By Imran Bagha, School of Public Policy & Administration

The controversy around red meat consumption and its effects on human health is a ‘hot topic’ in today’s media discourse. Recently the debate has been stimulated by a cultural shift towards vegetarianism, which frames red meat consumption as damaging to one’s health. This has, in turn, spurred responses of meat-loving advocates who tout the benefits of red meat consumption. The back-and-forth rhetoric can make it difficult to navigate the science behind the claims of each camp.

So what does the evidence tell us?

The Good

Red meat has formed an important part of North American diet for decades and is embedded into North American culture. For example, we might share ham with the family at Christmas, barbecue steaks on Canada Day, and enjoy chili cheeseburgers on Superbowl Sunday. There are many reasons for the popularity of red meat. Not only is it tasty and convenient, it has many nutritional qualities as well.

Red meat is high in macronutrients such as proteins and fats. It contains all amino and fatty acids necessary to aid the body in regular function (Williams, 2007). Furthermore, red meat is an excellent provider of minerals such as iron and magnesium, compounds thatĚýaid in healthy immune function and red blood cell count (Williamson et al., 2005; McAfee et al., 2010).

Red meat has also been shown to promote efficient DNA synthesis and memory retention through its concentration of vitamin B12 and zinc (Williams, 2007). It is high in compounds such as creatine and carnitine that aid in athletic and cognitive performance (McAfee et al., 2010; Williamson et al., 2005; Delanghe, et al., 1989); such compounds (as well as vitamins and minerals like iron and Vitamin B12) are difficult to obtain from other food sources, making red meat a valuable nutritional source.

The Bad

However, red meat has gotten a bad reputation largely due to its high fat composition. Of all meat products, red meat and processed red meat naturally contain the highest level of both saturated and unsaturated fats (American Heart Association, 2016). For perspective, one 50g burger patty from McDonalds or Wendy’s is composed of 20-30% fat (Keeton, 1994; McDonalds, 2016), and one lean and trimmed 100g rib-eye steak (about the size of the palm of your hand) contains about 11 grams of fat (USDA National Nutrient Database, 2016). Excessive consumption or accumulation of such fat contributes to unhealthy weight gain and poor gut fauna; other compounds present in red meat have been linked to atherosclerosis and colorectal cancer (McAfee et al., 2010; Hu, 2003).

When high-fat meals such as hamburgers are consumed, carbohydrates are first metabolized and used as energy (Gropper &ĚýSmith, 2012). This leaves fatty acids in circulation until they begin to be taken up by adipose tissue, which accumulates over time and results in weight gain. Such unhealthy weight gain results in poor mental health and reduces productivity and energy during the day (Panel, 1998). Left unchecked, excessive weight gain leads to obesity, an affliction affecting approximately one-third of the North American population (Statistics Canada, 2017; Harvard SPH, 2017). People suffering from obesity also tend to have poor metabolic activity and often suffer from a variety of health problems such as poor circulation, compromised immune function, sleep apnea, depression, and diabetes (Panel, 1998; Garrow, 1999; Wang et al., 2011). Those of us with sedentary lifestyles, such as most people with desk jobs, are especially at risk (Gropper &ĚýSmith, 2012).

Furthermore, consumption of fatty products cause death of bacteriodites, a type of bacteria usually associated with a healthy gut flora (Eppel et al., 2013; Cani et al., 2007). When the bacteriodites die, they release compounds into circulation thatĚýcause the body to increase fat storage and reduce fat metabolism, resulting in even sharper weight gain and its associated problems (Eppel et al., 2013; Cani et al., 2007).

In addition to the disease risks carried by its high fat content, red meat consumption has been linked to diseases such as atherosclerosis and colorectal cancer. For example, the amino acid L-carnitine is a naturally occurring compound in cooked red meat. Once consumed, gut bacteria process this compound into trimethylamine-N-oxide, which has cancerous activity in humans andĚýcontributes to atherosclerosis in lab animals (Bingham et al., 1996; Koeth et al., 2013).

So, can we have our meat and eat it too?

The scientific evidence may suggest to us that the only course of action for our health is to eliminate red meat from our diets. However, we know that red meat is a nutrient-dense food and has many health benefits associated with its consumption. Just as importantly, red meat is a significant part of North American culture. Giving up red meat would not only mean a change ofĚýour diets, but a cultural change as well. Thus, eliminating red meat entirely is an impractical and rather unrealistic expectation for the meat-eating public.

