Red Meat and Processed Meat: How Much Is Too Much, According to the Evidence

The claim arrived, as these things do, in a 40-second clip: a confident voice announcing that red meat had been “cleared” and that the old warnings were a myth. By the time it had been reshared a few million times, searches for how much red meat is safe had climbed again, and family group chats were relitigating Sunday roast. As of September 2026, that clip, together with fresh interest in a large Harvard-led study on red meat and type 2 diabetes and rising reports of tick-triggered meat allergy, is why this question is trending.

The honest answer is less dramatic than either camp wants. Nobody serious has cleared red meat, and nobody serious thinks a steak is a cigarette. The evidence sits between those poles, and it is graded, not binary.

So this is a guide to the grades: what we know with confidence, what is probable, what is plausible but unproven, and what that means for the butcher’s counter.

Which meat counts as red meat, and which counts as processed meat?

Start with definitions, because half the online argument is people using different ones. In the World Health Organization’s framework, red meat means muscle meat from mammals: beef, veal, pork, lamb, mutton, goat, horse. Pork is red meat, whatever the marketing once said. Chicken, turkey and duck are poultry, counted separately.

Processed meat is any meat that has been transformed to preserve it or change its flavor: salting, curing, fermenting, smoking or similar steps. Bacon, ham, salami, hot dogs, sausages, corned beef, jerky and most canned meat all qualify. The raw material is usually red meat, but a smoked turkey slice or a cured chicken sausage falls in the processed category too, because the processing is what matters.

Fresh minced beef that you brown yourself is red meat, not processed meat. A pre-formed, seasoned, preserved burger patty from a packet has crossed the line. The distinction sounds fussy, yet it is the single most important thing to understand, because the evidence treats the two groups very differently.

Portions trip people up as well. The NHS frames its advice in cooked weight: a cooked breakfast with two sausages and two rashers of bacon comes to about 130 g, and an 8 oz steak shrinks to roughly 160 g cooked. A deck of cards is a fair visual for about 85–90 g.

Why so much care over categories? Because a sentence like “meat causes cancer” is nearly meaningless, while “an extra 50 g of processed meat a day is associated with an 18 percent relative rise in bowel cancer risk” is a real, testable statement. The rest of this article uses the WHO definitions, and when it says red meat it means the unprocessed kind unless stated otherwise.

What changed recently

Nothing in the underlying science has flipped, which is itself the news. What has changed is the volume of attention, and a few genuinely new data points worth dating.

In October 2015, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified processed meat as Group 1, meaning there is sufficient evidence it causes cancer in humans, and unprocessed red meat as Group 2A, probably carcinogenic. That ruling, based on a review of more than 800 studies by 22 experts from 10 countries, remains the backbone of every national guideline.

In 2019 a group of researchers published guidance in a major internal medicine journal suggesting adults could continue their current intake, on the grounds that the certainty of evidence was low. Most public health bodies reviewed that analysis and kept their advice unchanged, noting that low certainty about the size of a harm is not the same as evidence of safety.

In October 2023, a Harvard-led analysis of about 216,000 adults followed for up to 36 years reported that higher red meat intake, processed meat especially, was associated with higher type 2 diabetes risk, and that swapping a daily serving for nuts or legumes was linked to a lower risk. Harvard Health summarized it for the public.

In July 2023 the CDC published estimates that more than 110,000 suspected cases of alpha-gal syndrome, the tick-associated allergy to mammalian meat, had been identified in the United States since 2010, with as many as 450,000 people potentially affected once untested cases are counted. That pushed “red meat allergy” into mainstream searches.

Then came the 2026 viral clip. It cited none of the above accurately. The sections that follow do.

What the evidence actually says about red meat and cancer

Grading the evidence means asking what kind of study produced it. Randomized trials, where people are assigned to eat more or less of something for years, are the strongest design. For cancer outcomes they barely exist for meat, because you cannot ethically randomize people to decades of bacon. So the cancer evidence is overwhelmingly observational: large cohorts followed over time, with statistical adjustment for smoking, weight, alcohol and the rest.

