I don't like the title. It asserts a finding that wasn't actually found.
They determined that the science doesn't really support claims of red meat causing x, y or z health issue. That is not the same as finding that red meat is not a health risk.
The real conclusion: Nutrition science has a long history of poor methodology and cannot state much at all with much statistical confidence.
That conclusion should not shock anyone familiar with how most such studies get done.
They determined that the science doesn't really support claims of red meat causing x, y or z health issue. That is not the same as finding that red meat is not a health risk.
The real conclusion: Nutrition science has a long history of poor methodology and cannot state much at all with much statistical confidence.
That conclusion should not shock anyone familiar with how most such studies get done.