I have only skimmed this paper. I’ll study it later but I already love it for the thoroughness and precision with which the authors approached the question. Their work demonstrates how important it is to be sceptical of one or, in many cases, even dozens of studies in which independent variables are examined against human health outcomes. Thanks also to the authors for paying to make the article open access. Many are unwilling to do so.
Red Meat & All Cause Mortality.pdf (719.7 KB)
8 Likes
I have now read this report more carefully.
My opinion is that the family of positive and negative associations between red meat and all cause mortality presented here is interesting and slightly surprising but that the implications of this analytic methodology for virtually a great many study outcomes, expressed here and throughout the literature on health and longevity, is groundbreaking.
The basic takeaway is, “We don’t know what we think we know because the data have not been analyzed on all possible ways.”
This study is definitely worth a careful read not to learn more about the impact of red meat but to see how tentative is all of what we believe to be true or likely true.
5 Likes
Is Red Meat Bad for Your Heart? It May Depend on Who Funded the Study.
A new analysis found that red meat studies with industry links were more likely to report favorable results than those without them.
In a review published last week in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, scientists came to a concerning conclusion. Red meat appeared healthier in studies that were funded by the red meat industry.
Of course, this is not surprising to anyone familiar with nutrition research, which often has conflicts of interest because of a lack of federal funding. But it is yet another example of how industry-linked studies might shape the way people understand, and potentially misunderstand, the health consequences of what they eat.
Past research funded by the sugar industry, for instance, has downplayed the relationship between sugar and health conditions like obesity and heart disease. And studies funded by the alcohol industry have suggested that moderate drinking could be part of a healthy diet.
Miguel López Moreno, a researcher at Francisco de Vitoria University in Spain who led the new analysis, said in an email that he wanted to know if similar issues were happening with the research on unprocessed red meat. Processed meats like bacon and sausage have consistently been linked with heart disease risk, he said, but the evidence for unprocessed red meats like steaks and pork chops has been “far more mixed.”
Read the full story here: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/20/well/eat/red-meat-heart-health.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Ik8.8jUY.-uD8DSp9_M3N&smid=url-share
Source Research Paper:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916525001261
4 Likes
And Chris from Viva Longevity has an interview with one of the lead authors of the famous Harvard heatmap study which generated so much commentary. Warning: the person being interviewed is not a native English speaker, and may be exceptionally difficult to understand for some.
Harvard says Red Meat is WORSE than Junk Food (Viva Longevity!)
4 Likes
I tried the carnivore diet a few times and never felt great on it. I’m not interested in trying it again. It was quite good for fat loss however.
I still find it hard to believe that red meat in moderation is worse than junk processed food in moderation.
5 Likes
Are they arguing a steak is worse than a burger?!?
1 Like
Beth
#7
I watched this yesterday and was quit surprised to hear they found it to be worse then UPF
I was not thrilled to see how low starchy vegetables ranked.
@AustraliaLongevity I’m not surprised at all, but I know some people on it feel great. When I was a teenager and after my dad had an early heart attack, my family mostly stopped eating red meat. Once my body was no longer used to eating it regularly, when I had it on rare occasions, it gave me such a bad stomach ache that I pretty much stopped eating it at all. Interestingly enough, this also happened years later when I became a vegetarian and added fish back for a couple of years. I took one bite of tunafish and threw it up pretty quickly… I had to slowly reintroduce it. It was interesting to experience how hard this stuff is to digest when you are no longer used to it. Not sure if that was just me or universal.
@John_Hemming 
Reintroducing any food you’ve not had in a while will cause issues quite often. Gut microbiome needs time to adapt. It’s like what happens sometimes after antibiotic use.
2 Likes
Tim
#9
I watch my GFR as closely as I watch my BP. If I eat a pound of steak–a rare or maybe a medium rare occasion–my GFR will drop eight points for a week or so. I interpret this as mild case of AKI, and full recovery is almost certain. But I think it makes me more susceptible to damage in the future.
1 Like
This is an interesting observation @Tim. What is your eGFR when you consume normal amounts of protein. Have you crosschecked with a Cystatin-C measurement?
jnorm
#11
Interesting that you mention that, because I’ve been binging on steak for the past 6 weeks or so, and my eGFR (tested last week) just came back at 78, which is the lowest it’s ever been. My previous 3 tests were 99, 119, & 108.
