Paul Saladino· MD
grass-fed beef isn't is not uh you know according to what's out there significantly more nutrient-dense uh to humans than feedlot finished beef it's just there's just not a significant difference
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
grass-fed beef isn't is not uh you know according to what's out there significantly more nutrient-dense uh to humans than feedlot finished beef it's just there's just not a significant difference
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
that in the studies that i've seen there's there's not a huge difference in terms of the actual nutrition content of grass-fed beef versus grain-fed beef
grass-fed beef isn't is not you know according to what's out there significantly more nutrient-dense to humans then feedlot finish beef it's just there's just not a significant difference