Observational data has a weakness called confounding. People who eat the most processed meat often smoke more, move less and eat fewer vegetables, and no adjustment removes those differences completely. The IARC experts addressed this the standard way: they looked for consistency across many populations, a dose-response pattern, and a plausible biological mechanism. Processed meat and colorectal cancer met all three; that is why it earned Group 1. For unprocessed red meat the association was weaker and less consistent, hence Group 2A, probable rather than established.

The size of the effect matters as much as its existence. The WHO’s summary figures are an 18 percent relative increase in colorectal cancer risk for every 50 g of processed meat eaten daily, and about 17 percent for every 100 g of red meat daily. Relative risk describes a proportional change, not your personal odds. If lifetime bowel cancer risk is roughly 1 in 20, an 18 percent relative rise moves it to something like 1 in 17. Real, worth acting on, and nowhere near the risk from tobacco.

One line in the WHO document deserves quoting in spirit: the Group 1 label reflects the strength of the evidence that something can cause cancer, not how dangerous it is. Processed meat and asbestos sit in the same group for that reason alone.

How much red meat is too much? What the guidelines actually recommend

Here the sources converge more than headlines suggest. No major body says adults must avoid red meat; several say to keep it moderate and to treat processed meat as an occasional food rather than a daily default.

Source	Unprocessed red meat	Processed meat	Basis
NHS (UK)	If you eat more than 90 g cooked a day, cut down to 70 g a day on average	Counted within the same 70 g, keep it low	Observational cohorts, expert review
WHO / IARC	No numeric limit set; risk rises with the amount eaten	Group 1 carcinogen; eating less reduces risk	Review of 800+ studies
American Heart Association	Choose lean cuts; favor fish, poultry and plant proteins	Limit processed meats	Trials on blood lipids plus cohort data
Harvard Health	A few servings a week at most	Avoid or minimize	Cohort studies incl. diabetes and heart disease

Translate 70 g a day into a week and you get about 500 g cooked: three or four modest portions. A household that eats a steak Friday, a roast Sunday and a bolognese midweek, with lean mince and real vegetables bulking the sauce, sits comfortably inside that. A household with bacon every morning and a deli sandwich every lunch is over before dinner.

Children, pregnant people and anyone with iron deficiency should not read a ceiling as a target to cut toward; lean red meat is one of the most absorbable sources of iron and zinc. The NHS limits are about adults averaging more than 90 g daily, which describes a large share of adult men in high-income countries and a smaller share of women.

Red meat and heart disease: saturated fat, iron and TMAO

The heart question has better evidence than the cancer question, because part of it can be tested in trials. Saturated fat raises LDL cholesterol, the fraction that drives plaque in artery walls, and that finding comes from controlled feeding studies, the strongest design available. The American Heart Association recommends keeping saturated fat below about 6 percent of daily calories for people who need to lower LDL, and fatty cuts, sausages and cured meats are among the largest contributors in a typical Western diet.

Two further mechanisms are plausible but less proven. Heme iron, the form found in animal muscle, is absorbed efficiently, which is a benefit when you are deficient and a possible liability when you are not, since excess iron promotes oxidative stress. The second is TMAO, trimethylamine N-oxide, a compound gut bacteria produce from carnitine, which is abundant in red meat. Higher blood TMAO has been associated with cardiovascular events in observational studies, and short feeding studies show red meat raises it. Whether lowering TMAO changes outcomes has not been shown in a trial, so grade this as mechanism-level evidence.

What happens when you swap? Randomized trials replacing red meat with plant proteins, fish or poultry generally lower LDL by modest but meaningful amounts; swapping it for refined carbohydrate does not help. That nuance explains some conflicting headlines: a study comparing red meat to white bread will look reassuring for the meat.

Processed meat adds salt to the picture. A couple of slices of ham can deliver a substantial fraction of the day’s sodium, and sodium raises blood pressure in a dose-dependent way that has been demonstrated in trials. For the heart, then, the ranking is clear: processed meat carries the strongest case against it, fatty red meat next, lean red meat in modest amounts last.

Red meat and type 2 diabetes: the 2023 study behind the headlines

The study that keeps resurfacing in 2026 feeds pooled data from three long-running US cohorts, about 216,000 nurses and health professionals, who reported their diets every few years for up to 36 years. More than 22,000 developed type 2 diabetes. After adjustment for the usual confounders, those in the highest fifth of red meat intake had roughly 62 percent higher risk than those in the lowest fifth. Each additional daily serving of processed red meat was associated with 46 percent higher risk; each serving of unprocessed red meat with 24 percent higher risk. Swapping one daily serving for nuts and legumes was linked to about 30 percent lower risk.

