Out (food) shopping yesterday my eye was caught by a news headline:

EAT LESS MEAT TO LOSE WEIGHT

Now as you can imagine I was a little disturbed... especially as this made front page news. I thought it was just some delusional Health Editor at the Daily Express, but then I find it on BBC News, theNHS website and a muppet at the Daily Mail who entitled his article "Sorry Dr Atkins, eating LESS meat is the way to lose weight, results of five-year study show."  Ah yes, Dr Atkins was a proponent of an ad libitum carbohydrate intake wasn't he?!?!?!

So this news has come from a large cohort study entitled the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Physical Activity, Nutrition, Alcohol, Cessation of Smoking, Eating Out of Home and Obesity (EPIC-PANACEA) project... I know what you're thinking... catchy! So, is it the study that is misguided or is it the unqualified journalists who are adding 2 and 2 and getting 5? Well, in this case it is a bit of both. Now, I've not been able to get hold of the full text yet... but the following is based on what I have been able to get hold of...

A quick re-cap of basic physiology and nutrition. Carbohydrate and protein both contain ~4kcals per gram with fat containing 9. This is the basic premise of why low fat diets work; if you don't know a lot about nutrition and are not overly motivated, lowering foods high in fat is the most likely way to create an energy deficit with the least short term discomfort... therefore causing you to lose weight (I say weight and not fat on purpose). Meat, perhaps wrongly, is regarded as a high fat food which is where the argument of a low meat intake comes from. On the other hand, time and time again research has shown that protein gives a greater sense of satiety (you feel fuller after eating it) and it also known that protein has the highest thermic effect of food (TEF) which is the increase in energy expenditure over the resting metabolic rate. I hopefully don't have to explain the link between protein and meat... it is also that case that there are a huge number of very lean meats which stay lean as long as they are not battered and deep fried... now, let's move on to the study.

In this study we read about weight gain over 5 years however there is never any measurement of body fat. In any situation, weight gain is not simply one tissue expanding e.g. adipose tissue. When people increase adipose tissue (fat) it is often accompanied by an increase in connective tissue and muscle! The ratio of muscle to fat gain is affected by a number of things, including the types of food you have eaten, this is known as nutrient partitioning. So, we are left uncertain as to what this ‘weight gain' actually means... but for now, let's humour them and say it is all fat...

We also see this weight gain attributed to those who ate processed meats such as bacon, ham and sausages particularly in countries where these meats are eaten often such as Germany and Norway. Now, I have German friends and even German/Norwegian extended family and what do they, and all their friends eat for breakfast with their sausage and ham? Plenty of ‘lovely' white crusty bread, smothered in cheese and chocolate spread! Now, I'm not suggesting that this is the norm in all households... but that is exactly the kind of suggestion/assumption that this study is making. Have they separated individuals based on trans fat intake? Or looked at the occurrence of high glycemic index carbohydrates eaten in conjunction with high fat foods... specifically processed foods? Of course not! On this scale that would be near impossible but time and time again I see this as being a major reason individuals get fat.

It is also the kind of mistake that was made when it was suggested that red meat was linked to coronary heart disease; here it was grouped together with processed meats which skewed the data and left us villainising red meat unjustly.... I say us... I mean them. I wrote about this here (there is a link to the study).

On a smaller scale, I see most of my clients increasing their meat intake if fat loss is a goal and lo and behold, they get leaner... because they eat non processes meat, they also eat lots of fat... often more than previously and finally... they have a carbohydrate intake that matches their activity levels! With those carbs coming from wholegrain, natural sources!

Amazingly in this study, they did not look at any change in diet i.e. over a 5 year period they measured diet once. Yes, once. How many of us (yes, I include myself) that have gained body fat eat the same diet all the time? I'll tell you this; those that are plagued the most with increasing body fat levels are far more prone to huge dietary changes. Oh, did I mention HOW food intake (diet) was measured? No? Oh, you're going to love this! It was measured with a questionnaire. Fantastic I know. Having done research using food based questionnaires this is what made me laugh the most. Yes, these are sometimes necessary, but don't then go out and make global dietary recommendations based on them!!

For anyone who cares to read the abstract of this study: here is a link.

You can discuss this topic on the Mac-Nutrition Online community, here is a link (you will need to register to view this).