, Obesity, and Mortality in a Large Prospective Cohort of Persons 50 to 71 Years Old Kenneth F. Adams, Ph.D., Arthur Schatzkin, M.D., Tamara B. Harris, M.D., Victor Kipnis, Ph.D., Traci Mouw, M.P.H., Rachel Ballard-Barbash, M.D., Albert Hollenbeck, Ph.D., and Michael F. Leitzmann, M.D.
N Engl J Med 2006; 355:763-778August 24, 2006DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa055643
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa055643#t=article
All of my handful of references above are peer-reviewed and constitute the state of the art of nutritional science.
Nature isn't "mainstream" enough? Getting an article published in Nature is considered to be one of the highlights of a scientists career.
BJM (British Medical Journal) is the premier nutritional science peer-reviewed journal in Europe.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition focuses on major unbiased clinical studies, and is also peer reviewed.
The American Diabetes Assocation should be taken very seriously, since they actually receive funding from big-ag itself. Going so far as to attack meat is attacking the very hand that feeds them. That's how seriously they take it.
The International Journal of Obesity is peer-reviewed, and seems to be a good source considering we are discussing obesity.
The American Journal of Epidemiology is peer reviewed and has an impact factor of 12 out of 172. That's pretty freaking good if you're a publishing scientist, but it is very hard to get a paper accepted since it is nearly the top of the field.
If you don't believe in science, then perhaps the evidence isn't very strong. For everyone else, start your investigation here:
Diet Patterns and Mortality: Common Threads and Consistent Results Marjorie L. McCullough
Epidemiology Research Program, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA
J. Nutr. June 1, 2014. vol. 144 no. 6 795-796
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/144/6/795.long
"Meat intake may be related to weight gain because of its high energy and fat content."
from Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study. Vergnaud AC1, Norat T, Romaguera D, Mouw T, May AM, Travier N, Luan J, Wareham N, Slimani N, Rinaldi S, Couto E, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault MC, Cottet V, Palli D, Agnoli C, Panico S, Tumino R, Vineis P, Agudo A, Rodriguez L, Sanchez MJ, Amiano P, Barricarte A, Huerta JM, Key TJ, Spencer EA, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Büchner FL, Orfanos P, Naska A, Trichopoulou A, Rohrmann S, Hermann S, Boeing H, Buijsse B, Johansson I, Hellstrom V, Manjer J, Wirfält E, Jakobsen MU, Overvad K, Tjonneland A, Halkjaer J, Lund E, Braaten T, Engeset D, Odysseos A, Riboli E, Peeters PH.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug;92(2):398-407. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28713. Epub 2010 Jun 30.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20592131?dopt=Abstract
So I have no strong reason to defend meat consumption, but I have been confronted with the vegetarian and vegan arguments from various people over the years, and I've spent a lot of time reading about the matter. For every study you cite, I could cite another that contradicts or qualifies the findings.
So do it. Cite non-industry funded research in peer reviewed journals to contradict me. Why just say you can?
The problem with "modern nutritional science" is that it's trying to break down very complex systems and isolate a single variable within a huge set of possible human situations. Thus, there are literally hundreds of possible confounding factors that make the conclusions of your studies suspect.
If you actually compared "apples to apples" in terms of people and diets, just isolating meat consumption, would you see such an effect on obesity? I don't know, but I'd bet LOTS of money that if there is an effect, it's a LOT smaller than most of these studies claim. Maybe meat consumption is itself a contributing factor to obesity problems, but it's far from the only one... and I'm not convinced yet from studies that it's even a major one.
This is the power of modern nutrition studies that are based on large populations, across long time spans. They are income adjusted, lifestyle adjusted, and fine tuned to the point that you can compare apples to apples. The Adventist Study is a prime example of this, since you have a relatively cohesive group with similar lifestyles, but with varying degrees of meat consumption from lacto/ovo/fish vegetarians all the way to pure vegans. They have actually quantified the risk factor of adding every individual "meat" product to a diet, and vegans come in with the lowest heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.
