Re:Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide ...
by tankenmate on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @08:04AM
(#26327775)
No, that is not what it said.
The summary says "higher BMI accounted for a substantial proportion of these increased risks suggesting that residual confounding or mediation by adiposity might account for some of these remaining associations"
That means that a substantial proportion of the increased risk is explained by a higher BMI. Unfortunately the summary doesn't say how much "substantial" is.
Re:Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide ...
by bigfudge on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @05:11PM
(#26335425)
To be specific, the regression models they use assume no measurement error in predictors. In this case BMI isn't even a direct measure of adiposity, so it's kind of obvious, but even if they had a direct measure of body fat the issue could remain because error in measurement of predictors would attenuate the ability of this covariate to eliminate confounding.
Re:Meat consumption and risk of 25 conditions: outcome-wide ...
by jonnycomputer on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @08:08AM
(#26327807)
After correcting for BMI, but BMI is an imperfect proxy for adiposity: "...residual confounding or mediation by adiposity might account for some of these remaining associations"
> In multi-variable adjusted (including BMI)
So after correcting for BMI, meat consumption is still bad.