• idkwhatimdoing@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    What do you mean? I eat a lot of steak and am unlikely to change that too much, but these are just numbers, and they seem to check out.

    • TheAlbatross@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The study methods themselves are bogus. They asked people to recall what they ate “last night” and called that indicative of diets.

      It’s flawed data without usefulness.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s not that the study methods are bogus, but that they don’t actually tell us what the headline says, which, incidentally, is not the title of the study. The actual title of the study is: “Demographic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Disproportionate Beef Consumption among US Adults in an Age of Global Warming

        And from the abstract:

        The objective of this study was to identify the demographic, socioeconomic, and behavioral correlates of disproportionate beef consumption in the United States.

        So the study actually does do a good job of that, because 24-hr recall is sufficient to tell us the relative rates of high beef consumption in different population segments.

        What it’s not good at differentiating is determining whether it is fewer individuals consuming beef more frequently or a greater number of individuals consuming beef less frequently.

        That is to say, 10% of the population consuming >4oz of beef every day compared to 20% of the population consuming >4oz of beef every 2nd day would appear the same. It still does tell us how much beef is being consumed by the population, however, so the data isn’t useless.