Below are a handful more studies with lifestyle and income adjustments that all suggest that meat/dairy is the primary cause of the major diseases we are discussing. Even when you adjust to include "junk-food vegans", you see that they come out ahead. It's not just processed foods that are to blame, although an increased consumption of processed foods is linked to elevated heart disease in all populations.
M L McCullough. Diet patterns and mortality: common threads and consistent results. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):795-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24717365
M A Martinez-Gonzalez, A Sanchez-Tainta, D Corella, J Salas-Salvado, E Ros, F Aros, E Gomez-Gracia, M Fiol, R M Lamuela-Raventos, H Schroder, J Lapetra, L Serra-Majem, X Pinto, V Ruiz-Gutierrez, Ramon Estruch for the PREDIMED Group. A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May 28;100(Supplement 1):320S-328S.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871477
J Reedy, S M Krebs-Smith, P E Miller, A D Liese, L L Kahle, Y Park, A F Subar. Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):881-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24572039
G E Fraser, D J Shavlik. Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11434797
Thousands of peer-reviewed papers based on the large-scale studies below support the treating of lifestyle diseases by reducing or eliminating animal product consumption, paired with an increased consumption of whole plant-based foods. These are clinically valid paths to eliminating the diseases, which are most often more effective than prescription drugs, which are geared toward relieving symptoms (e.g. statins) but not the underlying causes of disease.
Large scale, long-term studies:
PREDIMED Studies: http://www.predimed.es/publica...
Epidemiological studies show that populations with low meat consumption have lower life expectancy.
Cite a non-industry sponsored clinical study showing this in a peer reviewed journal. And find one that's adjusted for income. I'll save you time--you won't.
When humans stop eating meat and switch to whole-food plant based diets, the rates of all leading causes of death (obesity, cancer, heart disease, and pretty diseases of inflammation) drop. To anyone with a scientific mind, modern nutritional-science's data should pretty much indict animal based foods as the direct cause of obesity, along with the consumption of heavily processed foods. It's no wonder that the nations with the highest meat consumption have the highest rates of lifestyle diseases like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc.
A tiny sample of the tens of thousands of papers stemming from clinical studies of meat's role in disease
Non-industry funded Research
Meat consumption is associated with obesity and central obesity among US adults International Journal of Obesity (2009) 33, 621–628; doi:10.1038/ijo.2009.45; published online 24 March 2009
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v33/n6/abs/ijo200945a.html
Diet and body mass index in 38000 EPIC-Oxford meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans International Journal of Obesity (2003) 27, 728–734. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802300
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v27/n6/abs/0802300a.html
Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study. Vergnaud AC1, Norat T, Romaguera D, Mouw T, May AM, Travier N, Luan J, Wareham N, Slimani N, Rinaldi S, Couto E, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault MC, Cottet V, Palli D, Agnoli C, Panico S, Tumino R, Vineis P, Agudo A, Rodriguez L, Sanchez MJ, Amiano P, Barricarte A, Huerta JM, Key TJ, Spencer EA, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Büchner FL, Orfanos P, Naska A, Trichopoulou A, Rohrmann S, Hermann S, Boeing H, Buijsse B, Johansson I, Hellstrom V, Manjer J, Wirfält E, Jakobsen MU, Overvad K, Tjonneland A, Halkjaer J, Lund E, Braaten T, Engeset D, Odysseos A, Riboli E, Peeters PH.
Am J Clin Nutr August 2010. vol. 92 no. 2 398-407
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/92/2/398.short
Type of Vegetarian Diet, Body Weight, and Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes Serena Tonstad, Terry Butler, Ru Yan, Gary E. Fraser. Diabetes Care May 2009, 32 (5) 791-796; DOI: 10.2337/dc08-1886
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/5/791.short
What all of those studies share is confirming a link between meat consumption and cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, diseases of inflammation, and the list could go on. Some, like the Adventist Study and China Study, can even break down the risks of adding each particular kind of meat. Since within the Adventist communities you not only have vegans and lacto-ovo vegetarians, but you also have vegan+eggs, vegans+fish, vegans+eggs/fish, vegans+chicken+eggs+fish, etc. With such a large study base, they were able to record the risk factor of adding each individual "meat" component to a diet. The longest-lived and lowest-diseased group were the vegans. The same can be said of the China Study.
