red meat cancer risk

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

red meat cancer risk

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 > Last >>

sitdownstandup 26 Oct 15 8.21am
think a lot of people know about this, just now the world health organisation is getting involved. [Link] Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping. Hubert Reeves
Alert a moderator to this post

sitdownstandup

26 Oct 15 8.21am

Send a Private Message to sitdownstandup

think a lot of people know about this, just now the world health organisation is getting involved.

[Link]

Man is the most insane species. He worships an invisible God and destroys a visible Nature. Unaware that this Nature he’s destroying is this God he’s worshipping.

Hubert Reeves

Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 8.23am
The advice is flawed We are omnivores Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume the dignified don't even enter in the game
Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 8.23am

The advice is flawed
We are omnivores
Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 26 Oct 15 9.47am
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am The advice is flawed We are omnivores Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume Its more about quantity, although quality can be a factor. Omnivores in nature tend to supplement their diet with meat, rather than regularly eat meat. There is a big difference in how we consume meat and how omnivores in nature eat meat. They eat some meat, not one or two meals a day consisting of meat (also animals in nature don't really have to worry about cancer as a major threat. Also the amount of red meat that's consumed is an issue (bear in mind that all other omnivores and carnivores would eat meat that's fresh from a kill and don't eat it on a daily basis either - big cats are an exception, but they're pure carnivores, they can even supplement their hydration from meat). Of course on an individual basis genetic factors play a very important role, but essentially, vegetarians experience a much lower rate of some cancers, especially of the bowel (about 20% lower than the average, and vegans a further 20% lower than vegetarians). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 26 Oct 15 9.47am

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am

The advice is flawed
We are omnivores
Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume

Its more about quantity, although quality can be a factor. Omnivores in nature tend to supplement their diet with meat, rather than regularly eat meat. There is a big difference in how we consume meat and how omnivores in nature eat meat. They eat some meat, not one or two meals a day consisting of meat (also animals in nature don't really have to worry about cancer as a major threat.

Also the amount of red meat that's consumed is an issue (bear in mind that all other omnivores and carnivores would eat meat that's fresh from a kill and don't eat it on a daily basis either - big cats are an exception, but they're pure carnivores, they can even supplement their hydration from meat).

Of course on an individual basis genetic factors play a very important role, but essentially, vegetarians experience a much lower rate of some cancers, especially of the bowel (about 20% lower than the average, and vegans a further 20% lower than vegetarians).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

lankygit Lincoln 26 Oct 15 1.43pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am The advice is flawed We are omnivores Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat. That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat: "Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%. Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence" Is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour? [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

lankygit

Lincoln 26 Oct 15 1.43pm

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am

The advice is flawed
We are omnivores
Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume

We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat.
That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat:

"Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%.

Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence"

Is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour? [Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

martin2412 Living The Dream 26 Oct 15 1.51pm
I expect to see government health warnings on sausages, bacon & ham in due course. SAUSAGES KILL
Alert a moderator to this post

martin2412

Living The Dream 26 Oct 15 1.51pm

I expect to see government health warnings on sausages, bacon & ham in due course.

SAUSAGES KILL

Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 2.03pm
Quote lankygit at 26 Oct 2015 1.43pm Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am The advice is flawed We are omnivores Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat. That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat: "Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%. Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence" They have included both. Quoting red meat is probably carcinogenic. You are right about processed and Jamie makes a valid point about quantity. That applies to all Macro nutrients. Saturated Fat was demonised now people realise the mistake and Sugar is currently getting it in the neck. Quantiy & Quality (often the source) is key The trouble with studies like this is that it ignores other factors. Those who eat a lot of processed food are often financially poor or time poor and have pressurised lives. There is also the fact that many of these people will also be signifcantly overweight. the dignified don't even enter in the game
Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 2.03pm

Quote lankygit at 26 Oct 2015 1.43pm

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am

The advice is flawed
We are omnivores
Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume

We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat.
That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat:

"Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%.

Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence"

They have included both. Quoting red meat is probably carcinogenic.

You are right about processed and Jamie makes a valid point about quantity. That applies to all Macro nutrients. Saturated Fat was demonised now people realise the mistake and Sugar is currently getting it in the neck. Quantiy & Quality (often the source) is key

The trouble with studies like this is that it ignores other factors. Those who eat a lot of processed food are often financially poor or time poor and have pressurised lives. There is also the fact that many of these people will also be signifcantly overweight.

