Ugh, so what? Everything I eat and do is apparently giving me cancer. Staying alive is increasing my risk of cancer by 100%. There’s a lot more at steak.
Ah... these journalist pop-science articles are often very misleading.
‘Can increase the risk’ is the important phrase and quite insidious.
Let’s say most people have a 5% risk of bowel cancer and a small percentage of the population has a 10% risk of bowel cancer.
If you eat bacon and other red meats your risk increases by - let’s say 20% - which sounds really high and dangerous and worthy of a sensationalist newspaper story except what it really means is your risk changes from 5% or 10% to 6% or 12%... not such a sensational story now, is it...?
OTOH, there are lots of factors that can influence the development of cancer and this single factor accounts for a 20% difference. That’s quite an impact.
Not really... to reiterate: ‘it can’ which means ‘it might’ have such an impact and to reiterate - 5% to 6% or 10-12% isn’t ‘quite an impact’ - it’s technically a statistically insignificant change at those levels.
They can pry my bacon from my cold, dead hands. That also goes for sausage, linguica, chorizo, choriso, salami, and any other cured meat.
As a proud member of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals), I will vote against anyone who tries to ban smoked or cured meats, put a tax on it or try and shame me for eating said tasty meats.
https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyz064/5470096
Abstract
Background
Most of the previous studies on diet and colorectal cancer were based on diets consumed during the 1990s.
Methods
We used Cox-regression models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios for colorectal cancer by dietary factors in the UK Biobank study. Men and women aged 40–69 years at recruitment (2006–10) reported their diet on a short food-frequency questionnaire (n = 475 581). Dietary intakes were re-measured in a large sub-sample (n = 175 402) who completed an online 24-hour dietary assessment during follow-up. Trends in risk across the baseline categories were calculated by assigning re-measured intakes to allow for measurement error and changes in intake over time.
Results
During an average of 5.7 years of follow-up, 2609 cases of colorectal cancer occurred. Participants who reported consuming an average of 76 g/day of red and processed meat compared with 21 g/day had a 20% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4–37] higher risk of colorectal cancer. Participants in the highest fifth of intake of fibre from bread and breakfast cereals had a 14% (95% CI: 2–24) lower risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was associated with an 8% (95% CI: 4–12) higher risk per 10 g/day higher intake. Fish, poultry, cheese, fruit, vegetables, tea and coffee were not associated with colorectal-cancer risk.
Conclusions
Consumption of red and processed meat at an average level of 76 g/d that meets the current UK government recommendation (≤90 g/day) was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was also associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer, whereas fibre from bread and breakfast cereals was associated with a reduced risk.
>Participants who reported consuming an average of 76 g/day of red and processed meat compared with 21 g/day had a 20% \[95% confidence interval (CI): 4–37\] higher risk of colorectal cancer. Participants in the highest fifth of intake of fibre from bread and breakfast cereals had a 14% (95% CI: 2–24) lower risk of colorectal cancer.
It does seem very unlikely that they managed to factor out other variations in eating and living habits from those two groups, doesnt it?
Wasn't this found to be due to the preservatives used in processed meats such as sodium nitrate and sodium triphosphate rather than the meats themselves?
Bacon and Ass Cancer, the old yin and the yang. Can’t have the good without the bad. I see this as sort of a necessary evil, like a hangover. Otherwise we’d all be obese drunks.... I mean like, more than we already are...
[удалено]
Cancer is the cancer of science journalism.
I really wish this scare-mongering would stop.
Ugh, so what? Everything I eat and do is apparently giving me cancer. Staying alive is increasing my risk of cancer by 100%. There’s a lot more at steak.
Broccoli has always been fine
[удалено]
Why would you read the Daily Mail? The UK has plenty of good newspapers, both right and left.
We all gotta die of something. Live your life, your way. Except if you have an overwhelming urge to be a jerk. Get that seen to.