So, what to do? It all boils down to several important concurrences across the scientific health and nutritional communities. Most importantly, the vast majority of scientific and nutritional literature agree that we are eating too much red meat (Lima &ĚýGomes-da-Silva, 2005; McAfee et al., 2010; American Heart Association, 2016). An average meat-eating North American consumes over 200% more red meat than the healthy limit of 3 servings[1] 3 times per week (American Heart Association, 2016; Canadian Cancer Society, 2016). Health issues stemming from red meat consumption occur not because we are eating red meat, but because we are eating too much of it.

Second, because red meat often forms the main course of a meal, our diets lack significantly in nutrients obtained from plant-based foods – many of which suppress diseases such as obesity and cancer, and help the body metabolize fats (Moore and Thompson, 2013; Craig, 2006; Boeing et al., 2012). A diet high in plant-based foods is recognized across the scientific community as the healthiest diet.

And third, many nutritional benefits obtained from red meat can be found in other meat sources, such as fish, eggs, and white meat products (Canadian Cancer Society, 2016).

The clearest solution is to reduce the amount of red meat we presently consume. This reduction in red meat consumption may look different to different people depending on lifestyle and habit. Following are a few suggestions based on the evidence.

Some Practical Suggestions

1. Use the 3×3 rule

Try to consume no more than 3 servings of red meat 3 times weekly. This amount is plenty of red meat for a week: eating 2 single-patty hamburgers, an 8oz steak, and 2 servings of meatloaf in a week is still within the 3×3 rule.

[1] 1 serving is equivalent to 3 ounces of lean flank steak.

2. Try out vegetarian meals

Aim for 1-2 vegetarian dinners a week. For example, replace meat lasagna with vegetarian lasagna. Not only will this help increase the amount of plant-based nutrients in your diet, it will also help cut down on red meat consumption.

3. Consume more alternatives

Alternatives can consist of white meat, fish, egg, and dairy products. For example, replace the salami in your lunchtime sandwich with turkey breast, egg salad, or tuna. These products are high in protein, and contain many of the health benefits associated with red meat (Canadian Cancer Society, 2016).

None of these suggestions should prevent us from enjoying a steak on date night, grabbing a Superbowl chili cheeseburger, or cutting into the ham on Christmas eve. By reducing and monitoring red meat consumption, we can enjoy the benefits of red meat while minimizing risk from overconsumption. We can, indeed, have our meat and eat it too!

Related Resources:Ěý

References:

American Heart Association. (2016). “What’s my daily limit for foods with saturated fats?” Accessed from: http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/HealthyEating/Nutrition/Saturated-Fats_UCM_301110_Article.jsp#.VwQPXyfAd5c

Bingham, S.A., Pignatelli, B., Pollock, J.R.A., Ellul, A., Malaveille, C., Gross, G., Runswick, S., Cummings, J.H. and O’Neill, I.K. (1996). Does increased endogenous formation of N-nitroso compounds in the human colon explain the association between red meat and colon cancer?.ĚýCarcinogenesis,Ěý17(3), 515-524.

Boeing, H., Bechthold, A., Bub, A., Ellinger, S., Haller, D., Kroke, A., Leschik-Bonnet, E., Muller, M., Oberrier, H., Schulze, M., Stehle, P. & Watzl, B. (2012). Critical review: vegetables and fruit in the prevention of chronic diseases.ĚýEuropean journal of nutrition,Ěý51(6), 637-663.

Canadian Cancer Society. “Meat”. 2016. Accessed from: http://www.cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/cancer-101/what-is-a-risk-factor/diet/meat/?region=on#How_much_meat

Cani, P.D., Amar, J., Iglesias, M.A., Poggi, M., Knauf, C., Bastelica, D., Neyrinck, A.M., Fava, F., Tuohy, K.M., Chabo, C. and Waget, A. (2007). Metabolic endotoxemia initiates obesity and insulin resistance.ĚýDiabetes,Ěý56(7), 1761-1772.

Craig, W. J. (2009). Health effects of vegan diets.ĚýThe American journal of clinical nutrition,Ěý89(5), 1627S-1633S.

Delanghe J., De Slypere, J. P., De Buyzere, M., Robbrecht, J., Wieme, R., & Vermeulen, A. (1989). Normal reference values for creatine, creatinine, and carnitine are lower in vegetarians.ĚýClinical chemistry,Ěý35(8), 1802-1803.

Dunlop, C. (2017) Accessed from: http://zniup3zx6m0ydqfpv9y6sgtf.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/151026-How-much-meat-spag.png

Eppel, C., Migdal, K., Sterlin, M., & Fagan, J. M. (2013). What you eat may affect your intestinal microbial diversity and your propensity for obesity. Ruttgers University.

