Un-fucking-believable. Not once is bodyfat or lean mass mentioned, its ALL about WEIGHT, BMI-tastic tardiness. It's no wonder our fellow non-training civvies are all out of shape and diabetic.
Did they take into consideration activity level at all?
Or the foods consumed with the meat, e.g., french fries and Coke...
Don't get me started... this kind of backward shit is constantly touted in the news. The average person doesn't get their RDA of protein at the best of times and this certainly won't help.
This is the a funny bit: "a serving of meat should be the size of a deck of cards" !!!!! What's that? HALF a chicken boobie?
Bleh. We have a watch-dog agency to complain to when TV ads are misleading etc, we REALLY need one for when spurious nutrional guidance is given to the general public. So much power and consequence with absolutely fucking no moderation by or from anyone.
While I agree the article is ridiculous, you can't look at everything through the myopic lens of bodybuilding. That's about 3 - 4 ounces of meat. How much protein do you think the average, completely sedentary person needs?
Not all that much, I assure you.
Whats this? Self-report studies with no control groups?
Maybe I should link this thread in the Bro-science thread as a perfect example of why purely anecdotal evidence is not reliable.
I find it amusing that in 2010 they are still conducting population surveys with questionaires and calling them "studies". Not only that but using this data to derive actual numbers as if they were conducted in a lab-controlled environment: i.e. for every 250g of meat etc etc. We've seen it a million times and this is just yet another.
There's no sense in picking apart the "study" because we probably have better things we should be doing. What I find interesting, however, is the supposed correlation with poultry and weight gain. But just for the hell of it I'd like to translate that part in regard to the non-bodybuilding average population. Poultry = deep fried chicken.