/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #7616447

[36 / 3 / ?]

10KiB, 275x183, download.jpg

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 07:44:20 No.7616447 View Reply Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7616455 >>7616617 >>7617197 >>7617433 >>7618109 >>7618691

>Bacon, sausages and ham rank alongside smoking as cancer causes, says WHO

Should I be scared?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 07:48:45 No.7616455 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616447

Yep.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 07:56:32 No.7616460 Report Delete

Quoted By:

You smoking 3 packs of bacon a day son? You know that's going to kill you some day, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 10:42:30 No.7616617 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616447
>Should I be scared?

!"#!"#!!!

They are AS CERTAIN of Bacon's state as a carcinogen. This doesn't mean it is AS DANGEROUS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 11:00:50 No.7616641 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617494

>The IARC’s experts concluded that each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 11:29:07 No.7616693 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7616721 >>7617405 >>7618029

Your heart is what you should really be concerned about. That's even more certain. The main culprit are the surreal amounts of salt. No person living should be ingesting those quantities of salt in a single day. No person living ever did until these things became commonplace.

I'm only 28 but I went through a brief, unusual hypertensive event, where my blood pressure skyrocketed to hypertensive emergency levels. That is, my systolic pressure was several times higher than what is considered hypertension. I might have died.

In the two months after it happened, whenever I ate anything that contained a lot of salt I could actually feel it in my entire body. It was this odd sensation of numbness. It wasn't painful, but it did wake me up several times in a night. No other food I ate had that effect. I exprienced first hand the sensation of just what salt is doing to our veins. It's not a small deal.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 11:42:14 No.7616721 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616693
lol, do you have issues with stress or anxiety as well?

Sounds like you need to get laid more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:05:57 No.7616766 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Lmao sausage and ham are processed meats of fucking course they have nonregulation chemicals in them. You didn't think that Farmer Billy Bob wasn't going to cut corners when he's basically running a factory?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:21:23 No.7616808 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7616823

>It has now placed processed meat in the same category as plutonium.

This is a direct quote from the BBC article.

Whichi s it, /sci/? Should I start gnoshing on plutonium with my morning coffee, or is the BBC officially a NWO conspiracy?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:29:20 No.7616823 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7616854

>>7616808
18% increase in colon cancer

Let's look at that for a moment.
http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/colorect.html
So colon cancer affects ~40 people per 100k, an 18% increase ups that to about 42, and that is only new cases, not deaths, which has stayed at roughly 50% of the total (25/60 in 1970, 20/40 in 2013)

So, colon cancer is clearly not a large killer and has not been, a slightly higher chance 0.00042 vs 0.0004 is not going to make me give up sausage. And I would guess family history is a much larger factor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:48:14 No.7616848 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>nutrition
>science
>pick one

Has nutrition science gotten ANYTHING right in the past 30 years that they didn't contradict later? Did they specify the carcinogenic compound in meat or are they just making a generalized statement? If red meat is carcinogenic at all it's because it has caramelization. The same chemical from burning cigarettes, the same in burnt meat, the same uses as colorant in almost every food that has food dye. Same molecule in everything that's carcinogenic. Good luck eating food with out it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:53:09 No.7616854 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617502

>>7616823
Your math is very bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 12:56:02 No.7616859 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617668 >>7617672

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/solving-a-colon-cancer-mystery/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/putrefying-protein-and-toxifying-enzymes/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-to-reduce-carcinogenic-bile-acid-production/

Colon cancer is a western disease. Populations with little to no intake of animal products are virtually free from it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1185124835448.jpg, 57KiB, 517x588

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 15:15:28 No.7617197 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617242

>>7616447
>People breath air
>People get cancer

QED air causes cancer everybody, get into the fucking ocean!

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 15:26:50 No.7617242 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617197
Nobody's making that argument, how about you read the findings before criticising them

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 16:22:09 No.7617405 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617641

>>7616693
>No person living ever did until these things became commonplace

How do you think people preserve food in the past?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 16:30:46 No.7617433 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616447
>>Bacon, sausages and ham rank alongside smoking as cancer causes, says WHO
Literally who?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 16:50:10 No.7617494 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616641
So, if my odds of getting cancer increase with my age, I wonder how much my chance of getting any cancer increases by my choosing to not kill myself every day

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 16:51:47 No.7617502 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617653

>>7616854
The point is: 18% of a really small number is still a really small number.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 17:45:35 No.7617641 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617405
>How do you think people preserve food in the past?

