Correction: Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) on Consumption of Red and Processed Meat
FREE- This correction concerns the following article:
- review-article19 November 2019
Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for All-Cause Mortality and Cardiometabolic OutcomesFREE
- review-article19 November 2019
Reduction of Red and Processed Meat Intake and Cancer Mortality and IncidenceFREE
- review-article19 November 2019
Effect of Lower Versus Higher Red Meat Intake on Cardiometabolic and Cancer OutcomesFREE
- review-article19 November 2019
Patterns of Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk for Cardiometabolic and Cancer OutcomesFREE
- review-article19 November 2019
Health-Related Values and Preferences Regarding Meat ConsumptionFREE
- This correction concerns the following article:
On the author disclosure forms accompanying recent related articles on red and processed meat consumption and health outcomes (1–6), Bradley Johnston did not indicate a grant from Texas A&M AgriLife Research to fund investigator-driven research related to saturated and polyunsaturated fats. This funding is for work in the field of nutrition and the start of funding period was within the 36-month reporting period required in Section 3 of the disclosure form of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Dr. Johnston has updated his disclosure form to include this research funding and also to note funding received from the International Life Science Institute (North America) that ended before the 36-month ICMJE reporting period. The corrected disclosure forms now accompany the articles (1–6).
References
- 1.
Zeraatkar D ,Han MA ,Guyatt GH ,et al . Red and processed meat consumption and risk for all-cause mortality and cardiometabolic outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:703-10 doi:10.7326/M19-0655 LinkGoogle Scholar - 2.
Han MA ,Zeraatkar D ,Guyatt GH ,et al . Reduction of red and processed meat intake and cancer mortality and incidence. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:711-20 doi:10.7326/M19-0699 LinkGoogle Scholar - 3.
Zeraatkar D ,Johnston BC ,Bartoszko J ,et al . Effect of lower versus higher red meat intake on cardiometabolic and cancer outcomes. A systematic review of randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:721-31 doi:10.7326/M19-0622 LinkGoogle Scholar - 4.
Vernooij RWM ,Zeraatkar D ,Han MA ,et al . Patterns of red and processed meat consumption and risk for cardiometabolic and cancer outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:732-41 doi:10.7326/M19-1583 LinkGoogle Scholar - 5.
Valli C ,Rabassa M ,Johnston BC ,et al .NutriRECS Working Group . Health-related values and preferences regarding meat consumption. A mixed-methods systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:742-55 doi:10.7326/M19-1326 LinkGoogle Scholar - 6.
Johnston BC ,Zeraatkar D ,Han MA ,et al . Unprocessed red meat and processed meat consumption: dietary guideline recommendations from the nutritional recommendations (NutriRECS) consortium. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:756-64 doi:10.7326/M19-1621 LinkGoogle Scholar
Advocacy versus holding nutrition to a higher standard of evidence
1. Rubin R. Backlash Over Meat Dietary Recommendations Raises Questions About
Corporate Ties to Nutrition Scientists. JAMA. 2020 Jan 15. doi:
10.1001/jama.2019.21441.
More Conflicts of Interest in for Meat Studies
The Annals disclosure form tells authors, “You should disclose interactions with ANY entity that could be considered broadly relevant to the work.” The capitalization is in the original. Economic relationships with entities involved in meat research, marketing, and promotion would require disclosure.
First, one of the authors, Patrick Stover, oversees multi-million-dollar meat research, marketing, and promotion programs as part of his work as the head of Texas A&M AgriLife, which receives millions of dollars of funding from meat-promoting entities. This was not disclosed on his conflict of interest form dated September 10, 2019.
Second, while the research articles were being drafted, the primary author, Bradley Johnston, was negotiating a $170,000 tenured position at Texas A&M AgriLife, which, as noted above, is heavily involved in marketing the product that was the subject of the research Johnston sought to publish. He accepted the salaried position on August 1, 2019. This was not disclosed on his conflict of interest form dated August 23, 2019.
To my knowledge, neither of these conflicts has been reported by the authors or the Annals. The Annals should issue a further correction acknowledging these conflicts of interest.
1. Correction: Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) on Consumption of Red and Processed Meat. Ann Intern Med. 2019; [Epub ahead of print 31 December 2019]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/L19-0822
Disclosures: Dr. Barnard is an Adjunct Professor of Medicine at the George Washington University School of Medicine. He serves without compensation as president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and Barnard Medical Center in Washington, DC, nonprofit organizations providing educational, research, and medical services related to nutrition, encouraging the use of low-fat, plant-based diets and discouraging the use of animal-derived, fatty, and sugary foods. He is an active member of the American Medical Association, Medical Society of the District of Columbia, and American College of Cardiology, organizations that have called for the elimination of processed meats from hospital menus. He writes books and articles and gives lectures related to nutrition and health, and has received royalties and honoraria from these sources.
