First it was saturated fat and cholesterol, then it was nitrates, then it was TMAO, now it's Neu5Gc. Someone is always looking for a reason why epidemiology shows that red meat consumption slightly increases the risk of the of mortality. But there are many studies that show that it isn't red meat per se that increases the risk of mortality, but it's processed red meat. I can, perhaps, buy that. But it is epidemiology, with confounding variables that can't be taken into account no matter how much adjustment happens and sketchy methodologies for obtaining data on consumption such as recall questionarries that have been proven to be highly flawed. And even if it's true that red meat increases the risk of mortality (I know, the proposed mechanism increases the risk of tumor progression, but I only care about overall mortality), then that increased risk is quite small. Much, much smaller than the probability that smoking will increase mortality. Much lower than the risk of being morbidly obese will increase mortality. Much lower than the risk that diabetes will increase mortality. I think it is worth it to eat unprocessed red meat, which is delicious and highly satisfying per calorie, and possibly have of a slightly increased risk of developing cancer. Until a long-term randomized trial shows that red meat substantially increases the risk of dying (and not just a statistically significant difference, but a large effect size as well), I will continue enjoying red med, molecular studies be damned.
