A new Italian study raises concerns about chicken consumption beyond a weekly limit. Researchers suggest that eating more than 300 grams of chicken per week—about four typical servings—may be associated with a higher risk of death from digestive cancers and from all causes. The findings challenge the view of chicken as a universally healthy alternative to red meat and prompt reflection for Thai readers who rely on chicken in many classic dishes.
According to research led by the National Institute of Gastroenterology in Italy and published in Nutrients, nearly 4,869 adults were followed for 19 years. The study found that those consuming more than 300 grams weekly had a 27% higher risk of death from any cause and more than double the risk of death from digestive system cancers. Men appeared to face a greater risk, though researchers caution that this is observational data and does not prove causation. Data from the study emphasize the need to consider cooking methods, portion sizes, and overall diet patterns rather than focusing on a single food.
In Thailand, chicken is deeply embedded in daily meals—from massaman curry to gai yang at street stalls. The findings echo a familiar caution that has already guided Thai nutrition messaging: diversify protein sources and watch preparation methods. Local experts stress that cooking practices matter as much as what is eaten; high-heat methods like grilling and excessive frying can raise the formation of potentially harmful compounds. Thai public health guidance continues to advocate lean proteins and plenty of vegetables, balancing taste with health.
The Italian study collected detailed dietary data through validated questionnaires and medical interviews, tracking mortality outcomes over nearly two decades. While red meat remains associated with several health risks, the current study highlights that poultry is not a risk-free option when consumed in excess or prepared at high temperatures. The broader message aligns with international cautions about processed and red meat, while underscoring the complexity of diet-related cancer risk across different populations and cuisines.
Experts emphasize cautious interpretation. Lead author Dr. Caterina Bonfiglio notes that the study shows correlation, not causation, and that lifestyle factors could influence outcomes. Limitations include the inability to distinguish between chicken cuts, processing, or exercise levels. This nuance invites Thai audiences to consider overall dietary patterns, cooking styles, and physical activity as part of a healthy lifestyle.
Practical guidance for Thai households emphasizes moderation and variety. Consider aiming for a mix of protein sources such as fish, tofu, tempeh, and eggs, while keeping portions reasonable. Favor cooking methods that reduce mutagen formation, such as steaming, poaching, or gentle stir-frying at lower temperatures. When consuming poultry, choosing meat from reputable producers with careful feed practices is sensible, given ongoing debates about additives in poultry farming.
Public health messaging for schools, communities, and media could focus on practical steps: diversify proteins, prefer plant-based options where feasible, and promote healthful cooking practices. Thai culinary culture already celebrates a wide range of ingredients and flavors; expanding this variety can support healthier eating without sacrificing identity or taste.
Actionable takeaways for readers:
- Limit chicken to roughly three servings per week (about 300 grams).
- Balance meals with fish, tofu, eggs, and abundant vegetables.
- Choose chicken from sources with careful farming practices and minimal additives.
- Use steaming, boiling, or low-heat stir-frying instead of high-heat grilling or deep-frying.
- Pair meat with whole grains and plenty of vegetables.
For a deeper look, readers can consult guidance from Thailand’s Ministry of Public Health and national nutrition resources, which continue to emphasize balanced, varied diets and mindful cooking methods in line with global research.
Note on sources: This article reflects synthesis from the Italian study published in Nutrients and integrated public health perspectives. All citations have been incorporated into the narrative to maintain a clean, source-aware read without external links.