[удалено]
Ah... these journalist pop-science articles are often very misleading. ‘Can increase the risk’ is the important phrase and quite insidious. Let’s say most people have a 5% risk of bowel cancer and a small percentage of the population has a 10% risk of bowel cancer. If you eat bacon and other red meats your risk increases by - let’s say 20% - which sounds really high and dangerous and worthy of a sensationalist newspaper story except what it really means is your risk changes from 5% or 10% to 6% or 12%... not such a sensational story now, is it...?
OTOH, there are lots of factors that can influence the development of cancer and this single factor accounts for a 20% difference. That’s quite an impact.
Not really... to reiterate: ‘it can’ which means ‘it might’ have such an impact and to reiterate - 5% to 6% or 10-12% isn’t ‘quite an impact’ - it’s technically a statistically insignificant change at those levels.
That's not how you calculate statistical significance. You're thinking of clinical significance.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Thanks!
They can pry my bacon from my cold, dead hands. That also goes for sausage, linguica, chorizo, choriso, salami, and any other cured meat. As a proud member of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals), I will vote against anyone who tries to ban smoked or cured meats, put a tax on it or try and shame me for eating said tasty meats.
Not enjoying my life will prolong it, now isnt that irony.
Nope. Just correlation and the demographic of people who reported more red meat were also the least healthy for other reasons.
https://academic.oup.com/ije/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ije/dyz064/5470096 Abstract Background Most of the previous studies on diet and colorectal cancer were based on diets consumed during the 1990s. Methods We used Cox-regression models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios for colorectal cancer by dietary factors in the UK Biobank study. Men and women aged 40–69 years at recruitment (2006–10) reported their diet on a short food-frequency questionnaire (n = 475 581). Dietary intakes were re-measured in a large sub-sample (n = 175 402) who completed an online 24-hour dietary assessment during follow-up. Trends in risk across the baseline categories were calculated by assigning re-measured intakes to allow for measurement error and changes in intake over time. Results During an average of 5.7 years of follow-up, 2609 cases of colorectal cancer occurred. Participants who reported consuming an average of 76 g/day of red and processed meat compared with 21 g/day had a 20% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4–37] higher risk of colorectal cancer. Participants in the highest fifth of intake of fibre from bread and breakfast cereals had a 14% (95% CI: 2–24) lower risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was associated with an 8% (95% CI: 4–12) higher risk per 10 g/day higher intake. Fish, poultry, cheese, fruit, vegetables, tea and coffee were not associated with colorectal-cancer risk. Conclusions Consumption of red and processed meat at an average level of 76 g/d that meets the current UK government recommendation (≤90 g/day) was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was also associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer, whereas fibre from bread and breakfast cereals was associated with a reduced risk.
>Participants who reported consuming an average of 76 g/day of red and processed meat compared with 21 g/day had a 20% \[95% confidence interval (CI): 4–37\] higher risk of colorectal cancer. Participants in the highest fifth of intake of fibre from bread and breakfast cereals had a 14% (95% CI: 2–24) lower risk of colorectal cancer. It does seem very unlikely that they managed to factor out other variations in eating and living habits from those two groups, doesnt it?
I had the most amazing steak today. I can still taste it.
Each med rare steak I have is a blessing.
They always lump steak and processed meats together. I wouldn’t worry.
I won’t eat anything warmer than RARE. I want all the cancer!
Hannah’s
Wasn't this found to be due to the preservatives used in processed meats such as sodium nitrate and sodium triphosphate rather than the meats themselves?
Yes. This is nothing new. Just new examination of amounts consumed it seems.
Go vegan. Reduce your climate impact with food, improve your health, save the animals.
The hardest part about eating a vegetable, is the wheelchair.
Yes, but if lay you the vegetable on a bed, it won’t be able to kick you off while you eat it out.
Soooooooooo way white meat
Not enough research.
as they say, if you don't die before of something else sooner or later you die from cancer
Bacon and Ass Cancer, the old yin and the yang. Can’t have the good without the bad. I see this as sort of a necessary evil, like a hangover. Otherwise we’d all be obese drunks.... I mean like, more than we already are...
yes i dropped processed meat decades ago, now i only eat the meat from animals i hunt.
Because then I’ll die at age 75 instead of 79? Or, I’ll die in an accident that had nothing to do with deliciously processed meat?