These are all very large scale (both in time and population) studies so it isn't surprising that a large number of vegetarians had to be included. Also, they have to include meat eaters (high, medium, and low) and lacto-ovo vegetarians as controls and for comparison. You also generally won't find hundreds of thousands of vegans easily. As a result of the huge amount of data collected in these studies, thousands of papers have materialized interpreting their data. Not one or two, but thousands. It is hard to fathom how anyone could take a serious look at the results and not come to the conclusion that meat eating, along with an increased consumption of processed foods, is the cause of the leading causes of death in developed countries.
The world is polluted with blogs claiming that science has it wrong, and journalists are happy to line up since their publications are paid directly by big-ag, big-dairy, and processed food companies like Philip Morris. Popular health writers as well are all paid off, as well as a number of scientists and "health advocacy" lobbies and NGOs. Looking beyond these biased sources though leads to the clinical results that all point to the same general conclusions: meat and dairy consumption are causing serious harm that can be effectively reversed by the integration of a higher proportion of whole fruits and vegetables.
Really? Then you should be able to easily cite them.
1.) Post your peer-reviewed criticisms of PREDIMED and the other large-scale studies. You'll have to go to industry funded research or blogs to do this, because the link between meat eating and heart-disease/cancer/obesity is well established in the literature.
2.) That is really low hanging fruit. The myth dates back to a 1936 article that is now used primarily as a basis for the billion dollar Fish Oil industry:
I M Rabinowitch. Clinical and Other Observations on Canadian Eskimos in the Eastern Arctic. Can Med Assoc J. 1936 May;34(5):487-501.
Here is a tiny portion of the peer-reviewed scientific research that contradicts those early observational reports:
J G Fodor, E Helis, N Yazdekhasti, B Vohnout. "Fishing" for the origins of the "Eskimos and heart disease" story: facts or wishful thinking? Can J Cardiol. 2014 Aug;30(8):864-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
P Bjerregaard, T K Young, R A Hegele. Low incidence of cardiovascular disease among the Inuit--what is the evidence? Atherosclerosis. 2003 Feb;166(2):351-7.
M R Zimmerman. The paleopathology of the cardiovascular system. Tex Heart Inst J. 1993;20(4):252-7.
J Dyerberg, H O Bang, N Hjorne. Fatty acid composition of the plasma lipids in Greenland Eskimos. Am J Clin Nutr. 1975 Sep;28(9):958-66.
E C Rizos, E E Ntzani, E Bika, M S Kostapanos, M S Elisaf. Association between omega-3 fatty acid supplementation and risk of major cardiovascular disease events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2012 Sep 12;308(10):1024-33. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11374.
R De Caterina. n-3 fatty acids in cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 23;364(25):2439-50.
That article you linked closes in support of modern research that all point to a whole foods, plant based diet as the treatment for heart disease, cancer, obesity, etc:
"Instead, if you want significant health benefits, adopt a McDougall, Ornish, Esselstyn, Fuhrman, Barnard or Pritikin* diet, which are not simply about avoiding animal products, but are about avoiding unhealthy foods in general, and focusing on the healthiest ones. These programs are consistent and coherent and take a "whole" approach, and produce solid benefits in the published research."
Chris Kresser is not a doctor: http://chriskresser.com/about/ "is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine"
Translation: He's a journalistic writer and doesn't hold a degree in medicine. He also apparently does not provide references to claims in his writing.
Dr. Mercola's number one recommendation in all of his books is to eat less meat and more vegetables:
"Dr. Mercola’s Total Health Program: The Proven Plan to Prevent Disease and Premature Aging, Optimize Weight and Live Longer! "
"Effortless Healing: 9 Simple Ways to Sidestep Illness, Shed Excess Weight, and Help Your Body Fix Itself"
"Take Control of Your Health (2007, with Kendra Degen Pearsall)"
And your health-essentials link has no author which makes me more than a little suspicious. Although they do provide a link to their trusted physicians if you need to get some prescriptions written.
