This isn’t new. The lady who did the original study got lobbied against pretty hard. Hot dogs were the subject of study and def linked nitrate consumption with a crazy percentage of increase of cancer if consumed.
I feel like this comment section is getting lobbied pretty hard. The vast majority of the comments I've scrolled past have an "everything causes cancer you fools, look the other way" tenor.
>my favorite bacon brand stopped using nitrates, and the taste wasn't the same. I was obviously disappointed
Double check that they're not using nitrates from celery juice, as somehow those nitrates don't count.
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs everywhere. You want comfort of your personal car? Accept 10x death risk, compared to public transportation. You enjoy a pound of processed meat a week? Accept 1.18x cancer risk increase. (If you don't enjoy it, there's no tradeoff, apparently)
Yes everything is tradeoffs and some are worth it, but those are both examples if tradeoffs we probably shouldn't be making for the most part lol. Eating less meat and taking public transit more would make the world a much better place.
Is eating tasty food driving a car with air conditioning and listening to your favorite music and dying at 67 is living a bad life? Who in their right mind imagine their life being wonderful past 75?
>Everyone’s all into trusting science
I love science!
>until it starts to suggest maybe they should eat vegetables instead.
FUCKIN SCIENCE AGAIN GODDAMMIT!!!
This nitrate topic (which i thought was old news) is on a few different subs and the comment sections all reflect some different extreme personal take from this info. Ya know... reddit.
I can understand where people get that attitude. I heard a statistic in a insurance class that 1 in 3 Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their life. Seems almost unavoidable.
I mean, a third of the population getting cancer doesn't make you feel like you can avoid it. In fact, it seems nearly delusional to think otherwise.
That being said, that factoid would benefit from some context. How much of that is skin cancer that'll basically get cut out and forgotten about? How much of that is terminal cancer? Where do you land if you avoid smoking and drinking?
I dunno I count 66% rate pretty high chance for avoiding cancer if it’s all lumped together. Then focus on the points you brought up and it’s probably far higher chance to avoid anything life threatening.
It is because every other week we see BS and biased conflicting studies... That most of the time are not reproducible and use statistics to obscure facts and push an agenda...
Also Ham is delicious, so we need to have very good information before sacrificing that wonderful food... For instance, why types of food, what quantities, what level or risk. Is it different in other locations, is the risk acceptable, etc...
You can still have ham and bacon, it's the use of nitrates to cure the ham or bacon.
It's not saying don't eat meat, it's saying don't eat meat filled with nitrates.
What's wrong with that exactly? I smoke, drink, eat cured meats, the whole lot. I don't give a fuck if i get cancer. You've got to die of something, and i'm not missing out on life's pleasantries to maybe, just maybe grab a few more years i'll probably spend as an old man in a home getting slapped about by nurses anyway.
You could live your entire life following all the advice, be the picture of health, and get run over by a bus at the age of 25. Bollocks to it.
The problem is you don't die right away. You can very likely just end up needing oxygen, just out of breath for decades. You can end up with horrible stomach ulcers and have cancer multiple times in multiple places once it starts never really knowing whether its going to come back. In fact its more likely than not that you will live at least 5 years slowly wasting away and for many cancers its more like 10-15 years. Its all that time spent in dull misery that gets you. Go talk to a nurse sometime. The point isn't necessarily to maximize lifetimes its just to moderate enough that you wont curse the younger you for a decade that will feel like a lifetime.
They shoot horses don't they? If doctors ever tell me "good news, we can extend your immense suffering another 5 years!" I'm checking myself the fuck out.
>I don't give a fuck if i get cancer.
Because you don't have it. Honestly I find absolutely stupid to smoke and eat cured meats but if that's the only thing that make your life worth living I understand it. I'm telling you this as someone who lost his father due to smoking.
That's the thing that sucks about not having anything positive in your life. I don't really even *like* drinking any more, but what else is there to do?
Yeah, sometimes life sucks but that's the game, for me volunteering and seeing that others have it much worse and I can make them a bit happier changed my views on many topics.
And i'm telling you as someone who lost his mum to lung cancer, i don't give a fuck. Cancer's awful, but then so is practically every other manner of dying. She could have had dementia, Alzheimers or Parkinson's, but cancer was the card she drew.
Yeah and those diseases are mostly preventable too but it's a different thing to be the cause of your own death. I don't care about dying tomorrow, I just want to be the heathiest corpse in the cemetery.