Correcting the Record is more than merely addressing a potential COI or running a meta-analysis of other investigators research.
To date there are only three published studies [2-4] - none of which were discussed by Johnston, et al [1] in the original publications - which have been done looking at the effect low carbohydrate diets have on heart disease. Simply measuring changes in weight or changes in blood (cholesterol, CRP, homocysteine, IL-6, et cetera) tests [5-7] will not tell you what these diets are doing to the arteries of the heart or whether these diets are associated with the development of cancer. Changes in weight or these blood tests simply cannot answer these questions [6] and meta-analysis of such results only further confuse the issue. Individuals not familiar with these published studies [5-7] do not have the pre-requisite knowledge to be part of a serious discussion regarding the impact of these diets. Their continued efforts to pressure their way into the discussion merely confound those scientifically looking for answers.
When I was in training, our professors used to refer to this as mental masturbation. The process of debating obscure, unrelated, fundamentally unimportant issues – the purpose of which was to make the discussant feel better about their argument without ever addressing the important issues being discussed – the Billy Madison principle. In the courtroom attorneys refer to this approach as obfuscation where evidence is ignored or hidden from the jury in an effort to win the case. These efforts are more focused on making people feel important, than finding the truth. This is not a luxury we have in medicine. Ignoring the truth results in misdiagnosis and the loss of life.
Given this outside influence and efforts by people with money and power to control the flow of science, it is no wonder that people doubt so many published studies. Medical journalists – those who report on medical research and the remaining media are many times confused about what is and isn’t valid. In truth much – but not all – of the blame falls to us for our failure to clarify the confusion [5-7]. We can; however, and should change all that.
We now know it is possible to measure the effects [8-10] these diets have on coronary (heart) artery disease and breast cancer. By measuring what’s happening within the walls of the coronary arteries where the inflammation [5] is occurring and changes occurring within the breast tissue [7,10], we can objectively measure what these diets are doing to people. The question isn’t whether this can be done, but whether the diet pundits have the courage to do so. To commit to such a study will result in the exposure of those not telling the truth as well as the validation of those who are telling the truth. For those stating they are interested in finding answers, the time for excuses and obfuscation is over.
It’s time for such a study to be done! There’s only one reason not to – COI MONEY.
Potential COI: FMTVDM is a utility patent owned by the author. That being said, the author will make this test available for use without cost for the purposes of conducting a study to measure the impact of these diets on heart disease and breast cancer. The quantitative outcome of which will provide the objective truth.
References:
1. Correction: Nutritional Recommendations (NutriRECS) on Consumption of Red and Processed Meat. Ann Intern Med. 2019; [Epub ahead of print 31 December 2019]. doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/L19-0822
2. Fleming RM, Boyd LB. The Effect of High-Protein Diets on Coronary Blood Flow. Angiology 2000;51(10):817-826.
3. Fleming RM. The Effect of High-, Moderate-, and Low-Fat Diets on Weight Loss and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors. Prev Cardiol 2002;5:110-118.
4. Fleming RM, Fleming MR, Chaudhuri TK, Harrington GM. Cardiovascular Outcomes of Diet Counseling. Edel J Biomed Res Rev. 2019;1(1):21-30.
5. Fleming RM. Chapter 64. The Pathogenesis of Vascular Disease. Textbook of Angiology. John C. Chang Editor, Springer-Verlag New York, NY. 1999, pp. 787-798.
6. Fleming RM, Harrington GM. What is the Relationship between Myocardial Perfusion Imaging and Coronary Artery Disease Risk Factors and Markers of Inflammation? Angiology 2008;59:16-25.
7. Fleming RM, Fleming MR. The Importance of Thinking about and Quantifying Disease like Cancer and Heart Disease on a “Health-Spectrum” Continuum. J Compr Cancer Rep 2019;3(1):1-3 (Article ID 100011).
8. Sheikh A. Evolution of Quantification in Clinical Nuclear Medicine: A Brief Overview of Salient Uses and Upcoming Trends. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2018;9(4): 1000375. DOI: 10.4172/2155-9619.1000375.
9. The Fleming Method for Tissue and Vascular Differentiation and Metabolism (FMTVDM) using same state single or sequential quantification comparisons. Patent Number 9566037. Issued 02/14/2017.
10. Fleming RM, Fleming MR, McKusick A, Chaudhuri TK. Objectively measuring popular diets affect on heart disease and breast cancer. Acta Sci Pharm Sci 2019;3(9):81-92.
Disclosures: FMTVDM is a utility patent owned by the author. That being said, the author will make this test available for use without cost for the purposes of conducting a study to measure the impact of these diets on heart disease and breast cancer. The quantitative outcome of which will provide the objective truth.