I like reading points of view that run counter to prevailing beliefs. I become more educated when the arguments are well-constructed and backed with information, even if I ultimately don't sign on to them myself.

So I should be happy about the opportunity to read the research recently published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, poking holes in the long-believed connection between red or processed meat consumption and various forms of cancer. The article certainly flies in the face of reams of studies published in the last couple of decades. And as when Nina Teicholz published "The Big Fat Surprise" in 2014, the meat industry gets its time to shine.

But I'm frustrated.

I can't think of a group of people who squabble as much as nutritionists do, not counting holiday dinner with the family. And if they're not arguing about the big topics — like does meat "cause" cancer, or not? — they're arguing over whether conclusions reached on the basis of individual choices can be applied to the entire population, or vice versa.

The thing is, the distinction is important. As the old saw goes, "Lies, damn lies and statistics," and the antidote to statistical misrepresentation is understanding those distinctions, however subtle they are. But I confess, having listened to years of nutritionists' differing interpretations, I am confused and tired of the whole subject.

And honestly, as I read the coverage of this latest study led by Bradley Johnston, an epidemiologist at Dalhousie University in Canada, it is as controvertible as all the other studies. Tracking the effects of one dietary element over an individual's life span is impossible on a practical level, so the researchers can't say that there is no connection, only that the other studies' claims are based on thin evidence.

It's food for thought, but not quite cause for celebration.

(Nor, I think, cause for the kind of vicious, emotional reaction that many in the nutrition field have had to the study.)

I'll add this study to the mental library and turn its conclusions over in my mind. Of course, I don't have the responsibility of making policy in this area, as the members of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee do. I only need to make sure that I represent the information accurately and truthfully when I do write about it.

And that's challenging enough.

This issue is far from settled

Join for free* to continue reading.