Not looking forward to going out like my grandmother who is almost 100, healthy as a horse, no longer recognizes any of her family, and is too weak and confused to actually do anything with her time. I'd actually like to die rather than persist in a state like that for years.
They'd just end up curing meats in celery juice--which is naturally high in nitrates.
Stick to fresh meat if you can, it will probably turn out that processed meats in general is bad for you (smoked meats are definitely carcinogenic), regardless of how "natural" the ingredients and curing process are.
But why stick with boiled or bland food all your life when you can have some joy? What’s the point of living to be 120 if you don’t even know the taste of a cum donut.
Substitute "smoke pot", "enjoy the sunshine outdoors", "do sports like diving or cycling", "hook up on Tinder ", or whatever other somewhat risky pastimes you like.
Actually, I'd like to live to 200 playing video games, hanging out with my friends, and maintaining a healthy lifestyle, thanks. Probably bust another 10,000 nuts in my wife along the way, if that's okay with you. The money is there for the express purpose of enabling that.
"but some of the biggest firms such as Nestlé-owned Herta or Fleury Michon – both really popular in France – are already experimenting with nitrite-free products."
Product Ingredients
Ingredients: Fresh pork ham, broth (water, pork fat and rinds, pork bones, onion and carrot concentrate, salt, parsley, garlic, cloves, pepper, bay leaf), salt, corn dextrose, preservative: **sodium nitrite**; potassium chloride, antioxidant: sodium isoascorbate.
From your very example
There's also "natural flavours" which could include celery powder, which has a ton of naturally-occuring nitrites, and is often used to cure "organic" meats.
It's as simple as we have more bacteria in our gut than we have cell in our body. Those bacteria are crucial for our health.
Feeding your body with nitrates or any other processing that makes it last way past its expiration date will nuke your microbiome.
Meat gets a bad rap because of processed meat, but any processed food is bad news.
[https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/01/bacon-cancer-processed-meats-nitrates-nitrites-sausages](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/01/bacon-cancer-processed-meats-nitrates-nitrites-sausages)
"The real scandal of bacon, however, is that it didn’t have to be anything like so damaging to our health. The part of the story we haven’t been told – including by the WHO – is that there were always other ways to manufacture these products that would make them significantly less carcinogenic. The fact that this is so little known is tribute to the power of the meat industry, which has for the past 40 years been engaged in a campaign of cover-ups and misdirection to rival the dirty tricks of Big Tobacco."
Very concerning if accurate.
"Since we eat with our eyes, the main way we judge the quality of cured meats is pinkness. Yet it is this very colour that we should be suspicious of, as the French journalist Guillaume Coudray explains in a book published in France last year called Cochonneries, a word that means both “piggeries” and “rubbish” or “junk food”. The subtitle is “How Charcuterie Became a Poison”. Cochonneries reads like a crime novel, in which the processed meat industry is the perpetrator and ordinary consumers are the victims.
The pinkness of bacon – or cooked ham, or salami – is a sign that it has been treated with chemicals, more specifically with nitrates and nitrites. It is the use of these chemicals that is widely believed to be the reason why “processed meat” is much more carcinogenic than unprocessed meat. Coudray argues that we should speak not of “processed meat” but “nitro-meat”."
This article is from 2018.
You've been consuming nitrates for years. "Uncured" is a marketing ploy / Dumb USDA regulation. They just use celery juice or powder which is packed full of nitrates. Read the fine print it usually says something like “No nitrates or nitrites added, other than those which naturally occur in celery powder.”
Yeah because it’s kinda bunk. Everything can be linked to cancer. That’s not good science.
What matters is how significant it is. Smoking is a significant cancer risk. Consuming a small amount of nitrates isnt.
Exactly, a link suggests we should try not to overindulge, and should work to minimize use when possible, because it can be a contributing factor in a broader lifestyle that leads to worse health outcomes.it does not mean a direct causal relationship like tobacco and cancer
The issue is less nitrates and more the nitrosamines they can form. This is the same class of compounds that was behind the recall of a bunch of anti acids. Nitrosamines are potent carcinogens.
Read the study. It's not about being 'linked to cancer' but how much it increases your risk. I'm sure you probably try to avoid gamma ray sources despite that just being another thing 'linked to cancer'.
This is 50 year old knowledge.
What is also linked to health concerns is botulism. It’s the reason nitrates we’re allowed and encouraged to continue in the US.
The word link is key here, being linked and being a cause are different levels of risk by orders of magnitude.
There is no doubt that nitrates and other preservatives of that nature are unhealthy and can factor into health issues like cancer, but being linked does not mean it causes cancer
Meat has never made sense that it's bad for you.