Why does this matter when the data is observational? Partly because the size, duration and repeated dietary measurement are unusually good, and partly because the result is consistent with earlier cohorts in Europe and Asia. The researchers themselves framed it as supporting an upper limit of around one serving a week, which is stricter than the NHS 70 g figure. Grade it as moderate-strength observational evidence pointing the same way as weaker older studies.

Mechanisms are plausible rather than proven. Nitrites in cured meat may impair insulin secretion in laboratory models; high heme iron stores are associated with insulin resistance; saturated fat affects how muscle cells handle glucose; and heavy meat eaters tend to carry more weight, which the analysis adjusted for but cannot fully remove.

The practical reading is modest. People already living with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes gain the most from the swaps the study describes, which conveniently are the same swaps that help LDL. Any change to a diabetes plan, especially one involving medication and carbohydrate intake, belongs in a conversation with the treating clinician or a registered dietitian.

Why processed meat is graded differently from a fresh steak

If a pork chop and a slice of ham come from the same animal, why does one earn a stronger warning? The answer is chemistry added at the factory.

Curing relies on nitrite, usually as sodium nitrite or as nitrate that bacteria convert to nitrite. Nitrite keeps meat pink and blocks the bacterium that causes botulism, a real safety benefit. In the acidic environment of the stomach, and during high-heat cooking, nitrite reacts with compounds in meat to form N-nitroso compounds, several of which damage DNA in the bowel lining in animal studies. Human data on nitroso compounds specifically is observational, but it fits the pattern.

Smoking adds polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the same family of compounds found in tobacco smoke and charred food. Salting adds sodium in amounts that raise blood pressure. Fermentation and long storage can raise levels of other reactive compounds. None of these is present in a fresh cut you cook at home.

A note on labels, because this is a common point of confusion. Products marketed as “uncured” or “no nitrates added” are typically cured with celery powder or other vegetable extracts that are naturally rich in nitrate, which converts to nitrite in exactly the same way. The regulatory label is accurate in a narrow sense and misleading in practice. No body that has looked at the question treats these products as a lower-risk category.

The processed meat ceiling in most guidance is therefore not a number but a direction: as little as you are willing to accept. For many people that means bacon or salami as a weekend or holiday food rather than a sandwich filler five days a week, which alone can cut processed meat intake by three quarters without changing anything else.

Does grilling make red meat healthier than frying?

Not really, and the reason is instructive. Two groups of compounds form when muscle meat meets high heat. Heterocyclic amines, or HCAs, form when amino acids, sugars and creatine in the meat react above roughly 150°C, which happens in a frying pan, under a broiler and on a grill alike. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, PAHs, form when fat drips onto flame or hot coals and the smoke coats the meat, which is a grilling-specific problem.

Both groups are mutagenic in laboratory tests and cause tumors in animals at high doses. The human evidence is observational and mixed: some studies link well-done or charred meat preference to higher colorectal, pancreatic or prostate cancer risk, others find nothing after adjusting for total meat intake. Grade it as plausible mechanism, uncertain real-world magnitude.

Grilling does drain some fat, which slightly lowers saturated fat per portion. Frying in added oil adds calories. Those are small differences. The amount and type of meat on the plate drives risk far more than the cooking surface.

If you want to lower HCA and PAH exposure without giving up the grill, the measures with laboratory support are simple. Marinating, especially in acidic or herb-rich mixtures, reduces HCA formation substantially in controlled tests. Cooking at a lower temperature for longer, flipping frequently, trimming visible fat so it does not drip, and cutting away blackened edges all help. Partially cooking in a microwave or oven before a brief sear limits the time at high heat. Cooking methods that do not brown the surface, such as stewing, braising and poaching, form very few HCAs at all.

So the better question is not grill or pan but how much, how often and how charred.

What's the healthiest red meat to eat, and the unhealthiest?

Within the red meat category the spread is wide, and it falls along two lines: how much saturated fat a cut carries, and whether it has been processed.