Interesting that she could come to that conclusion... From her own site: http://drkaayladaniel.com/abou... "serves on the Board of Directors of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fun"
Translations: she is paid to support diary.
Peer-reviewed scientific research strongly supports a shift to a vegan diet if health is a concern, and this knowledge is nothing new. The list of references below took me 5 minutes to compile, and could be expanded to thousands of papers by simply following the wake of papers published following every new large-scale clinical study of the link between diet and health. All point to meat consumption and processed foods as the cause of the health crisis faced in developing countries, and an increased intake of whole fruits and vegetables as a path of treatment.
M L McCullough. Diet patterns and mortality: common threads and consistent results. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):795-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24717365
M A Martinez-Gonzalez, A Sanchez-Tainta, D Corella, J Salas-Salvado, E Ros, F Aros, E Gomez-Gracia, M Fiol, R M Lamuela-Raventos, H Schroder, J Lapetra, L Serra-Majem, X Pinto, V Ruiz-Gutierrez, Ramon Estruch for the PREDIMED Group. A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May 28;100(Supplement 1):320S-328S.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871477
J Reedy, S M Krebs-Smith, P E Miller, A D Liese, L L Kahle, Y Park, A F Subar. Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):881-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24572039
G E Fraser, D J Shavlik. Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11434797
Next time you're on Facebook, pay attention to how the popular videos in your newsfeed are edited. Is the most interesting image the first thing you see? And does that trick get you to stop scrolling and watch?
Translation: We believe that our readers are fucking morons.
I was under the impression that a hardware upgrade was going to be sold for PS4 owners, and a new console would also be made that includes the upgraded GPU. This would be similar to the 32X, and Sega even planned a console that included the 32X and Sega CD hardware called the Sega Neptune.
It is in fact exactly like the 32X, which supported all Genesis games and provided graphical improvements to 32X games and a small number of (gastly) Sega CD/32X titles. Playstation 4 Plus could just as easily be called Playstation 5 Lite, since it will function exactly the same economically. It's a stop-gap between generations.
The hardware add-on era is back and, frankly, we should be surprised that this business model is being pursued. It shows just how unprepared Sony and MS are for new contenders at this stage.
Slashdot Mirror
X-Notifier is a great way to get email updates from lots of different accounts.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/xnotifier/
Classic Theme Restorer brings back the drop down search engine list that they removed. I'm not one of those people who critiques every decision that Mozilla makes, but I was disappointed when they removed the about:config string that allowed you to retain the search engine list.
Classic Theme Restorer
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/classicthemerestorer/
Everyone should be installing TrackMeNot to pollute the search engine result tracking pool:
TrackMeNot
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/trackmenot/
By issuing randomized queries to common search-engines, TrackMeNot obfuscates your search profile(s) and registers your discontent with surreptitious tracking.
You don't need Disconnect any longer since Firefox integrated Tracking Protection into the browser.
Enable Tracking Protection
about:config
privacy.trackingprotection.enabled = true
For that matter, the OP contradicts earlier studies that showed overweight (but not obese) people live longer than normal weight. This matches with the obesity paradox, where obese people are more likely to have problems, but when they do, they are more likely to survive than a normal weight person with the same problem.
For that matter, the OP contradicts earlier studies that showed overweight (but not obese) people live longer than normal weight. This matches with the obesity paradox, where obese people are more likely to have problems, but when they do, they are more likely to survive than a normal weight person with the same problem.
It's hard to respond directly to this claim, since you only cite heresay and not any sort of clinical studies with equally adjusted population controls. However, we are discussing obesity and not simply being "overweight". If you are simply stating that a slightly above normal BMI doesn't equate to higher overall mortality, then you are relatively correct since this class would fall below class 1 and higher obesity. The majority of studies however find a positive correlation between any increases in BMI (above the mean), and overall mortality.
Association of All-Cause Mortality With Overweight and Obesity Using Standard Body Mass Index Categories: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Katherine M. Flegal, PhD; Brian K. Kit, MD; Heather Orpana, PhD; Barry I. Graubard, PhD
JAMA. 2013;309(1):71-82. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.113905.
