Does red meat cause cardiovascular disease?

The relationship between red meat and heart health is one of the most debated topics in nutrition. But does consuming this type of meat, by itself, really increase a person’s risk of developing heart disease?

What do the studies say?

One of the most influential studies on diet and heart health was published in the 1950s, when the modern debate on the topic began to gain traction. Started in 1958 by physiologist Ancel Keys, the Seven Countries Study brought together researchers from different countries to investigate how dietary patterns and lifestyles related to the occurrence of cardiovascular diseases across populations.

The study’s main hypothesis was that rates of coronary heart disease (which involve impairment of blood flow through the coronary arteries, most often due to atheromas, as noted by the MSD Manual) would vary between populations and individuals according to physical characteristics and, above all, lifestyle — especially the dietary fat composition and total cholesterol levels identified in blood tests. Dietary fat received special attention because coronary heart disease specifically refers to impairment of the arteries that supply the heart, usually associated with the accumulation of fatty plaques over time, popularly known as “clogging of the arteries.” Cardiovascular diseases, meanwhile, constitute a broad group of conditions that affect the heart and blood vessels, ranging from hypertension to events such as heart attacks and stroke.

Based on standardized surveys carried out over decades in different countries, the study showed that factors such as high cholesterol, blood pressure, diabetes and smoking are universal risk factors for coronary disease, and it also indicated that distinct dietary patterns and lifestyles were associated with different rates of cardiovascular mortality. In other words, the set of habits and behaviors that characterize how people live also had an impact.

These findings contributed to the consolidation of the so-called diet–heart hypothesis and influenced nutritional recommendations in various countries in the following decades, while also reinforcing the idea that cardiovascular diseases are multifactorial and potentially preventable through lifestyle.

As the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasizes, cardiovascular risk is strongly associated with factors such as physical inactivity, smoking, obesity, diets high in ultra-processed foods, and low fiber intake. In other words, the dietary context and lifestyle are decisive.

Although the initial milestone in this debate already indicated that cardiovascular risk is not linked to a single isolated food, the simplistic association between meat and fat supported nutritional recommendations that limited red meat consumption, despite the diversity of meats and cuts, with options that are low in fat, different cooking methods, and ways of consuming them.

Moreover, part of the associations between meat and cardiovascular risk come from observational studies, which identify correlations but do not establish cause and effect. A meta-analysis published in the Annals of Internal Medicine reviewed cohort studies, which are observational, longitudinal and analytical, and clinical trials. The conclusion was that the evidence linking red meat to cardiovascular disease risk is low, with small absolute effects.

The French paradox

An example of how isolated nutrient analysis can lead to simplified interpretations is the so-called “French paradox.” In the 1990s, it was observed that France had relatively low mortality rates from coronary heart disease despite a dietary pattern perceived as rich in saturated fats. The phenomenon was widely discussed in the scientific literature.

Later reviews, such as the one published in the National Library of Medicine, suggested that the paradox likely involves multiple factors, including methodological differences in death certification and time lags between dietary exposure and cardiovascular problems, rather than a single-food explanation.

According to a publication in The Lancet, one hypothesis raised to explain differences in coronary disease rates between populations was the pattern of wine consumption with meals, especially in the context of diets higher in fat. However, this interpretation is controversial and should not be understood as a recommendation to consume alcohol, which is associated with significant health risks.

Meat on the plate. Are we eating too much red meat?

The Guiding Principles for Sustainable Healthy Diets from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) do not recommend excluding meat entirely from the diet. The guidance is moderate consumption and prioritizing minimally processed foods within a balanced dietary pattern. It also emphasizes systemic sustainability, which simultaneously considers the nutritional, environmental, economic and social impacts of food choices. Balanced diets that include lean meat, vegetables, fruits, whole grains and regular physical activity are compatible with good cardiovascular health.

Although the document does not provide an exact recommendation on the amount of meat that would be considered moderate for a balanced diet, the World Cancer Research Fund recommends approximately 525 g to 750 g of raw meat per week (the reference is given based on raw weight because the total weight of the food changes after cooking). Annually, that would be 27 kg to 39 kg per person. In Brazil, according to the CiCarne Yearbook of the cattle production chain 2024-2025, based on data from the Brazilian Association of Beef Exporting Industries (Abiec) from 2023, the average meat consumption is 37.5 kg per inhabitant per year, also considering raw weight.

In an article published in Jornal da USP, Professor Eduardo Delgado, from the Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), still notes that approximately 10% of the reported tonnage of meat in Brazil consists of bones, and about 20–30% of total beef production is exported. Therefore, effective domestic consumption in Brazil is lower than the statistics suggest. “With a 20–30% loss during cooking, the actual intake of fresh meat is even more reduced. Practically speaking, an annual per capita consumption of about 37.5 kg translates to approximately 100 grams of meat per day. That is the amount of fresh in natura meat, which when cooked results in a steak of roughly 70–75 grams,” he adds.

