The 2012 red meat-mortality study (Arch Intern Med): The data suggests that red meat is protective
I am not a big fan of using arguments such as “food questionnaires are unreliable” and “observational studies are worthless” to completely dismiss a study. There are many reasons for this. One of them is that, when people misreport certain diet and lifestyle patterns, but do that consistently (i.e., everybody underreports food intake), the biasing effect on coefficients of association is minor. Measurement errors may remain for this or other reasons, but regression methods (linear and nonlinear) assume the existence of such errors, and are designed to yield robust coefficients in their presence. Besides, for me to use these types of arguments would be hypocritical, since I myself have done several analyses on the China Study data ( ), and built what I think are valid arguments based on those analyses. My approach is: Let us look at the data, any data, carefully, using appropriate analysis tools, and see what it tells us; maybe we will find evidence of measurement errors distorting the ...