No evidence of adverse health effects from meat consumption: Study
Adults can continue to eat their current levels of red meat, as well as processed and unprocessed meats, unless they feel inclined to change their habits for non-nutritional reasons, according to a panel of reviewers who conducted several recent studies and developed a new guideline on the topic.
An editorial accompanying the studies and guideline stated, “This is sure to be controversial, but it is based on the most comprehensive review of the evidence to date. Because that review is inclusive, those who seek to dispute it will be hard pressed to find appropriate evidence with which to build an argument.”
Unprocessed red meat and processed meat are unlikely to be causal factors for adverse health outcomes, although it is possible they have a very small causal effect, the guideline stated. The guideline, editorial, and reviews were published by Annals of Internal Medicine on Oct. 1.
The guideline stated, “Our weak recommendation that people continue their current meat consumption highlights both the uncertainty associated with possible harmful effects and the very small magnitude of effect, even if the best estimates represent true causation, which we believe to be implausible.”
The guideline was developed by a panel based on four de novo systematic reviews that considered evidence on consumption of meat, as well as one review that addressed consumers' beliefs and values about consuming it. The reviews included data from millions of patients.
The first review was a meta-analysis of cohort studies that focused on how dietary patterns, including the amount of red or processed meat consumed, affected all-cause mortality, cardiometabolic outcomes, and cancer incidence and mortality. More than 100 studies including more than six million participants were analyzed. The overall conclusions were that dietary patterns, including differences in meat consumption, may result in only small differences in outcomes over long periods.
The next study was a meta-analysis that looked specifically at cohort studies examining how reductions in red and processed meat might affect cancer incidence and mortality. It included 118 studies with more than six million participants, and it, too, found that the possible impact of reduced meat intake was very small.
The third study was a meta-analysis of cohort studies that looked specifically at meat consumption and its relationship to all-cause mortality and cardiometabolic outcomes and found that any link was very small.
In the fourth analysis, researchers examined randomized controlled trials that compared diets with differing amounts of red meat for at least six months. They found 12 eligible studies, but one of them—the Women's Health Initiative—was so large (almost 49,000 women) that it dominated the analysis. The authors concluded that diets restricted in red meat may have little or no effect on major cardiometabolic outcomes and cancer mortality and incidence, although the certainty of the evidence was low.
Finally, a review of consumers' beliefs about meat consumption found that reasons for eating meat included enjoyment, the belief that meat was essential to a healthy diet, cultural reasons, and disbelief about potential negative health effects.
The editorial said that nutritional epidemiology research often has methodological problems and that it may be time to stop producing observational research in this area. “These meta-analyses include millions of participants. Further research involving much smaller cohorts has limited value,” the editorial said. “High-quality randomized controlled trials are welcome, but only if they're designed to tell us things we don't already know.”
Instead, the editorial continued, a major overhaul of the methods for communicating nutritional data is needed to reach target populations and change health outcomes. One potential takeaway from these studies is that there are many reasons other than health to reduce meat consumption, the editorialists said.
“Ethical concerns about animal welfare can be important, as can concerns about the effects of meat consumption on the environment,” they wrote. “Both of these issues might be more likely to sway people, and they have the added benefit of empirical evidence behind them. And if they result in reducing meat consumption, and some receive a small health benefit as a side effect, everyone wins.”
courtesy: acpinternist.org
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Zubeen Garg's drowning in Singapore highlights vessel operators' responsibility: legal experts
Singapore (PTI): The drowning of Indian singer-composer Zubeen Garg has brought the spotlight on rules and regulations that concern responsibilities of vessel operators when dealing with intoxicated passengers, according to a media report that cited legal experts.
A cultural icon in India’s northeastern region, 52-year-old Garg travelled to Singapore in September 2025 to perform at a live event. A day before his performance, he went on a yacht trip with a group of people. He drowned while swimming in the sea near Lazarus Island, which is a popular diving spot.
His death shook his home state Assam, where millions came out on the streets mourning. Later, police cases were registered against the organiser of the event, his manager and some others.
Nico Lee, managing director of the Triangle Legal law firm, told The Straits Times that Singapore has Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (Port) Regulations under which there are provisions to debar drunk passengers.
The owner, agent or captain of the vessel must not allow persons under the influence of alcohol or drugs onboard if they are intoxicated to a point where they endanger safety of the vessel, its crew or any person in it.
“In terms of civil liability, it could be argued that a yacht captain is negligent, as he owes a prima facie duty of care to guests on board under general negligence principles,” Lee was quoted as saying by the newspaper.
The singer and his entourage of about 15 individuals were partying on a chartered vessel, which they had boarded at Marina at Keppel Bay.
A death certificate issued by the Singapore General Hospital listed his cause of death as drowning.
An autopsy report suggested that Garg had 333 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood in his system, which was four times the legal limit for driving in Singapore and is likely to have impacted his coordination.
Citing Garg’s case, Lee said the circumstances were serious, as the controller of the vessel knew that the guest was intoxicated. Also, he may not have understood or processed a safety briefing for all passengers.
“That combination makes reliance on an ordinary briefing inadequate. If intoxication reaches a level that endangers the safety of the vessel or persons on board, the person in charge should not permit boarding at all,” he said.
According to Lee, the vessel’s operators could also have assigned a crew member to directly supervise him or ensure that he received a one-to-one explanation when he was capable of understanding.
Part of the responsibility could be attributed to the guest if he chose to enter the water and ignore instructions or behave dangerously despite the yacht owner or charterer’s best efforts, Lee said.
Vanessa Sandhu from Clifford Law LLP told The Straits Times that a key question is whether the yacht captain or operator owed a “duty of care” to the passenger and, if so, whether a breach of that duty caused the death.
“A yacht captain and operator generally owe passengers a duty to take reasonable care for their safety while on board, including swimming or water activities. This may include providing safety equipment and issuing appropriate safety instructions,” the daily quoted Sandhu as saying.
“However, the standard of care is an objective one, based on what a reasonable captain or operator would have done in the circumstances. It is not an absolute obligation to prevent all harm,” she said.
During the coroner’s inquiry, the operators of the vessel had said that no one had forced the singer to consume alcohol or enter the water, and that the entire entourage was informed on the yacht about the necessity of wearing life jackets before going for a swim.
A coroner’s inquiry on March 25 ruled Garg’s death as accidental drowning. On April 1, the police said that investigations into the singer's death had concluded, with no evidence of foul play.
However, in Assam, where seven persons were arrested in connection with Garg’s case, and some of them charged with murder, the matter is being heard in the court. All the suspects have denied any wrongdoing.