Garrow, J. (1999). Health risks of obesity.ĚýObesity: The report of the British Nutrition Foundation Task Force., 4-16.

Gropper, S., & Smith, J. (2012).ĚýAdvanced nutrition and human metabolism. Cengage Learning.

Harvard SPH. (2017). Adult obesity: A global look at rising obesity rates. Harvard School of Public Health. Available from: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-trends/obesity-rates-worldwide

Hu, F. B. (2003). Sedentary lifestyle and risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes.Lipids,Ěý38(2), 103-108.

Keeton, J. T. (1994). Low-fat meat products—technological problems with processing.ĚýMeat Science,Ěý36(1-2), 261-276.

Koeth, R.A., Wang, Z., Levison, B.S., Buffa, J.A., Org, E., Sheehy, B.T., Britt, E.B., Fu, X., Wu, Y., Li, L. and Smith, J.D. (2013). Intestinal microbiota metabolism of L-carnitine, a nutrient in red meat, promotes atherosclerosis.ĚýNature medicine,Ěý19(5), 576-585.

Lima, M. C., & Gomes-da-Silva, M. H. G. (2005). Colorectal cancer: lifestyle and dietary factors.ĚýNutricion hospitalaria,Ěý20(4), 235.

McAfee, A. J., McSorley, E. M., Cuskelly, G. J., Moss, B. W., Wallace, J. M., Bonham, M. P., & Fearon, A. M. (2010). Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and benefits. Meat science, 84(1), 1-13.

McDonlads Canada Nutrition Information. (2016). Accessed from: http://www.mcdonalds.ca/ca/en/menu/full_menu/sandwiches.html

Moore, L. V., Thompson, F. E. (2015). Adults meeting fruit and vegetable intake recommendations—United States, 2013.ĚýMMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report,Ěý64(26), 709-713.

Panel, N. O. (1998). Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. 98(4083).

Statistics Canada. (2017). Overweight and Obese Adults (self-reported), 2014.ĚýGovernment of Canada, Statistics Canada. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2015001/article/14185-eng.htm

StrengthSensei. (2017) Accessed from: http://www.strengthsensei.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/article-1267409-03BA69770000044D-927_468x286.jpg

USDA National Nutrient Database. (2016). “Basic Report:Ěý 23197, Beef, rib eye steak, boneless, lip-on, separable lean and fat, trimmed to 1/8″ fat, all grades, cooked, grilled.” “Cheese”; “meat”; “milk” “cookie”, Accessed from: https://ndb.nal.usda.gov/ndb/foods/show/7288?fgcd=&manu=&lfacet=&format=&count=&max=35&offset=&sort=&qlookup=23197

Wang, Y. C., McPherson, K., Marsh, T., Gortmaker, S. L., & Brown, M. (2011). Health and economic burden of the projected obesity trends in the USA and the UK.ĚýThe Lancet,Ěý378(9793), 815-825.

Williamson, C. S., Foster, R. K., Stanner, S. A., & Buttriss, J. L. (2005). Red meat in the diet.ĚýNutrition Bulletin,Ěý30(4), 323-355.

Kraft Dinner made with real cauliflower? What a great way to indulge without feeling as guilty.

Think again.

Kraft Dinner, among many other companies, is a culprit of using food marketing to create a false sense of health amongst consumers. What the packaging doesn’t tell you is that there is a slim two tablespoons of cauliflower per serving. To make matters worse, there is an additional 12% of saturated fat, 9% more sodium, 12% more sugar and 4% less protein than the original version (Freedhoff, 2010).

Despite significant efforts to address the current obesity epidemic facing our nation, experts have expressed that our food environment may be one of the primary drivers (Pomeranz, 2013). The proliferation of claims on food packaging creates a misleading and illusionary representation of a product’s healthfulness. The lack of regulations restricting questionable claims, and insufficient consequences for those who do violate the regulations, further encourage such deceptive claims and undermine public health. Food and beverage companies consistently manipulate consumers and attempt to gain economic benefit from society’s yearning desire to be healthy and fit, by marketing their products as healthy, when they are in fact not.

Harris et al. (2009) analyzed a variety of data sources to provide a rigorous and comprehensive analysis of the nutritional quality and marketing of children’s cereals (115 cereal brands examined in total). Of the 115 cereals brands examined, the most health claims were found on the least healthy cereals. Lucky Charms displayed an average of 3.8 health claims, despite being categorized as one of the most unhealthy cereal brands for children.