The leanest options are trimmed sirloin, tenderloin or fillet, eye of round, pork tenderloin and loin chops, lean lamb leg, and minced beef labeled around 5 percent fat. Game such as venison is leaner still, with a fatty acid profile closer to poultry. These cuts deliver the nutrients red meat is prized for: highly absorbable heme iron, zinc, vitamin B12 and complete protein, with a fraction of the saturated fat of a ribeye or belly cut.

Grass-fed beef has a modestly better omega-3 to omega-6 ratio and somewhat less total fat than grain-finished beef, which is a genuine if small nutritional difference. What it does not change is the heme iron content or the HCAs formed when it is seared, so it shifts the heart picture slightly and the cancer picture not at all. Treat it as a quality preference rather than a risk strategy.

The unhealthiest end of the spectrum is easy to name because the evidence is clearest: processed, fatty and salty. Bacon, salami, pepperoni, hot dogs and fatty sausages combine high saturated fat, high sodium, nitrite curing and, in some cases, smoking. Heavily charred fatty cuts come next.

Portion is the quiet variable. A 90 g serving of lean sirloin twice a week is a different exposure from a 350 g tomahawk once a week, even though the second person might describe themselves as eating red meat less often. If you want one rule, choose the lean cut, keep it to about the size of your palm, and let vegetables, grains or pulses take up the rest of the plate.

Is chicken called red meat? Where poultry, fish and game fit

No. Chicken, turkey and duck are poultry and are not red meat under the WHO definition or any national dietary guideline. The muscle fibers in poultry contain less myoglobin, the oxygen-storing protein that gives mammalian muscle its red color and its heme iron content, which is one reason the evidence for poultry looks different.

What does the evidence show for poultry? Large cohorts generally find no association between unprocessed poultry and colorectal cancer, and in studies where poultry replaces red meat, heart disease and diabetes risk tends to be modestly lower. That is observational data, graded moderate because it is consistent across populations. Poultry skin is high in saturated fat, so skinless cuts are the comparison that holds up.

The important exception is processing. A smoked turkey breast, a chicken sausage or a cured chicken deli slice is processed meat in the IARC sense, because nitrite curing, salting and smoking produce the same compounds whatever the species. The “made with turkey” label on a packet of hot dogs removes some saturated fat and none of the curing chemistry.

Fish sits in its own category with the best evidence of the lot. Randomized trials of fish oil are mixed, but cohort data consistently links eating oily fish once or twice a week with lower cardiovascular mortality, and most guidelines recommend it.

Game meats such as venison, rabbit and wild boar are technically red meat if the animal is a mammal. They are leaner than farmed beef and pork, and they are eaten rarely enough by most people that they contribute little to the weekly total. Rabbit is sometimes classed as white meat in culinary tradition; nutritionally it behaves like lean poultry.

Red meat allergy linked to tick bites: what alpha-gal syndrome is

One reason red meat is trending has nothing to do with portions. Alpha-gal syndrome is an allergy to a sugar molecule, galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose, found in the tissue of most mammals but not in humans, poultry or fish. In the United States it is most often triggered by a bite from the lone star tick, which transfers the sugar into the skin and can prime the immune system to react to it. Different tick species are implicated in Europe, Australia and Asia.

The syndrome breaks the usual rules of food allergy in two ways. Reactions are delayed, typically 2–6 hours after eating beef, pork or lamb, so people rarely connect the hives at 2 a.m. with the burger at dinner. And the trigger extends beyond meat: dairy, gelatin and some medications or vaccines that contain mammalian-derived ingredients can provoke symptoms in sensitive individuals. Reactions range from itching and gastrointestinal upset to anaphylaxis, a whole-body allergic reaction that is a medical emergency.

The CDC’s 2023 estimate of more than 110,000 suspected US cases since 2010, and potentially up to 450,000 affected, came alongside a survey in which about 42 percent of clinicians had never heard of the condition. Underdiagnosis is therefore likely, and so is overdiagnosis by people self-interpreting symptoms online.

Diagnosis rests on a clinical history and a blood test for alpha-gal antibodies, ordered and interpreted by a clinician, often an allergist. Management is avoidance of the foods that trigger symptoms for that person, which varies widely; some people tolerate dairy, others do not. Sensitivity can decline over years in people who avoid further tick bites, though this is observational and not guaranteed.