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1555137+
Overweight, Obesity, and Mortality from Cancer in a Prospectively Studied Cohort of U.S. Adults
Eugenia E. Calle, Ph.D., Carmen Rodriguez, M.D., M.P.H., Kimberly Walker-Thurmond, B.A., and Michael J. Thun, M.D.
N Engl J Med 2003; 348:1625-1638April 24, 2003DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa021423
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021423
Overweight, Obesity, and Mortality in a Large Prospective Cohort of Persons 50 to 71 Years Old
Kenneth F. Adams, Ph.D., Arthur Schatzkin, M.D., Tamara B. Harris, M.D., Victor Kipnis, Ph.D., Traci Mouw, M.P.H., Rachel Ballard-Barbash, M.D., Albert Hollenbeck, Ph.D., and Michael F. Leitzmann, M.D.
N Engl J Med 2006; 355:763-778August 24, 2006DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa055643
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa055643#t=article
All of my handful of references above are peer-reviewed and constitute the state of the art of nutritional science.
Nature isn't "mainstream" enough? Getting an article published in Nature is considered to be one of the highlights of a scientists career.
BJM (British Medical Journal) is the premier nutritional science peer-reviewed journal in Europe.
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition focuses on major unbiased clinical studies, and is also peer reviewed.
The American Diabetes Assocation should be taken very seriously, since they actually receive funding from big-ag itself. Going so far as to attack meat is attacking the very hand that feeds them. That's how seriously they take it.
The International Journal of Obesity is peer-reviewed, and seems to be a good source considering we are discussing obesity.
The American Journal of Epidemiology is peer reviewed and has an impact factor of 12 out of 172. That's pretty freaking good if you're a publishing scientist, but it is very hard to get a paper accepted since it is nearly the top of the field.
If you don't believe in science, then perhaps the evidence isn't very strong. For everyone else, start your investigation here:
Diet Patterns and Mortality: Common Threads and Consistent Results
Marjorie L. McCullough
Epidemiology Research Program, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA
J. Nutr. June 1, 2014. vol. 144 no. 6 795-796
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/144/6/795.long
"Meat intake may be related to weight gain because of its high energy and fat content."
from
Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study.
Vergnaud AC1, Norat T, Romaguera D, Mouw T, May AM, Travier N, Luan J, Wareham N, Slimani N, Rinaldi S, Couto E, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault MC, Cottet V, Palli D, Agnoli C, Panico S, Tumino R, Vineis P, Agudo A, Rodriguez L, Sanchez MJ, Amiano P, Barricarte A, Huerta JM, Key TJ, Spencer EA, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Büchner FL, Orfanos P, Naska A, Trichopoulou A, Rohrmann S, Hermann S, Boeing H, Buijsse B, Johansson I, Hellstrom V, Manjer J, Wirfält E, Jakobsen MU, Overvad K, Tjonneland A, Halkjaer J, Lund E, Braaten T, Engeset D, Odysseos A, Riboli E, Peeters PH.
Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Aug;92(2):398-407. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28713. Epub 2010 Jun 30.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20592131?dopt=Abstract
So I have no strong reason to defend meat consumption, but I have been confronted with the vegetarian and vegan arguments from various people over the years, and I've spent a lot of time reading about the matter. For every study you cite, I could cite another that contradicts or qualifies the findings.
So do it. Cite non-industry funded research in peer reviewed journals to contradict me. Why just say you can?
The problem with "modern nutritional science" is that it's trying to break down very complex systems and isolate a single variable within a huge set of possible human situations. Thus, there are literally hundreds of possible confounding factors that make the conclusions of your studies suspect.
If you actually compared "apples to apples" in terms of people and diets, just isolating meat consumption, would you see such an effect on obesity? I don't know, but I'd bet LOTS of money that if there is an effect, it's a LOT smaller than most of these studies claim. Maybe meat consumption is itself a contributing factor to obesity problems, but it's far from the only one... and I'm not convinced yet from studies that it's even a major one.
