Red Meat Consumption as a Health Issue

Red Meat Consumption as a Health Issue 

Red Meat 

The consumption of red meat as a source of protein and fats has come a major concern to numerous people. This is because they believe that it contributes to high death rates due to cardiovascular conditions, cancer and diabetes mellitus. This has thus attracted attention from experimenters who have carried out colorful inquiries to support the view or condemn it. The popular press composition and scientific peer- reviewed composition bandy the issue. 

Comparison between the two papers 

The scientific peer- reviewed composition on Red meat consumption and mortality as well as the popular exploration composition on red meat linked to high threat of unseasonable death bandy the effect of red meat on mortal health through the exploration conducted. Through the exploration that was conducted in the two papers, there's substantiation that raw, reused, or undressed red meat causes cardiovascular conditions, diabetes mellitus, and cancer( Lee & Zheng, 2009). 

 

In both papers, the exploration analysis proves that those people who consume red meat increase the chances of unseasonable deaths in their lives as compared to insectivores. In the exploration, the sample that was used to collect data in the two papers is analogous because they both used white men and women. In the two papers, the exploration took into account other threat factors similar as the body mass indicator, age and the history of the family in relation to habitual conditions during the analysis( Colditz etal., 1989). 

 

In the popular exploration composition, the analysis shows that the chance increase of unseasonable deaths for those who consume reused meat similar as a hot canine is advanced than those people who consume undressed red meat. This is analogous to the analysis in the scientific peer- reviewed composition, which has the view that the increased threat of CVD and cancer mortality in those people who consume reused red meat is advanced than the undressed red meat( Colditz etal., 1989). 

 

In the scientific peer- reviewed composition, the analysis shows that the consumption of red meat redounded in other goods of dependence like alcohol and smoking, which are dangerous to mortal health. The popular press composition indicates that those who eat red meat always have the appetite of taking icy tonics, which beget other complications in mortal health similar as heart conditions( Lee & Zheng, 2009). 

 

In the popular press composition, the analysis isn't clear since it doesn't indicate the age type of the men and women who were used as the sample of the study. While in the case of the scientific peer- reviewed composition, the analysis of the sample is clear since the age type is given that's 40- 75 times for men and 30- 55 times for women. This, thus, shows that the analysis in the popular press composition isn't done well( Colditz etal., 1989). 

 

In the popular press composition, the information given lacks substantiation because the exploration doesn't specify the sample of the study easily and how the experimenter collected the data for analysis. It also fails to explain how the assessment of meat consumption was done as well as the follow- ups to cover the exploration that was conducted. The exploration fails to identify the factors of red meat, which beget the goods stated in the study as is explained in the scientific peer- reviewed composition. The results to the problem are handed like giving druthers of healthy sources of proteins to red meat( Lee & Zheng, 2009). 

 

Limitation of scientific peer- reviewed composition 

As much the scientific peer- reviewed composition tries to specify the sample and explain the follow- up to insure that the information collected isn't poisoned there are loopholes left, which makes numerous experimenters misdoubt the information given and conclusions arrived at after the study. The study in this case lacks a scientific base since in a scientific study the sample used to give the needed data is generally of a randomized clinical trial where the actors are divided into two groups aimlessly. 

 

The two groups should thus match in terms of coitus, age, health and any other factor considered to affect the results. One group is given drug as opposed to the other one, which isn't treated. In RCT, there are other forms of treatment to apply to gain unprejudiced information for the study more especially if the exploration is presumed to affect the mortal health( Lee & Zheng, 2009). 

 

Due to the high costs of enforcing the RCT numerous experimenters affect to experimental study like in the scientific peer reviewed composition where they used the cohort study to gain the data for their analysis. In this kind of study, the sample was named for a period of 22 times but the information collected wasn't valid since there was no prove of a cause- effect relationship. For illustration, between the red meat and the CVD, cancer or other actions like taking alcohol or smoking. For any scientific study, observation kind of study isn't valid in collecting data to draw conclusions( Lee & Zheng, 2009). 

 

Another limitation in the scientific peer reviewed composition is that the sample selection was poisoned. The sample that was named didn't feed for all orders in terms of age. The women under the age of 30 times and men under the age of 40 times weren't named yet they consume red meat and suffer from diabetes mellitus as well as heart conditions. The age type was thus a problem and this leads to further review on the data collected for analysis( Colditz etal., 1989). 

 

During the arbitrary selection of the sample for the study, there was a problem in gender representation since the number of men in the study wasn't equal because women were numerous compared to men. In the cohort study, sample selection is specified as opposed to RCT where sample selection is done aimlessly and this result to trip in data collection.