ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

*(Oops, I hadn't noticed I'd replied to all of ISEN.  But this does pose an
interesting test case for how we evaluate and integrate new scientific
research, so for anyone interested:)*

The 2012 Harvard study, which Fuchs dismisses as "meaningless", "folly",
and "doesn’t deserve a moment of your attention", followed over 120,000 men
and women for over two decades.  (An independent NIH study followed 550,000
men and women for 10 years, and reached conclusions similar to the Harvard
study.)  So there's a large body of evidence here.

Fuchs implies the media misunderstood the Harvard study and went far beyond
the authors' modest claims.  In fact, the senior author of that study
stated, "This study provides clear evidence that regular consumption of red
meat, especially processed meat, contributes substantially to premature
death."  See
http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mens_Health_Watch/2012/June/cutting-red-meat-for-a-longer-life

Fuchs acknowledges that the Harvard study controlled for many possible
confounding factors, including race, age, weight, exercise, smoking,
alcohol, medicines, and personal and family health histories.  Fuchs
counters, "But there were almost certainly other differences that could not
be guessed or accounted for."  This is always a theoretical possibility in
epidemiological studies, even large, well-controlled ones like this, but in
public health one almost always has to rely on the preponderance of
evidence, not absolute proof.  The sort of study Fuchs demands, in which
thousands of people would be randomly assigned to either vegetarian or
meat-heavy diets for many years, is just not practical, and especially not
as a double-blind study.  By the way, this is exactly the same argument
tobacco supporters use to reject all the epidemiology linking smoking and
cancer.  (Curiously, Fuchs endorses observational studies of smoking, even
though they're logically equivalent to the diet studies he rejects, see
http://www.albertfuchs.com/blog/?p=1140)

Strangest of all, Fuchs - a physician - dismisses almost all of
epidemiology.  Besides his provocative title, "Epidemiology is much worse
for you than red meat", he states that "Observational studies have almost
never steered us towards the truth."  Epidemiology is a sophisticated field
of science, which has contributed greatly to current human health,
longevity, and current medical practice, despite inherent limitations of
observational methods.  Cholera, anyone?

-Richard


On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:35 AM, Chuck Howarth <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
> Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
> institutions.
>
> *****************************************************************************
>
> "Epidemiology is much worse for you than red meat".
>
> This is an interesting blog post that disputes the conclusion that red
> meat is bad for you.  Dr. Fuchs makes a couple of good points:  first, that
> the research is not based on a controlled study, so there is no way to know
> whether the difference in mortality is causation or just correlation since
> vegetarians and meat eaters differ in other ways than just diet.  He points
> out that the Harvard team knows this and did not claim that their work
> proves that red meat causes mortality, but the press picked up the story
> without making that distinction.  Second, the increased mortality rate
> Harvard calculated is actually very small according to his calculations.
>
> Fuchs also points out that the study got widespread attention because it
> appears to confirm what most of us are inclined to believe anyway.
>
> http://www.albertfuchs.com/blog/?p=956
>
>
> Chuck Howarth, Vice President
> ____________________________________
>
> G Y R O S C O P E I N C
> 283 Fourth Street, Suite 201
> Oakland, CA 94607
>
> tele:   510.986.0111
> web:  www.gyroscopeinc.com
> blog:  http://museums-now.blogspot.com
> ____________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************************
> For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and
> the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.
>
> Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at
> www.exhibitfiles.org.
>
> The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft.
> To learn more, visit
> http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.
>
> To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
> message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
> [log in to unmask]
>

***********************************************************************
For information about the Association of Science-Technology Centers and the Informal Science Education Network please visit www.astc.org.

Check out the latest case studies and reviews on ExhibitFiles at www.exhibitfiles.org.

The ISEN-ASTC-L email list is powered by LISTSERVR software from L-Soft. To learn more, visit
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html.

To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]