This is the power of modern nutrition studies that are based on large populations, across long time spans. They are income adjusted, lifestyle adjusted, and fine tuned to the point that you can compare apples to apples. The Adventist Study is a prime example of this, since you have a relatively cohesive group with similar lifestyles, but with varying degrees of meat consumption from lacto/ovo/fish vegetarians all the way to pure vegans. They have actually quantified the risk factor of adding every individual "meat" product to a diet, and vegans come in with the lowest heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.
Below are a handful more studies with lifestyle and income adjustments that all suggest that meat/dairy is the primary cause of the major diseases we are discussing. Even when you adjust to include "junk-food vegans", you see that they come out ahead. It's not just processed foods that are to blame, although an increased consumption of processed foods is linked to elevated heart disease in all populations.
M L McCullough. Diet patterns and mortality: common threads and consistent results. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):795-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24717365
M A Martinez-Gonzalez, A Sanchez-Tainta, D Corella, J Salas-Salvado, E Ros, F Aros, E Gomez-Gracia, M Fiol, R M Lamuela-Raventos, H Schroder, J Lapetra, L Serra-Majem, X Pinto, V Ruiz-Gutierrez, Ramon Estruch for the PREDIMED Group. A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May 28;100(Supplement 1):320S-328S.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871477
J Reedy, S M Krebs-Smith, P E Miller, A D Liese, L L Kahle, Y Park, A F Subar. Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):881-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24572039
G E Fraser, D J Shavlik. Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11434797
Thousands of peer-reviewed papers based on the large-scale studies below support the treating of lifestyle diseases by reducing or eliminating animal product consumption, paired with an increased consumption of whole plant-based foods. These are clinically valid paths to eliminating the diseases, which are most often more effective than prescription drugs, which are geared toward relieving symptoms (e.g. statins) but not the underlying causes of disease.
Large scale, long-term studies:
PREDIMED Studies: http://www.predimed.es/publica...
Epidemiological studies show that populations with low meat consumption have lower life expectancy.
Cite a non-industry sponsored clinical study showing this in a peer reviewed journal. And find one that's adjusted for income. I'll save you time--you won't.
When humans stop eating meat and switch to whole-food plant based diets, the rates of all leading causes of death (obesity, cancer, heart disease, and pretty diseases of inflammation) drop. To anyone with a scientific mind, modern nutritional-science's data should pretty much indict animal based foods as the direct cause of obesity, along with the consumption of heavily processed foods. It's no wonder that the nations with the highest meat consumption have the highest rates of lifestyle diseases like obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc.
A tiny sample of the tens of thousands of papers stemming from clinical studies of meat's role in disease
Non-industry funded Research
Meat consumption is associated with obesity and central obesity among US adults
International Journal of Obesity (2009) 33, 621–628; doi:10.1038/ijo.2009.45; published online 24 March 2009
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v33/n6/abs/ijo200945a.html
DIET, OBESITY, AND RISK OF FATAL PROSTATE CANCER
Am. J. Epidemiol. (1984) 120 (2): 244-250. 1.
http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/120/2/244.short
Diet and body mass index in 38000 EPIC-Oxford meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans
International Journal of Obesity (2003) 27, 728–734. doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0802300
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v27/n6/abs/0802300a.html
Prevalence of obesity is low in people who do not eat meat.
Key T, Davey G. BMJ: British Medical Journal. 1996;313(7060):816-817.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2352221/
Meat consumption and prospective weight change in participants of the EPIC-PANACEA study.
Vergnaud AC1, Norat T, Romaguera D, Mouw T, May AM, Travier N, Luan J, Wareham N, Slimani N, Rinaldi S, Couto E, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault MC, Cottet V, Palli D, Agnoli C, Panico S, Tumino R, Vineis P, Agudo A, Rodriguez L, Sanchez MJ, Amiano P, Barricarte A, Huerta JM, Key TJ, Spencer EA, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Büchner FL, Orfanos P, Naska A, Trichopoulou A, Rohrmann S, Hermann S, Boeing H, Buijsse B, Johansson I, Hellstrom V, Manjer J, Wirfält E, Jakobsen MU, Overvad K, Tjonneland A, Halkjaer J, Lund E, Braaten T, Engeset D, Odysseos A, Riboli E, Peeters PH.