I cook it in the oven on low heat and then throw it on the grill for a couple minutes. Takes longer but they always come out perfect, plus I figured the gentler heating would produce less reactive species. I was also considering starting to pair it with something to inhibit iron absorption, although compared to free iron it’s harder to inhibit absorption of the heme iron in red meat. Maybe instead I should be worrying about finding other types of meat to eat.
2 Likes
Grilled meat for sure with its heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Processed meat cold cuts are awful and disgusting. Grass fed ground beef lightly sauteed for a chili soup cannot be worse than eating Oreos.
3 Likes
Huge amount of context left out… what is the meat replacing ? What is the rest of the diet like? What are your fluid intake vs output ? NSAIDs ? DM ?
One has to look at how that heatmap was generated. Meat is rarely consumed alone. It’s possible that meat comes out looking bad in that study because of some other factors riding along. I might just have a nice juicy stake in honor of this study next Friday. I don’t eat meat, other than some seafood, but on rare occasions I do so, like a great restaurant when I’m traveling, or whatnot. I can’t believe having a bit of healthy meat in your diet is dire, assuming you get most of the other factors right.
3 Likes
There is no issue with GFR. It’s just the eGFR which is calculated from the creatinine level.
Note that the e in eGFR is estimated GFR.
Red meat contains creatine, which metabolizes into creatinine which artificially lowers the eGFR level in the same way as taking creatine as a supplement.
People should measure Cystatin-C and compute the eGFR from it instead, if they eat creatine as a supplement or in meat.
I posted my eGFR with and without creatine here Creatine Supplementation Definitely Increases Creatinine Levels - #8 by cl-user
2 Likes
I wonder how accurate one eGFR test is. I found out for myself how important hydration is before a blood test. It really affects creatinine and eGFR results.
If this is so easily influenced by hydration, how much weight do we assign the results?
You are very active. Were you properly hydrated before the last test? As I recall, I have asked you this question before.
I eat a lot of red meat, mainly steak, but I see more of a relationship to my hydration before the test. I found this out when my Doc asked me how much water I had consumed before a test that came back a little low. For the next test, I drank a liter of water in the hours before the test and achieved a nice increase in my GFR result.
“Dehydration reduces plasma volume and renal perfusion, leading to a transient rise in serum creatinine and thus a spuriously lower eGFR. One analysis notes that even moderate dehydration can reduce GFR until fluid balance is restored.”
“Water intake and progression of chronic kidney disease: the CKD-REIN cohort study - PubMed”
1 Like
Many supplements affect blood test results, and creatinine supplementation is one of them. I always stop creatine and most other supplements at least three days before a blood test. I want to see what my body is doing without props.
2 Likes
I like to see what my blood is doing with props, but for my USA blood test, I limit the number of supplements I take vs the ones I do in Hong Kong.
My eGFR is steady at about 108 when calculated with Cystatin C.
2 Likes
Tim
#19
Few things are as satisfying as a good steak. But chicken, tuna, and salmon are more benign. Make at least one day of the week all fruit and vegetables.
My hemoglobin is low, which may indicate an iron deficiency, which may suggest iron tablets, although an iron infusion would be nice.
@ RobTuck
What is your eGFR when you consume normal amounts of protein. Have you crosschecked with a Cystatin-C measurement?
In my one experiment, I binged on two 1 lb. rib eyes. Tested a few days later, my GFR had dropped from 40 to 32. When my kidneys bounce back, as they usually do, I may celebrate with a lamb shank or some pot roast.
I am faithful to the renal diet, but not rigidly so, and my GFR fluctuates. I don’t think I’ve ever had a Cys-c test. I’m not dissatisfied with current arrangements.
2 Likes
jnorm
#20
The rest of my diet didn’t change much, the increased beef has been replacing shrimp, chicken, and bacon (permanently removing bacon). Fruit as main fiber source, white rice as main carb source, avocados and avocado oil as main source of unsaturated fats. Zero fast food. I eat a lot of ice cream but overall I’d say my diet is good. No NSAIDs.