Prevention is tick prevention: repellent, long clothing in wooded or grassy areas, and prompt checks after being outdoors.

Common myths about red meat, corrected

Viral claims tend to cluster into a handful of recognizable shapes. Each gets a plain correction below.

• “Red meat has been cleared.” No agency has withdrawn its classification or its intake advice. The 2019 analysis that this claim usually leans on concluded that the evidence was low certainty, which is a statement about precision, not a finding of safety, and most guideline bodies declined to change their recommendations after reviewing it.
• “A sausage is as bad as a cigarette.” Both are IARC Group 1, but the group describes how sure scientists are of a cancer link, not how large the risk is. Smoking multiplies lung cancer risk many times over; daily processed meat raises bowel cancer risk by a fraction.
• “Grass-fed and organic beef carry none of the risk.” Farming method changes fat composition modestly. It does not change heme iron, and it does not change what happens on a hot grill.
• “Nitrate-free bacon is safe bacon.” Celery-powder curing delivers nitrite by another route. The chemistry in your stomach is identical.
• “Pork is white meat.” That was an advertising slogan. Pork is mammalian muscle and is classified as red meat by WHO and national guidelines alike.
• “Plant-based burgers are automatically healthier.” They contain no heme iron or nitrite, which is a genuine plus. Many are also high in sodium and saturated fat from coconut oil, and long-term outcome data on them does not yet exist. Whole pulses, beans and lentils have decades of evidence behind them; the patties do not.
• “You cannot get enough iron or B12 without lots of red meat.” Modest amounts cover most people, and B12 is also found in fish, eggs, dairy and fortified foods; people who eat no animal products need a supplement, which is a conversation for a clinician rather than a reason to eat steak nightly.

The thread running through all of these is the same: the truth is quantitative, and the myths are not.

Eating less red meat without feeling deprived, and what to replace it with

The people who sustain a change are rarely the ones who go from daily steak to zero overnight. The pattern that lasts is substitution at the margins.

Begin with processed meat, where the evidence is strongest and the loss is smallest. Replace the daily ham sandwich with egg, tinned fish, hummus or leftover roast chicken, and move bacon to weekends. That single shift takes most people from well above the NHS average to below it.

Next, stretch the red meat you do cook. Mixing lean mince half and half with cooked lentils or finely chopped mushrooms in a bolognese, chili or shepherd’s pie keeps the flavor, halves the meat per portion, and adds fiber, which cohort studies associate with lower bowel cancer risk. Using meat as a seasoning in stir-fries and stews rather than as the centerpiece is how most of the world’s traditional cuisines have always eaten it.

Nutrients deserve a sentence each. Iron from plant foods is less efficiently absorbed than heme iron, but absorption rises when it is eaten with vitamin C, so beans with peppers or lentils with tomato are smart pairings, and tea or coffee with meals reduces absorption. Zinc comes from nuts, seeds, whole grains, dairy and shellfish. Vitamin B12 is found reliably in animal foods and fortified products; anyone cutting all meat, fish, eggs and dairy should ask a clinician about testing or supplementation rather than guessing.

Who should be cautious about cutting? People who are pregnant, menstruating heavily, recovering from surgery or already iron deficient, and older adults with poor appetite who rely on meat for protein. For them the right question is not how to eat less red meat but how to eat lean red meat well, alongside other protein sources, with a clinician or dietitian checking blood counts where needed.

When to see a doctor

Diet advice in a magazine is population-level. Several situations call for an individual conversation, and a few call for urgent care.

Seek emergency help immediately for any suspected anaphylaxis: difficulty breathing, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, a sudden drop in blood pressure with faintness, or widespread hives with dizziness, especially several hours after eating mammalian meat. If you have had milder delayed reactions to beef, pork or lamb, or unexplained hives or stomach upset after meals, ask a clinician about alpha-gal testing, particularly if you spend time outdoors in tick country or recall a bite.

Book a routine appointment if you notice bleeding from the bowel, a change in bowel habit that persists for several weeks, unexplained weight loss, persistent abdominal pain or unexplained tiredness that could reflect anemia. These are reasons to be assessed, not a checklist for self-diagnosis; most turn out to have benign causes, and only a clinician can tell which.