Meat was preserved with salt. But they ate less meat, so it still worked out to less salt.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 17:50:45 No.7617653 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617502
you're still working off baseline statistics from a population with an already shitty cancer-promoting diet where there could be plateau effects etc

http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/3/427.long

and assuming without any evidence that it mostly boils down to "muh genetics" and inevitability of aging

plus now that colonoscopies are a routine thing a lot of would be cases are masked

though the real reason WHO probably cares about such modifiable risk factors is that they still account for a significant proportion of disease burden at the population level and it isn't like processed meats aren't harmful in other ways too

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 17:57:53 No.7617668 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617687 >>7617711

>>7616859
LOL, so apparently the "West" is the only place that eats animal products?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 17:59:00 No.7617672 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617715

>>7616859
This is bullshit, plenty vegetarians get colon cancer. And as cancer is largely genetic doing diet studies by region is kinda pointless because it could just be their genes that western people don't have. I think we should stop the bullshit fear mongering with "this and that gives you cancer" and focus on better screening. Poor detection rates is literally why most cancers are so deadly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:06:17 No.7617687 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617706

>>7617668
Jews and Muslims don't eat bacon or pork. Only Christians think it's lawful and majority of West is Christian. As you can see, bacon is a major contributor to cancer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:14:14 No.7617706 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617717

>>7617687
Jews and Muslims eat beef and lamb.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:15:41 No.7617711 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617668
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/100/Supplement_1/320S.full
>Many observational studies have consistently reported that FPs that are rich in phytochemicals and low in meat or other animal products [the MedDiet, the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension diet, the Prudent dietary pattern, or the alternative Healthy Eating Index] are associated with reduced risks of chronic degenerative diseases, whereas opposite food patterns, rich in animal foods and poor in plant-based foods (typically called Western or westernized diets), are associated with higher risks (2, 3, 32, 45, 51–57).

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:16:41 No.7617715 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617672
>being this deep in denial

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:17:49 No.7617717 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7617749 >>7618724

>>7617706
Beef and lamb don't have to be processed but pork does.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 18:34:10 No.7617749 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617717
>beef jerky

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 20:43:51 No.7618029 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7618648

>>7616693
Actually the salt bs was debunked

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO capybaras get all the ladies.jpg, 81KiB, 640x480

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 20:57:23 No.7618053 Report Delete

Quoted By:

The red meat association they found was not statistically significant. It's class 2A just because when cooking red meats at high temperature, PAHs are produced, and some of those are known or suspected carcinogens. But it hasn't been studied whether or not the amounts produced are significant.

The processed meat classification was based on epidemiological studies, but it's not clear how these were controlled. Probably a lot of poor people eat processed meats. The difference in risk on an individual basis is still small. 7% of men will get colorectal cancer during their lives; if this correlation held and we all stopped eating processed meats, then over 6% of men would still get it.

Read more here: http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Monographs-Q&A_Vol114.pdf

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 26 Oct 2015 21:31:07 No.7618109 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616447
Didn't they want us to eat insect meat because "lol its gud 4 yu"? Nutrition """"""science"""""" always shills for this shit on the 1st world so the 3rd world street shitters can be fed enough to keep multiplying like rabbits. 3rd world overpopulation is the nearest we'll get to destroying nature.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 04:12:14 No.7618648 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>7618678

>>7618029
this. there's so much bs in nutritional science.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 04:50:23 No.7618678 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7618648
Not him, but most of the food bs isn't actually in nutritional science but in journalists' poor interpretations of unsettled science and governments' shitty dietary recommendations based on unsettled science.

Although if your definition of nutritional science includes the label "nutritionist" which is a completely unregulated credential in the US, then yes, nutritional science is full of bs. But that's purely semantic

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 05:01:38 No.7618691 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7616447
deliciousness of flesh > fear of death by cancer

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 05:28:11 No.7618724 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>7617717
>Beef and lamb don't have to be processed but pork does.

>don't have to be
>aren't
>same thing

>>>/out/

Subject

Name

E-mail

Password

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these boards

Your latest searches