Similarly, a study conducted by Mozaffarian et al. (2013) found that food items presenting the “Whole Grain Stamp”, used to indicate products containing at least half a serving of whole grain, actually contained the most sugar of all other grain products assessed and were often more expensive. Upon further exploration, the authors concluded that consumers are often misled by the promised healthfulness that the symbol implies. It should also be noted that Whole Grain Stamp is the only standard that is determined by the manufacturers own assessments and willingness to pay for its use, which poses significant conflict of interest issues.

“Whether or not a product contains whole grains is just one measure of healthfulness, and others factors must be considered” (Mozzaffarian et al., 2013)

These studies highlight the deceptive nature of the food marketing industry. However, does our society readily rely on these health claims when attempting to make healthy lifestyle choices in the first place? Or do they see through the claims and refer to the ingredient list or nutrition facts label when making food selections?

Northup (2014) investigated the degree to which consumers relate marketing terms on food packaging, also known as health buzzwords, to healthy lifestyle choices. The author developed an online survey that presented two different images of the same product; one presenting health buzzwords on the packaging (“organic”, “gluten-free”, “whole grain”, etc.) and the other with the health buzzwords photo-shopped out. Participants (a total of 318) were then asked to rate which product they perceived to be the healthier option. The author of this well-controlled, novel and generalizable study found that the participants consistently rated the food products displaying the health buzzwords as healthier choices.

“Words like organic, antioxidant, natural and gluten-free imply some sort of healthy benefit. When people stop to think about it, there’s nothing healthy about Antioxidant Cherry 7-Up – it’s mostly filled with high fructose syrup or sugar. But its name is giving you this clue that there is some sort of health benefit to something that is not healthy at all” (Northup, 2014).

Participants also reviewed the nutrition facts label on a variety of food items. These items were presented two at a time and participants chose which item they perceived to be healthier. Unfortunately, this proved to be a difficult task for many. Rothman et al. (2006) found that poor label comprehension was highly correlated with low-level literacy and numeracy skills. One could argue that poor health literacy increases society’s dependence and reliance on health buzzwords (Butler, 2010).

It is evident that there is a significant need for more restrictive regulations regarding food marketing, in order to protect consumers. Consumers should become aware of the food industry’s intentions and question all health claims on food packaging. Secondly, consumers should refer to the ingredient list and nutrient facts labels in order to assess the actual healthfulness of a food product. It is essential that we become active buyers when striving to make healthy lifestyle choices. With that being said, food label regulators must make changes to the current nutrition facts label, in an effort to increase its comprehensibility for the general public.

Bibliography:

Butler, K. (2010). Making smart choices: Health claims, regulation, and food packaging (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Pittsburg, Pittsburg.

Freedoff, Y. (2010). Badvertising: KD smart think you’re KD stupid. Retrieved from ĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚýĚý kd.html

Harris, J. L., Schwartz, M. B., Brownell, K. D., Sarda, V., Weinberg, M. E., Speers, S., ….. Byrnes-Ěý Enoch, H. (2009). Evaluating the nutrition quality and marketing of children’s cereals. Hartford, CT: Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.

Mozaffarian, R. S., Lee, R. M., Kennedy, M. A., Ludwig, D. S., Mozaffarian, D. & Gortmaker, S. L. (2013). Identifying whole grain foods: A comparison of different approaches for selecting more healthful whole grain products. Public Health Nutrition, 16(12), 2255-2264.

Northup, T. (2014). Truth, Lies, and Packaging: How Food Marketing Creates a False Sense of Health. Food Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3(1), 9-18.

Pomeranz, J. L. (2013). A comprehensive strategy to overhaul FDA authority for misleading food labels. American Journal of Law & Medicine, 39(4), 617-647.

Rothman, R. L., Housam, R., Weiss, H., Davis, D., Gregory, R., Gebretsadik, T., Shintani, A. & Elasy, T. A. (2006). Patient understanding of food labels: The role of health literacy and numeracy. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 31(5), 391-398.

There’s something a little extra delicious about a barbequed meal and a cold beer on the deck after returning home from a fire-fighting tour. Our crew just finished a 19-day tour in Lac la Biche district in Alberta. We were working on a fire near Cold Lake that grew to 10 000 ha in less than 4 days in the absence of wind—it was dry, and the fuels were ready to burn. Fire behavior predictions foreshadowed lots of work, long days, and short sleeps.

The Alberta government set up a base camp (trailers for a kitchen, diner, bathroom, logistics, radio ops, etc.), and we set up our tents. Everyday on tour is unpredictable—what you’ll see, what you’ll accomplish, when you’ll be going home. A small change in observed weather throughout the day can either increase or suppress fire behaviour, movement, and growth. Despite the abundant unknowns, I’m a creature of habit, and try to create as much of a daily routine as possible for the things I can control.