Know your screening age. In the United States, bowel cancer screening is recommended from age 45 for people at average risk; in England the NHS program invites people from 50 to 74, and other countries set their own ranges. A family history of bowel cancer, inflammatory bowel disease or certain inherited syndromes may mean earlier or more frequent screening, which is a decision for your doctor.

Talk to your clinician before making large dietary changes if you have diabetes, kidney disease, gout, a history of iron deficiency, or take medicines whose effect depends on a stable diet, such as anticoagulants. Never stop or adjust a prescribed medicine because of something you have changed on your plate. Any targets for red meat and processed meat in your own case, and any supplement decisions, belong with the person who knows your blood results and your history.

Frequently asked questions

Which meat is red meat?

Red meat is muscle meat from mammals: beef, veal, pork, lamb, mutton, goat and horse, according to the WHO definition used by most dietary guidelines. The color of the cooked meat is not the test; pork is red meat even when it cooks pale. Poultry and fish are separate categories, and game from mammals such as venison also counts as red meat.

What's the healthiest red meat to eat?

Lean, unprocessed cuts eaten in modest portions: trimmed sirloin or fillet, pork tenderloin, lean lamb leg, 5 percent fat minced beef and game such as venison. These carry the iron, zinc and B12 that red meat is valued for with far less saturated fat than fatty cuts. Keeping portions around palm size matters as much as the cut you choose.

What is the unhealthiest red meat?

Processed, fatty and salty products have the strongest evidence against them: bacon, salami, pepperoni, hot dogs and fatty sausages combine nitrite curing, high sodium and high saturated fat. Heavily charred fatty cuts come next because of compounds formed at high heat. Fresh lean cuts cooked gently sit at the other end of the spectrum.

Is chicken called red meat?

No. Chicken is poultry, a white meat with much less myoglobin and heme iron than mammalian muscle, and studies generally do not link unprocessed poultry to higher bowel cancer risk. The exception is processing: cured or smoked chicken and turkey products are classed as processed meat because the curing chemistry is what drives the risk, not the species.

Is processed meat worse than red meat?

Yes, on the evidence. Processed meat is classified by the WHO as a Group 1 carcinogen, meaning sufficient evidence in humans, while unprocessed red meat is Group 2A, probably carcinogenic. Processed meat also carries more sodium and usually more saturated fat, and in cohort studies it shows larger associations with type 2 diabetes and heart disease per serving.

How much red meat per week is considered too much?

Most guidance treats an average above about 70 g cooked a day, or roughly 500 g a week, as the point to cut back; the NHS specifically advises those eating over 90 g daily to reduce to 70 g. Some researchers argue for around one serving a week based on diabetes data. Processed meat has no safe threshold identified, so lower is better.

Does grass-fed beef remove the health risks of red meat?

No. Grass-fed beef has somewhat less total fat and a slightly better omega-3 profile, which is a small benefit for the heart. It contains the same heme iron, forms the same heterocyclic amines when seared, and is counted the same way in every guideline. Treat it as a quality or ethical choice rather than a way to eat more.

Is red meat allergy from tick bites permanent?

Not necessarily. Alpha-gal antibody levels often fall over several years in people who avoid further tick bites, and some regain tolerance, but this is observational and varies from person to person. Reintroducing mammalian meat should only be done under an allergist’s guidance, because reactions can be severe and are delayed by several hours.

Will cutting red meat lower my cancer risk?

Population data suggests reducing processed meat in particular lowers bowel cancer risk, since the association is dose dependent, but no trial has proven this for an individual, and most bowel cancers occur in people with ordinary diets. Diet is one factor alongside fiber intake, alcohol, weight, activity, family history and age-appropriate screening, which remains the most effective single step.

Are plant-based meat alternatives healthier than red meat?

They avoid heme iron and nitrite, which is a genuine advantage, but many are high in sodium and saturated fat from coconut oil, and there is no long-term outcome data on them yet. Whole pulses, lentils, beans, nuts and tofu have decades of evidence linking them to lower heart disease and diabetes risk. Occasional use is reasonable; whole foods are the better daily swap.

References

• WHO: Cancer: Carcinogenicity of the consumption of red meat and processed meat
• NHS: Meat in your diet
• CDC: About Alpha-gal Syndrome
• MedlinePlus: Protein in diet

This article is for general information only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Please consult a qualified doctor about your individual situation.