This is a guest article by Mannie Barling and Ashley F. Brooks.

A Harvard School of Public Health study, published online in the Archives of Internal Medicine this week, examined the eating habits and health of more than 110,000 adults for more than twenty years and concluded that eating any amount or any type of red meat significantly increases the risk of premature death.

The study asserted that adding a daily serving of a hot dog or two slices of bacon caused a 20% higher risk of death.  Past studies have linked the consumption of red meat, particularly processed red meat with diabetes, heart disease and cancer.  But this one goes much farther indicting meat as the principal cause of premature death.

The Harvard School of Medicine, whose studies are financed by multinational corporations with an agenda, concluded that the results suggest that, among the 37,698 men and 83,644 women who were tracked, as their meat consumption increased, so did their risk of mortality.

Mark Twain once said “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics” to express his contempt with studies like these.

Twenty years of studying 100,000 plus people is just not enough time or sufficient participants (approximately .0003% of the U.S. population) to project these results as affecting a population of 349 million people in the U.S.  These conclusions are terribly flawed.

For example, did the participants eat red meat fed with genetically modified corn, shot-up with bovine growth hormones and daily antibiotics as well as being diluted with chemical “pink slime” to avoid E. coli.

It is unlikely any of the study participants ate grass-fed organic beef which has no chemicals?  Nor did the participants eat only organic vegetables that were no exposed to multiple applications of Monsanto’s Roundup.
There is also no mention of the amount of packaged and frozen foods were consumed, many containing more than 150 chemical ingredients, many carcinogenic.

It should be noted that the “Greatest Generation” has outlived all others before it eating meat every day of the week.  But the meat that generation ate, until the last two decades, was grass-fed organic meat.  And the dairy that generation consumed was free of bovine growth hormones, daily shots of antibiotics and not fed genetically modified corn.

The data does not differentiate between the participants’ diets, not does it trace the sugar or alcohol consumption of the participants.  There was no indication of how many of them smoked or how many of the ones who died smoked.

And how many of the 110,000 surveyed actually died.  Twenty years does not seem adequate to truly understand the lifestyles of all those surveyed and what affected those who died.  And what about those who did not die?  Isn’t the study just speculating at what will happen to the surviving study participants over their lifetimes?

There were more unanswered questions about the ages of the participants, how much daily exercise was involved and whether their jobs posed environmental and health hazards that would also eschew the statistics.  Certainly their geographical location and the style of regional food have an impact on their longevity.

Did the participants drink sugary soft drinks?  Were their family histories taken to determine their individual risk factors?  How many were single?  And how many lived at the poverty line?

Certainly a group consisting of Americans’ living at the poverty level would provide different statistics than a well-educated upscale group who could afford to buy better quality meats and eat organic foods.  Any survey of Americans living on fast foods will have disastrous mortality statistics.  Not to mention the high incidence of diabetes, heart disease, live and kidney disease already chronicled in multiple studies.

So what does this study really mean?  Absolutely nothing without closely scrutinizing all of the parameters used to create the group tested.  And examining who funded the study and what their economic interest was in financing the study.  For example, was it intended to spur the sales of drugs or some other financially profitable remedy?  It is difficult to believe that any for-profit multinational corporation financed this study out of the goodness of their corporate heart.

Without scrutinizing all of the missing information, this study has probably been twisted into whatever conclusion the grant money intended when it was provided.  You can be assured that whoever paid for this study had an agenda.

To avoid the consequences of this study, it is important to avoid factory farmed meats and factory farmed dairy products, not to mention chemically polluted packaged and frozen foods.  If you want to live as long as your grandma, you should consider eating like your grandma did in her younger days.

Mannie Barling is an Attorney, Author, Business Adviser and Voting Member of the Academy of Television Arts & Sciences.  Mannie is also the co-host of Barling & Barrett – Criminal or Civil with Simon Barrett, heard on on Sunday afternoons at 4 PM EST, 1 PM PST.

Mannie Barling is the co-author with Ashley F. Brooks of the award winning books – Arthritis, Inflammation, Gout, Crohn’s, IBD and IBS (Books and Authors 2010 Best Books in the Health, Diet & Reference Categories); Mannie’s Diet and Enzyme Formula (Blogger News Net 2010 Best Health And Nutrition Book Award winner); It’s Not Your Fault; and The Food Revolution Papers  –  available at, Amazon, Barnes&Noble, and other booksellers around the world.

Garbage in, garbage out may apply to computers.  But with humans, it is garbage in, shorter life.

Be Sociable, Share!