Am J Clin Nutr August 2010. vol. 92 no. 2 398-407
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/92/2/398.short
Type of Vegetarian Diet, Body Weight, and Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes
Serena Tonstad, Terry Butler, Ru Yan, Gary E. Fraser. Diabetes Care May 2009, 32 (5) 791-796; DOI: 10.2337/dc08-1886
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/5/791.short
What all of those studies share is confirming a link between meat consumption and cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obesity, diseases of inflammation, and the list could go on. Some, like the Adventist Study and China Study, can even break down the risks of adding each particular kind of meat. Since within the Adventist communities you not only have vegans and lacto-ovo vegetarians, but you also have vegan+eggs, vegans+fish, vegans+eggs/fish, vegans+chicken+eggs+fish, etc. With such a large study base, they were able to record the risk factor of adding each individual "meat" component to a diet. The longest-lived and lowest-diseased group were the vegans. The same can be said of the China Study.
These are all very large scale (both in time and population) studies so it isn't surprising that a large number of vegetarians had to be included. Also, they have to include meat eaters (high, medium, and low) and lacto-ovo vegetarians as controls and for comparison. You also generally won't find hundreds of thousands of vegans easily. As a result of the huge amount of data collected in these studies, thousands of papers have materialized interpreting their data. Not one or two, but thousands. It is hard to fathom how anyone could take a serious look at the results and not come to the conclusion that meat eating, along with an increased consumption of processed foods, is the cause of the leading causes of death in developed countries.
The world is polluted with blogs claiming that science has it wrong, and journalists are happy to line up since their publications are paid directly by big-ag, big-dairy, and processed food companies like Philip Morris. Popular health writers as well are all paid off, as well as a number of scientists and "health advocacy" lobbies and NGOs. Looking beyond these biased sources though leads to the clinical results that all point to the same general conclusions: meat and dairy consumption are causing serious harm that can be effectively reversed by the integration of a higher proportion of whole fruits and vegetables.
Really? Then you should be able to easily cite them.
1.) Post your peer-reviewed criticisms of PREDIMED and the other large-scale studies. You'll have to go to industry funded research or blogs to do this, because the link between meat eating and heart-disease/cancer/obesity is well established in the literature.
2.) That is really low hanging fruit. The myth dates back to a 1936 article that is now used primarily as a basis for the billion dollar Fish Oil industry:
I M Rabinowitch. Clinical and Other Observations on Canadian Eskimos in the Eastern Arctic. Can Med Assoc J. 1936 May;34(5):487-501.
Here is a tiny portion of the peer-reviewed scientific research that contradicts those early observational reports:
J G Fodor, E Helis, N Yazdekhasti, B Vohnout. "Fishing" for the origins of the "Eskimos and heart disease" story: facts or wishful thinking? Can J Cardiol. 2014 Aug;30(8):864-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
P Bjerregaard, T K Young, R A Hegele. Low incidence of cardiovascular disease among the Inuit--what is the evidence? Atherosclerosis. 2003 Feb;166(2):351-7.
M R Zimmerman. The paleopathology of the cardiovascular system. Tex Heart Inst J. 1993;20(4):252-7.
J Dyerberg, H O Bang, N Hjorne. Fatty acid composition of the plasma lipids in Greenland Eskimos. Am J Clin Nutr. 1975 Sep;28(9):958-66.
E C Rizos, E E Ntzani, E Bika, M S Kostapanos, M S Elisaf. Association between omega-3 fatty acid supplementation and risk of major cardiovascular disease events: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2012 Sep 12;308(10):1024-33. doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11374.
R De Caterina. n-3 fatty acids in cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 23;364(25):2439-50.
That article you linked closes in support of modern research that all point to a whole foods, plant based diet as the treatment for heart disease, cancer, obesity, etc:
"Instead, if you want significant health benefits, adopt a McDougall, Ornish, Esselstyn, Fuhrman, Barnard or Pritikin* diet, which are not simply about avoiding animal products, but are about avoiding unhealthy foods in general, and focusing on the healthiest ones. These programs are consistent and coherent and take a "whole" approach, and produce solid benefits in the published research."
