Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

iSURG

  1. Home
  2. Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
  3. There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research

There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
health
2 Posts 2 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • return2ozma@lemmy.worldR This user is from outside of this forum
    return2ozma@lemmy.worldR This user is from outside of this forum
    return2ozma@lemmy.world
    wrote last edited by
    #1
    This post did not contain any content.
    J 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • return2ozma@lemmy.worldR return2ozma@lemmy.world
      This post did not contain any content.
      J This user is from outside of this forum
      J This user is from outside of this forum
      jet@hackertalks.com
      wrote last edited by jet@hackertalks.com
      #2

      Health effects associated with consumption of processed meat, sugar-sweetened beverages and trans fatty acids: a Burden of Proof study

      Study title... CNN title is only about meat.

      A meta-analysis of observational epidemiology

      All of the issues with epidemiology apply

      • association is not causation
      • hypothesis generating only
      • healthy user confounders
      • people eating meat are often eating high carbohydrate diets
      • metabolic context of the participants
      • food frequency questionnaires filled out yearly or every 4 years.

      I don't have access to the paper, it hasn't made it to the Free Academic circles yet, so I haven't been able to read it.


      Is everything we eat associated with cancer? A systematic cookbook review

      I personally think the reason EVERYTHING is linked to cancer, as well as the massive surge in cancer since the 1900s, is all due to the modern metabolism (sugar burners) being very different then pre-1900 metabolism (fat burners)

      • High carbohydrate load, high blood glucose load, high insulin levels
      • Industrial Oil, systemic body inflammation
      • Agrochemical contamination of food supply, more systematic inflammation

      The problem with these observational studies is they don't look at the modern metabolic context, so in this context, yes EVERYTHING is associated with cancer - because the studies arn't looking at the right variables.

      This is exactly why hard science doesn't use association to draw conclusions, epidemiology is hypothesis generating only

      If you haven't read about the Metabolic Theory of Cancer I highly recommend giving it a read. It's a much more compelling model, and explains the surge of cancer since 1900, as well as actionable steps to reduce incidence (reduce sugar and inflammation).

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      Reply
      • Reply as topic
      Log in to reply
      • Oldest to Newest
      • Newest to Oldest
      • Most Votes


      • Login

      • Don't have an account? Register

      • Login or register to search.
      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Categories
      • Recent
      • Tags
      • Popular
      • World
      • Users
      • Groups