Discussion for article #242157
Sorry, WHO. I don’t believe it. This is just another poorly research finding that will be iver turned in 5 years!
2 Likes
Man, that picture makes me hungry.
That my friends is some serious comfort food. I gotta leave now and get me some breakfast
7 Likes
“Iver” turning being one of the more patriotic acts of out defund-crazed Congress. If Louis Gohmert’s not up on his haunches in the Capitol chamber aspiring over what this means for his asparagus, I just don’t know what all.
Millions of years of evolution made us omnivores. Who am I to resist that?
3 Likes
Interesting that in the two articles I’ve read there’s no mention of why. For example, why are hot dogs worse than a steak? We know the answer when we read the list of ingredients on the typical hot dog, so why won’t they talk about that? And as for cigarettes, the same thing. Tobacco is one of the most heavily sprayed crops, and so smoking drags all that into the lungs. I wonder why there’s never any mention of that. Hmmm, could it be that Monsanto has a stronger lobby than tobacco growers?
7 Likes
I think this bit is so condensed its made erroneous. What the study showed was a very small incidence in colorectal, prostate and liver cancer. But…it was a very small increase in incidence. In Colorectal ( a serious threat to Americans ) risk went from 5 % to 6 % in those that ate processed meat daily and no increase noted in moderate consumption. The conclusion: “in moderation” these foods are fine.
These studies should not be used to set your mind for or against these foods. This study looks at one fact: cancer. It does not look at diabetes, obesity, blood pressure and cardiovascular disease. All aggravated by enriched processed foods.
12 Likes
Makes me wonder why (or how) it is that I have these types of teeth in my mouth ? ? —
7 Likes
I’ve said this for years; we need an amendment to protect our bacon!
This is just the first wave before the government confiscates it all!
Where do Cupp, Pavlich and Abbott stand on this issue?
Thanks, Obama!
2 Likes
You can live forever if you give up everything that makes life worth living. Or maybe not.
3 Likes
All articles on this, like this one mention why. Additional fat ( for palatabilty ) , nitrates ( for color ) and salt ( to promote more consumption ) are mentioned in this study. The researcher’s spokespeople have been making the TV rounds on this. They all mention why.
2 Likes
BELIEVE what you want, but you can’t fool your body. You will die trying.
Believe what you want. WHO has no reason to lie to you. There is nothing radical in the concept that fatty, salty foods aren’t good for you. That isn’t a new thing. What this study elucidates is one manifestation of these diets: cancer. Its a very low threat as the study shows but its a threat ( I used to do colon cancer research…it’s not how you want to die )
But why do you think they call it junk food?
2 Likes
Here’s my question-- and it is truly a question, not an argument. Let’s assume that the increase in cancer risk is only - as one TPM commenter said - for those who eat the stuff every day. What if you eat the stuff every day, but also work out daily and maintain a good weight? What’s the added risk then? Is there any risk? Does the fact that you have a good weight and daily work out actually reduce your risk of getting cancer over those who don’t eat the stuff? Do the researchers know the answers to these questions? Thanks.
1 Like
Many researchers are coming down on the side that a lot of cancers are actually somewhat random and can be attributed just as much to chance as other factors. We cannot, however, accept that and so we end up with all these reasons why you can’t eat this and you shouldn’t eat that… Accepting that cancer can be just as much chance changes the control dynamic as though we can control it at all. I’m not suggesting there aren’t items you should avoid, but the spin up from these articles gets to be a little much.
2 Likes
3 Likes
Scientists remain confounded about the fact that non-smokers develop lung cancer at rates that can’t be explained. A neighbor and friend who did not smoke developed lung cancer and it was only diagnosed at Stage 4. She went into aggressive treatment but it was too late. Her family never understood why except something about a “hereditary” disposition
5 Likes
CaptainCommonsense: Life directly linked to Cancer.
Stop the presses. Alert the media. Send the Hype machine into overdrive.
1 Like
Actually, the notion that fat is an evil was debunked almost as soon as it was proclaimed – there’s now much better evidence linking sugar consumption to heart disease than fat, and we know that some groups of fats are actually very beneficial to your health (e.g., Omega-3’s) and should be sought out.
Cooking increases the availability of calories in food. Obviously good for survival in lean times, not so great in fat times. Whether you can handle occasional bacon probably has more to do with your starting health than with anything inherent in either smoke or salt.
3 Likes