Todd, thanks for posting this abstract.

Trouble is that this type of prospective study is notorious. This is
exactly what made the Framingham study so flawed, researcher bias,
participants' bias, etc. etc.

Note that it is the "covariates" that are so hard to control. Perhaps
the folks who ate a lot of nuts (or who _said_ they did) were in general
more careful about what they ate, ate lower carb, ate fewer transfatty
acids, etc. Who knows? And perhaps the men who ate red meat ate higher
carb, ate more moldy fruit, or some other variate that the researchers
didn't even _think_ about measuring/asking about/controlling or couldn't
have controlled for.

So yes, it's interesting, but I certainly can't draw any conclusions
from it about peanuts, or much else for that matter.

--Richard