4:54 am: Alarm goes off.
5:15 am: Morning jog down the basecamp road
5:57 am: Wait in line for breakfast
5:59 am: Grab a bagged lunch

The bagged lunch. Of all the elements and difficulties you face on a daily basis while on tour, the bagged lunch can really be a morale booster or breaker. Looking in your bagged lunch before you get to the line can be destructive, because you KNOW there is going to be a white bread ham sandwich in there, and that’s a day-killer that you just don’t need at 6:00am (or if you’re “lucky”, it’ll be a white bread peanut butter and butter sandwich). It’s not wet feet, bug bites, sleep deprivation, or diminished cigarettes that warrant daily complaints; it’s the white bread ham sandwiches.

On average, the bagged lunch consists of: 3 white bread ham, cheese, and butter sandwiches; one apple; one orange; one dessert square; two juice boxes; and, if you choose to grab one, a bag of chips. It might be immature. It might be selfish. But when you have a daily 30-minute walk through knee-deep muskeg to get to a 20-minute hike through dusty, sooty, burn, and your face is covered in black ash, your B.O. is unrecognizable, and your shin chafe starts to bleed, the last thing you want to pull out of your bagged lunch is a white bread ham sandwich.

By day 8, you’re pretty vocal about how much you hate sandwiches. By day 10, you’re pretty sure you cannot eat another sandwich. By day 14 you’ve boycotted sandwiches, and have started hoarding granola bars to get you through the day. Day 14. That’s two weeks.

Let’s think about this for a minute. Ham, cheese, and butter sandwiches seem to be a fireline base-camp go to—why? Because they’re cheap and easy to make. When there are over 300 people to feed by a staff of 10, you can’t expect anything much fancier. Now think about northern semi-remote districts in Ontario, like Armstrong, or Pickle Lake, and the price of supporting over 200 rangers, where food prices are already outrageous for locals. Should the Ministry be responsible for supporting gourmet meals for the duration of rangers’ stay?

Food is expensive. Food preparation is timely. Exciting meal planning and development requires knowledge. Despite education, it’s surprising how quickly we become bored of eating the same, affordable meals all the time, and how quickly we become drawn to grabbing that bag of chips, or trying to score an extra dessert square. Food quickly becomes a comforting item on fire, as it is for so many people outside of fire.

We know that obesity rates are high among First Nations people. We know that food prices in remote communities are ridiculous. And so we know that the price and practicality to eat healthy is affecting obesity rates. But an underrepresented factor is the availability of variety. While we know that, yes, variety is limited and affects some remote and semi-remote areas, each day that I had a white bread ham sandwich, I was reminded how quickly you become bored of plain food, and how important it is to seek variety in order to continue making healthy choices.

I am aware of the importance of fueling my body with healthy, hearty fuels, and so sometimes I have to remind myself to eat for the nutrients, not the comfort or enjoyment—but what happens when people aren’t as aware of the importance in making healthy decisions regularly? What about those who aren’t aware that they are making unhealthy decisions? What about those who don’t know what a healthy decision is? Considering all these questions, why on earth would someone continue to eat the white bread ham sandwich when they can grab an extra bag of BBQ chips, a Pepsi, and a dark chocolate Mounds bar every day instead?

It’s important to realize that it’s not a divide; it’s not that First Nations people are always choosing unhealthy food options, and white people are saints when it comes to eating—trust me, I know that’s not true. But there’s a point to be made as we KNOW that food options are limited in northern remote and semi-remote communities, and that prices are high. If we want to truly make healthy options more available, it’s not enough to subsidize prices; it’s not enough to add more lettuce and peppers to the shelves. We need to revisit the importance of variety. Options. Explanations. Mentality. Being part of an individual’s built environment, improving overall diet is a complex task; not one that will ever have a simple answer or solution.

6:00am: Switch out 95% of my bagged lunch items with food I scavenged and stowed from dinner the night before.
6:03am: Get changed and gear up for the day
6:25am: Head to the bus, bagged lunch in hand, and get ready for another day’s work on LWF-122.

Author Ariel RootĚýis currently in Kenora in her fourth season working as a forest fire fighter for the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. ĚýShe has a BSc in Food Science & Nutrition from ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University in 2012, and is currently a graduate student in the Health Science, Technology and Policy program at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University. She has been featured on APTN’s new hit TV show, Playing with Fire, Season 2.

Come back for next week’s instalment.

Photos by Ariel Root

Follow us onĚý!