Studies have shown? Cite them.
Chris Kresser is not a doctor: http://chriskresser.com/about/
"is a globally recognized leader in the fields of ancestral health, Paleo nutrition, and functional and integrative medicine"
Translation: He's a journalistic writer and doesn't hold a degree in medicine. He also apparently does not provide references to claims in his writing.
Dr. Mercola's number one recommendation in all of his books is to eat less meat and more vegetables:
"Dr. Mercola’s Total Health Program: The Proven Plan to Prevent Disease and Premature Aging, Optimize Weight and Live Longer! "
"Effortless Healing: 9 Simple Ways to Sidestep Illness, Shed Excess Weight, and Help Your Body Fix Itself"
"Take Control of Your Health (2007, with Kendra Degen Pearsall)"
And your health-essentials link has no author which makes me more than a little suspicious. Although they do provide a link to their trusted physicians if you need to get some prescriptions written.
Interesting that she could come to that conclusion... From her own site: http://drkaayladaniel.com/abou...
"serves on the Board of Directors of the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fun"
Translations: she is paid to support diary.
Peer-reviewed scientific research strongly supports a shift to a vegan diet if health is a concern, and this knowledge is nothing new. The list of references below took me 5 minutes to compile, and could be expanded to thousands of papers by simply following the wake of papers published following every new large-scale clinical study of the link between diet and health. All point to meat consumption and processed foods as the cause of the health crisis faced in developing countries, and an increased intake of whole fruits and vegetables as a path of treatment.
M L McCullough. Diet patterns and mortality: common threads and consistent results. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):795-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24717365
M A Martinez-Gonzalez, A Sanchez-Tainta, D Corella, J Salas-Salvado, E Ros, F Aros, E Gomez-Gracia, M Fiol, R M Lamuela-Raventos, H Schroder, J Lapetra, L Serra-Majem, X Pinto, V Ruiz-Gutierrez, Ramon Estruch for the PREDIMED Group. A provegetarian food pattern and reduction in total mortality in the Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea (PREDIMED) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 May 28;100(Supplement 1):320S-328S.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871477
J Reedy, S M Krebs-Smith, P E Miller, A D Liese, L L Kahle, Y Park, A F Subar. Higher diet quality is associated with decreased risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality among older adults. J Nutr. 2014 Jun;144(6):881-9.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24572039
G E Fraser, D J Shavlik. Ten years of life: Is it a matter of choice? Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jul 9;161(13):1645-52.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11434797
Large scale, long-term studies:
PREDIMED Studies: http://www.predimed.es/publica...
The Adventist Health Studies: https://publichealth.llu.edu/a...
The China Studies: https://scholar.google.com/sch...
The Nurses Health Study: http://www.nurseshealthstudy.o...
The EPIC Study: http://epic.iarc.fr/
I thought "web" reached EOL a decade ago.
Because even electric cars need to reverse...
He's lying about the stupid mistake to save face, get attention, and/or make money.
Next time you're on Facebook, pay attention to how the popular videos in your newsfeed are edited. Is the most interesting image the first thing you see? And does that trick get you to stop scrolling and watch?
Translation: We believe that our readers are fucking morons.
Do home water filters like Brita help with this kind of problem?
I was under the impression that a hardware upgrade was going to be sold for PS4 owners, and a new console would also be made that includes the upgraded GPU. This would be similar to the 32X, and Sega even planned a console that included the 32X and Sega CD hardware called the Sega Neptune.
It is in fact exactly like the 32X, which supported all Genesis games and provided graphical improvements to 32X games and a small number of (gastly) Sega CD/32X titles. Playstation 4 Plus could just as easily be called Playstation 5 Lite, since it will function exactly the same economically. It's a stop-gap between generations.
The hardware add-on era is back and, frankly, we should be surprised that this business model is being pursued. It shows just how unprepared Sony and MS are for new contenders at this stage.