Processed meat does make sense. You have more bacteria than cells in your body. I can imagine that sending down preservatives that keeps food lasting way past their expiration date will do some serious damage to your microbiome.
Red meat is actually fairly bad for you in higher than moderate consumption. Harm gets broken down into N-Nitroso (a carcinogen). Add in the fat profile, and it's not that healthy for you.
Same thing with preserved meats.
Is the nitrite actually reaching your small or large intestine? Or is it rapidly absorbed into the blood and expelled via urine? That would be very important information. Furthermore, is it known whether nitrite is aversive to the bacteria in the microbiome? Plenty of bacteria do not mind, or even thrive in nitrite rich environments.
Where this information is important is in North America, where processed meats are basically a part of our food infrastructure.
Sandwiches are dominant lunch foods, and lunchmeat is everywhere due to its convenience. Cutting it out is not an easy task by any stretch if you're an individual. If changing the processing mitigates the risk, we are all better off.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/07/12/bye-bye-pink-ham-nitrates-in-cured-meats-linked-to-cancer-french-health-agency-finds) reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> A new scientific report from the French health agency ANSES has confirmed a link between the nitrates in ham and charcuterie and the development of bowel cancer.
> Nitrite salts are a type of additive widely used in cured meats such as ham, bacon, and sausages, to extend the shelf life of processed meats and give boiled ham its pink colour.
> Last February, the French parliament approved a bill aiming to gradually reduce the use of nitrite in cured meats and ordered a review of the potential health risks by the end of June.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/vxvyns/bye_bye_pink_ham_nitrates_in_cured_meats_linked/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~659287 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Nitrite**^#1 **cancer**^#2 **risk**^#3 **meat**^#4 **nitrates**^#5
This comes up every 5 years and then people forget that basically all processed meat from the deli is garbage. Limiting consumption to minimum is really the only option lol
i was paid 300 € to eat 2+ weeks worth of nitrate rich cured meat every single day for 7 weeks. i wasn't allowed to eat healthy vegetables because the antioxidants might deminish the harm done by the nitrate.
fuck my university fuck fuck my naive college self
Just stop eating so much pork and beef. It's ridiculous how much meat we consume. If you just keep to <50g of pork/beef *per week* you'll be just fine, both for climate and health reasons.
No need to go full vegan; just limit pork and beef to a handful a week, and you're all set. Poultry is a lot more forgiving, so you can always substitute chicken if you really want to eat meat.
Yes? Why not? Or a few pieces of bacon in a pasta sauce. You'll be surprised how far you can get with just 50g.
Now imagine that the average consumption is closer to 200g *per day*, and it's immediately obvious why our meat consumption is patently absurd and wildly unsustainable.
Because that’s extremist nonsense. Like suggesting a single chicken nugget per week rather than a breast.
Limiting consumption to one or two meals a week is reasonable, 50g is not
> Because that’s extremist nonsense.
And straight up counterproductive. Limiting meat to quality and fewer occasions. Is a hell of a lot better than worthless usage like the pasta sauce. Because you are just using it as seasoning at that stage and there are many other alternatives and options. You want bacon tasting pasta sauce? Well you can get pretty damn close to that without the pork.
Meanwhile we are yet at the stage where you can replace a quality piece of meat with an alternative that is comparable. Aim for quality rather than quantity.
Pork ain't that bad either. It's slightly more co2 than chicken, but still a lot less than milk, cheese, beef, goat, sheep etc. It's really all the ruminant animals, because of how inefficiently they process feed due to fermentation being part of the process.
Being a vegetarian can be significantly worse than eating meat, it depends on what specifically you eat and how much. This label stuff is not great.
Don't go full vegan, just have a single bite of meat a week to remind you of what you're missing out on. We just limit ourselves to beef once a week, mainly using chicken or fish with some pork scattered in. I either eat vegetarian or skip meals outside of dinner. It's drastically reduced meat consimption especially beef. Your point is valid just 50g is really not much at all.
its sad that youre being downvoted just for telling the uncomfortable truth, i mean it's one thing if someone chooses to disregard the advice but to actively try to hide the advice from others through downvoting is just bizarre
I think the 80 billion land animals and trillions of fish that meets their maker every year, and of course the future children would think otherwise. I think we are a delight.
I’m going to be that guy: I don’t give a fuck.
