However, when people cut back on red meat and ate more fish, chicken, eggs and vegetables, their risk of dying over the eight years fell. Substituting one 85g serving of red meat — about three thin slices of roast beef — per day for fish reduced the risk by 17 per cent. Switching from processed meat to fish cut the chance by 25 per cent.
What genetic factors did they take into account for people living longer. My grandparents lived until nearly 90 and grandfather was a butcher, so we were or are big meat eaters.
My hubby’s father lived until 101, enjoyed ale in reasonable amounts when out a couple of times a week but never drunk, all his life, did not drink indoors. Did give up smoking in his 60s, did not bother too much about his diet but ate veg and some salad, cooked fish and meat for himself. Would cook chips and other friend foods, did do a weekly roast.
Whilst Hubby’s mother (parents divorced when he was very young) was in her 60s and so was her sister when they died. The sister took care of herself better than my MIL. Both smoked, both liked a drink of scotch. Food was not overly brilliant, much more processed than FIL. Neither took much exercise e.g. walked, whereas FIL was very active until mid-90s then his legs started to fail him. MIL had a rougher life than FIL, of her own making.
So whey did FIL live 40 years longer than MIL and her sister.
People make changes in the life as years roll by, how were these taken into account or controlled. What else happened to this study group over time?
I very rarely read research these days or listen to news items which are food/life style studies supposedly.