[antattack]

What's the point of having a better looking scar if you're more likely to get colon cancer?

Also, given that study itself measured Iron and B12, supplementing Iron and B12 may help scar healing w/o the (red) meat eating downside.

[ofrzeta]

It's not even clear what's meant by "red meat". In all the studies they mix up consumption of unprocessed and processed meats. In my totally non-scientific metastudy I came to the conclusion that it's essentially processed meat with nitrates that poses the major health threat.

[xvedejas]

I'm curious here: I am under the impression, possibly due to outdated info, that the issue with red meat was specifically that cooking it at high temperatures creates carcinogens (this being why bacon is especially bad). Would it be possible to avoid carcinogens by slow cooking all red meat at lower temperatures?

[arcturus17]

Note how the study compares vegan diets with omnivore diets, not with salami and bologna diets.

[JeremyNT]

Iron and B12 seem like obvious avenues to explore here. Anemia in particular is very common among vegans and vegetarians, since it takes a good bit of care to reach optimal iron levels without consuming heme iron or supplementation.

[mytailorisrich]

Personally I think that a good, healthy diet is one that does not require me to take supplements to counter deficiencies.

Obviously that does not mean that eating a lot of meat is good, but having to take supplements is not good, either.

[decebalus1]

> What's the point of having a better looking scar if you're more likely to get colon cancer?

I don't think it's worth going into the extremes with this. Omnivore doesn't mean a buttload of red meat.

[yokaze]

> Also, given that study itself measured Iron and B12, supplementing Iron and B12 may help scar healing w/o the (red) meat eating downside

Unless iron is the source of the (red) meat eating downside.

[da_big_ghey]

Others already said below research on red meat and colon cancer correlation is imperfect. It not to distinguish processed meats with not processed. It not consider for difference in cook methods producing potential carcinogen, say grill vs. bake. Also many people maybe are not predisposed to colon cancer, they prefer to have better healing and take a risk such like that.

Also study is compare of vegan. Not veggietarian. This mean potential beenfit from dairy. ALso potential white meat not reds. You have made a link from red meat to scar outcome where above study no created one. This is bad thinking.

Also you are say for supplementing remedy all problem on vegans. This supplements expensive need much research. Maybe hard for getting right. Why benefit from this and use vegans diet? If same results are come from meat. There am also chance for benefits not iron and b12 related but maybe collogen and other meat things.

[centimeter]

Attributing colon cancer to meat is, it turns out, complete bullshit, just like most other nonsense anti-meat fear-mongering (uric acid, cholesterol, etc.).

[jjtheblunt]

I'm not familiar with the data either way, so am reading to learn; why do you say it's bullshit?

[steve_adams_86]

Before I became vegetarian I read as many papers as I could about why meat is good or bad for you.

Unfortunately a lot of papers don't provide very good data regarding what kind of meat is being eaten. At least, not in what I've read; I'd love to see something better.

Some very specifically included processed meats which, to me, invalidates the study as a study about meat. Processed meats are a completely different beast. On those grounds a significant number of studies I've read are hard to take seriously.

This could be a reason people are calling it bullshit.

I'd love to see a study involving conscientious meat eating habits in which people eat mostly vegetables, some whole meats, and otherwise avoid processed foods. This is how I'd want to eat if I ate meat, but it's rare to see balanced studies.

This does, however, make some sense: most people eat processed foods where these studies are done, so they're relevant to a broader part of the population.

They should not be used to condemn meat, though.

[zepto]

In context, I think it’s as fair to call it bullshit as to claim it as a truth.

It was being claimed as a truth to rebut the implications a peer reviewed study, but without any data to support it.

[centimeter]

Every time I get concerned about one of these things and look it up, it turns out to have been false.

[yesenadam]

I have the same experience when apparently anti-vegan results/studies appear on HN. Usually the headline is a million miles from what the study could claim to show. It would be nice to actually see this paper.

This was the last time I looked at one of these claims: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23661158 (Article claimed 25% of vegans have low blood iron, and the study involved ..10 vegans.)