Menu Bar

Home           Calendar           Topics          Just Charlestown          About Us

Sunday, August 24, 2025

Here is a good example of what all health and science research will look like under Donald Trump

“Surprising” Study – funded by the meat industry - finds meat may protect against cancer

By McMaster University

EDITOR’S NOTE: Since taking office in January, Donald Trump has made it clear that “facts” will now be molded to fit his view of reality. Whether it’s the economy, climate science, vaccinations, health, American history, foreign policy, etc., Trump’s opinions, not data or fact or science, will determine the outcome of research.

This week, we saw Trump go after the Smithsonian Institute for portraying the horrors of slavery and fire the Defense Intelligence Agency official who contradicted Trump’s claim that US air strikes completely destroyed Iran’s bomb-making capacity.

Trump fired the head of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics because he didn’t like their job numbers. He is threatening to “fire” the Mayor of Washington DC because he doesn’t believe DC’s crime statistics. He issued a stop-work order against the wind farm being built off the coast of Rhode Island because he believes “windmills” cause cancer. Hundreds more researchers have lost their jobs or their funding because their works doesn't fit with Trump's looney views.

In the future, expect research to look more like this study from the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association that in this case makes the “surprise” claim that beef can actually fight cancer. This is as believable as Trump’s belief that you should drink bleach to fight COVID.  – Will Collette

Eating foods that contain animal protein is not connected to a higher chance of death and may even provide some protection against cancer-related mortality, according to new research.

The findings, published in Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, are based on an analysis of data from nearly 16,000 adults aged 19 and older who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHAMES III).

Researchers looked at how much animal and plant protein participants consumed and compared those patterns with their risk of dying from cancer, heart disease, or any cause. The results revealed no elevated risk of death linked to greater animal protein intake. Instead, the data pointed to a small but meaningful decrease in cancer-related deaths among people who consumed more animal protein.

“There’s a lot of confusion around protein – how much to eat, what kind and what it means for long-term health. This study adds clarity, which is important for anyone trying to make informed, evidence-based decisions about what they eat,” explains Stuart Phillips, Professor and Chair of the Department of Kinesiology at McMaster University, who supervised the research.

Ensuring Reliable Results

To ensure reliable results, the team employed advanced statistical methods, including the National Cancer Institute (NCI) method and multivariate Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) modelling, to estimate long-term dietary intake and minimize measurement error.

“It was imperative that our analysis used the most rigorous, gold standard methods to assess usual intake and mortality risk. These methods allowed us to account for fluctuations in daily protein intake and provide a more accurate picture of long-term eating habits,” says Phillips.

The researchers found no associations between total protein, animal protein, or plant protein and risk of death from any cause, cardiovascular disease, or cancer. When both plant and animal protein were included in the analysis, the results remained consistent, suggesting that plant protein has a minimal impact on cancer mortality, while animal protein may offer a small protective effect.

Broader Implications

Observational studies like this one cannot prove cause and effect; however, they are valuable for identifying patterns and associations in large populations. Combined with decades of clinical trial evidence, the findings support the inclusion of animal proteins as part of a healthy dietary pattern.

“When both observational data like this and clinical research are considered, it’s clear both animal and plant protein foods promote health and longevity,” says lead researcher Yanni Papanikolaou, MPH, president, Nutritional Strategies.

Reference: “Animal and plant protein usual intakes are not adversely associated with all-cause, cardiovascular disease–, or cancer-related mortality risk: an NHANES III analysis” by Yanni Papanikolaou, Stuart M. Phillips and Victor L. Fulgoni III, 16 July 2025, Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism.
DOI: 10.1139/apnm-2023-0594

This research was funded by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), a contractor to the Beef Checkoff. NCBA was not involved in the study design, data collection and analysis or publication of the findings.