Thus, he explains, “although there are different types of red meat, the idea that we are facing excessive consumption does not apply to the Brazilian reality, where many cannot even reach that average for income reasons. Therefore, generalizations about reducing consumption can unfairly penalize the meat production sector, which is essential for global food security”.

Red meat returns to a starring role in the American food pyramid

The new U.S. Dietary Guidelines 2025–2030, published in January 2026, put even more emphasis on protein consumption and caution regarding ultra-processed foods. Aiming to bring so-called “real food” back to the center of the plate, the official publication Real Food promotes dietary patterns based on recognizable, minimally processed and nutritionally dense foods, highlighting high-quality proteins as a central point, combined with fats from whole foods.

This movement, however, has sparked debate among experts. In a report by CNN Portugal, cardiologists warn that the relaxed approach to fats could lead to interpretations that underestimate their impact on LDL cholesterol levels, one of the factors associated with the development of atherosclerosis, a disease that affects the arteries responsible for carrying blood from the heart to the rest of the body. However, the focus of the new guidelines is clear, explicitly citing healthy fats: “all meals should prioritize high-quality, nutrient-rich proteins from both animal and plant sources, combined with healthy fats from whole foods such as eggs, seafood, meats, full-fat dairy, nuts, seeds, olives and avocados.”

The debate about healthy fats

The new dietary guidelines for Americans also redefined the concept of “healthy fats” by focusing on the whole-food matrix rather than isolating the nutrient. According to the official document, the fat present in foods such as meats, eggs and full-fat dairy has been classified as part of a nutrient-dense dietary pattern. The central logic of this change, detailed in analyses from HSPH Harvard, is that these natural fats should not be avoided when consumed in their original form, as they are essential carriers for fat-soluble vitamins and minerals.

Although meat also contains saturated fat, the guidelines argue that the metabolic impact of this nutrient is attenuated when it is part of a food considered “real food,” which provides satiety and glycemic stability. On the other hand, traditional bodies such as the American Heart Association (AHA) remain cautious, reiterating that excess saturated fat, even from whole-food sources, can still raise LDL cholesterol. The point of convergence between the new rules and classic science is that the priority now is replacing refined carbohydrates and industrial oils with these whole-food fats, while maintaining the technical limit of 10% of daily calories from saturated fat for cardiovascular health.

It is worth noting, however, that according to the USDA food composition data, to reach the daily limit of 22 grams of saturated fat (based on a standard 2,000 kcal diet), an individual would need to consume more than 1 kg of lean round or eye-of-round in a single day. Even though this dynamic changes by cut, the amount of meat that would hit that saturated fat ceiling is quite high compared to average per capita consumption. In options like top sirloin or filet mignon, the limit would be reached with approximately 300 g to 400 g of meat. In fattier cuts, such as picanha or ribeye, the threshold is reached with about 150 g to 250 g.

Unprocessed vs ultra-processed, the difference that changes everything

A study published in AHA Journals indicates that high consumption of processed meats, such as cold cuts, has been more consistently associated with higher cardiovascular risk in systematic reviews.

In the document Cardioprotective Diet, the Brazilian Ministry of Health already highlights this guidance, advocating essentially natural foods: “the basis of our diet should be composed of in natura or minimally processed foods,” says the guide, which further clarifies the two types of foods as “those acquired without undergoing any alteration after leaving nature, or those that have undergone minimal changes. Examples: fruits; vegetables; legumes; milk; natural yogurt; beans; cereals; roots; tubers; eggs; chilled or frozen meats; flours; pasta; nuts; dried fruits; whole juices; tea; coffee; and drinking water.”

The discussion about cardiovascular health should therefore consider the overall dietary pattern. Recent evidence supports this approach. A study published in The Lancet’s global medical journal, which evaluated levels of ultra-processed and minimally processed food consumption among nearly 200,000 consumers with different meat consumption patterns, showed that diets with lower red meat presence are not necessarily associated with healthier choices. The study found a 1.3 percentage point higher consumption of ultra-processed foods among vegetarians compared with regular meat consumers. Consumption of minimally processed foods was higher in all other diet types: from 0.4 percentage points higher among vegetarians to 3.2 among vegans, compared with regular red meat consumers.

In other words, the claim that “meat causes cardiovascular disease” is an excessive simplification. Risk depends on the type of meat, the cut, the amount consumed, the overall dietary pattern, the degree of processing of foods in the diet as a whole, nutritional balance and lifestyle, and not on the isolated presence of red meat. Science does not point to a single food as the villain, but rather the combination of poor dietary choices and lifestyle habits over time, as well as the influence of other factors such as genetics.

Learn more: New U.S. dietary guidelines reinforce the central role of meat in the diet

Reference Links:

Scientific studies indicate that cardiovascular risk is more closely related to overall dietary patterns and lifestyle than to the isolated consumption of red meat, especially when distinguishing between unprocessed and ultra-processed products.

What do the studies say?

Meat on the plate. Are we eating too much red meat?

Latest news

Uruguay advances in soil management and livestock stocking

More Than Exports: Brazil Accelerates Opening of International Markets and Exports Expertise in Combating Hunger

Precision nutrition increases cattle weight and reduces waste