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 26 Oct 15 4.33pm
Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 2.03pm Quote lankygit at 26 Oct 2015 1.43pm Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am The advice is flawed We are omnivores Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat. That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat: "Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%. Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence" They have included both. Quoting red meat is probably carcinogenic. You are right about processed and Jamie makes a valid point about quantity. That applies to all Macro nutrients. Saturated Fat was demonised now people realise the mistake and Sugar is currently getting it in the neck. Quantiy & Quality (often the source) is key The trouble with studies like this is that it ignores other factors. Those who eat a lot of processed food are often financially poor or time poor and have pressurised lives. There is also the fact that many of these people will also be signifcantly overweight. Thing that is important isn't so much quantity as frequency, with carcinogens. We, as a nation, tend to eat meat twice a day, sometimes three times a day, and there in lies the problem, its one of continued exposure, rather than occasional exposure. Meat is actually a good source of vitamin B, which is probably why omnivores evolved and benefitted from meat supplementing their diet. Problem is, its definitely not good for you long term, especially humans and especially the kinds of meat we like (and the servings we like). "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 26 Oct 15 4.33pm

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 2.03pm

Quote lankygit at 26 Oct 2015 1.43pm

Quote Y Ddraig Goch at 26 Oct 2015 8.23am

The advice is flawed
We are omnivores
Like anything its about the quality of the priduct you consume

We are omnivores, but our evolution didn`t include the consumption of processed meat.
That report in the link refers to the risk from processed meat:

"Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%.

Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence"

They have included both. Quoting red meat is probably carcinogenic.

Thing that is important isn't so much quantity as frequency, with carcinogens. We, as a nation, tend to eat meat twice a day, sometimes three times a day, and there in lies the problem, its one of continued exposure, rather than occasional exposure.

Meat is actually a good source of vitamin B, which is probably why omnivores evolved and benefitted from meat supplementing their diet. Problem is, its definitely not good for you long term, especially humans and especially the kinds of meat we like (and the servings we like).

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 4.40pm
This is a very good synopsis: Everybody jumped on the sensational headlines and nobody cared to read the official communique from IARC. They put it as a Class 2A carcinogen, same as glyphosate (Roundup) and caffein. "Probable" carcinogen. In the other hand, alcohol is still Class 1, "known carcinogen". If you have to be careful, it is to limit your grilled and smoked meat because the processing of these foods involves the addition of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) from combustion byproducts. These are known carcinogens (Class 1) and tells you one things: BBQ and grill should be a weekend treat and tailgate food, not your daily staple food. Here is the original link: [Link] the dignified don't even enter in the game
Alert a moderator to this post

Y Ddraig Goch

In The Crowd 26 Oct 15 4.40pm

This is a very good synopsis:

Everybody jumped on the sensational headlines and nobody cared to read the official communique from IARC. They put it as a Class 2A carcinogen, same as glyphosate (Roundup) and caffein. "Probable" carcinogen. In the other hand, alcohol is still Class 1, "known carcinogen".
If you have to be careful, it is to limit your grilled and smoked meat because the processing of these foods involves the addition of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) from combustion byproducts. These are known carcinogens (Class 1) and tells you one things: BBQ and grill should be a weekend treat and tailgate food, not your daily staple food.
Here is the original link: [Link]

the dignified don't even enter in the game

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 26 Oct 15 4.49pm
My rule of thumb is that avoiding carcinogens is largely pointless if you've quit smoking, or still smoke. Sooner or later something is going to kill you, and chances are its going to be really nasty and you'll suffer. Rather than worry about what might kill us, or give us a nasty terminal end, we should focus on what we can do, which is offer people who face a 'nasty end' a way out, that doesn't involve slowly decaying, in pain and say slowly drowning in your own fluids, until your heart gives way from lack of oxygen. Death is inevitable, life is precious, but its not about 'how much you get', but how much you 'get out of it'. We cannot measure the quality of our existence by years. The only reason that cancer worries me, is that I know that the compassion of my country and its laws aim to ensure that I experience as much of that suffering as possible. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 26 Oct 15 4.49pm

My rule of thumb is that avoiding carcinogens is largely pointless if you've quit smoking, or still smoke.

Sooner or later something is going to kill you, and chances are its going to be really nasty and you'll suffer.

Rather than worry about what might kill us, or give us a nasty terminal end, we should focus on what we can do, which is offer people who face a 'nasty end' a way out, that doesn't involve slowly decaying, in pain and say slowly drowning in your own fluids, until your heart gives way from lack of oxygen.

Death is inevitable, life is precious, but its not about 'how much you get', but how much you 'get out of it'. We cannot measure the quality of our existence by years. The only reason that cancer worries me, is that I know that the compassion of my country and its laws aim to ensure that I experience as much of that suffering as possible.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

cpfcdboi Thornton heath 28 Oct 15 11.18am
Off to smoke a big fat bacon roll up now London born palace bred @cpfcdboi
Alert a moderator to this post

cpfcdboi

Thornton heath 28 Oct 15 11.18am

Off to smoke a big fat bacon roll up now

London born
palace bred
@cpfcdboi

Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721 Reading 28 Oct 15 11.27am
If anything, bacon taste nicer now. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 28 Oct 15 11.27am

If anything, bacon taste nicer now.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post