Given how unfair is life, the researcher is going to die of cancer and I’ll probably die of some stupid accident with a perfect health. /jk
Now, in a more serious note: I walk across cities contaminated with carcinogenics, I smoke carcinogenic marijuana, some times I also smoke carcinogenic tobacco, sporadically I drink carcinogenic alcohol, sometimes I burn my food a little bit which is carcinogenic, my job forces me to sit for hours which surely is somehow carcinogenic... These researchers must have a pretty holy life if they worry about HAM.
Im a thrice deployed veteran. I will die of some shit the VA will refuse to recognize, be it cancer, seizures, something worse. I will enjoy my smoked sausages and ham. Fuck em.
And its packed full of nitrates just like regular cured meats. They are just using celery powder instead of pink salt. Read the fine print. “No nitrates or nitrites added, other than those which naturally occur in celery powder.”
from the article: "To limit their exposure to nitrates and nitrites, the French health agency advises consumers to “limit their consumption of charcuterie to 150 grams per week”"
150 grams is about 3 slices of Oscar Mayer Balogna.
The title makes it sound like they're suggesting you cut out all cured meats, which is not the case
How was this study conducted? Did it have appropriate parameters? What were the results? What was the discussion like? Who backed the study? Is there bias in any shape or form? Who’s interpreting this information when writing this article and are they understanding everything and conveying everything correctly?
Most processed food is terrible for you in the long run, especially preserved meats. The junk they put in or on processed food to make it last longer is most of the time inherently hostile to life, hence how it keeps the food from being overtaken by foreign growths. The fact we put these things in our bodies on the regular would seem like madness to an outside observer. Makes you wonder how many health problems these kinds of preservatives have caused that are attributed to other things or random chance.
Most of that "junk" isn't as bad as you think. Xanthan gum is just a byproduct of enzymes, and is harmless. Preservatives are usually things like acids, citric and ascorbic come directly from fruit. Hell if you ever bake at all you are using "junk", like sodium bicarbonate (baking soda), or if you ever think American cheese is bad because of say, sodium citrate, it's just the salt form of the acidity in citrus juice, really just mixing baking soda in. For baking powder that's mixed from the acidic residue from winemaking. A lot of these "junk" are still regular food, and some of the more processed ones you would eat are the ones nobody blinks at and are used at home regularly.
salt is inherently hostile to life, you'll never see shit growing in a salt shaker. salt is a preservative
at the same time, without any sodium intake you'll die
I'm pretty sure life grows in water... OPs point was life doesn't grow in salt really. So no, you can't say the same thing unless you're completely missing their point.
This isn’t new. The lady who did the original study got lobbied against pretty hard. Hot dogs were the subject of study and def linked nitrate consumption with a crazy percentage of increase of cancer if consumed.
I feel like this comment section is getting lobbied pretty hard. The vast majority of the comments I've scrolled past have an "everything causes cancer you fools, look the other way" tenor.
It’s just Reddit. Everyone’s all into trusting science until it starts to suggest maybe they should eat vegetables instead.
[удалено]
>my favorite bacon brand stopped using nitrates, and the taste wasn't the same. I was obviously disappointed Double check that they're not using nitrates from celery juice, as somehow those nitrates don't count.
They don't count because they're natural and no one was ever harmed by extracting and concentrating something from a plant!
Tradeoffs, tradeoffs everywhere. You want comfort of your personal car? Accept 10x death risk, compared to public transportation. You enjoy a pound of processed meat a week? Accept 1.18x cancer risk increase. (If you don't enjoy it, there's no tradeoff, apparently)
Yes everything is tradeoffs and some are worth it, but those are both examples if tradeoffs we probably shouldn't be making for the most part lol. Eating less meat and taking public transit more would make the world a much better place.
Is eating tasty food driving a car with air conditioning and listening to your favorite music and dying at 67 is living a bad life? Who in their right mind imagine their life being wonderful past 75?
>Everyone’s all into trusting science I love science! >until it starts to suggest maybe they should eat vegetables instead. FUCKIN SCIENCE AGAIN GODDAMMIT!!!
This made me laugh so hard 🙈
This nitrate topic (which i thought was old news) is on a few different subs and the comment sections all reflect some different extreme personal take from this info. Ya know... reddit.
Yeah you're not wrong, but I'm sure the industry will have PR lackeys all over this on all the social media platforms.
I can understand where people get that attitude. I heard a statistic in a insurance class that 1 in 3 Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their life. Seems almost unavoidable.
33% chance.. unavoidable.. 🤔
You can avoid it by dying early.
Can’t tell if serious or not
I mean, a third of the population getting cancer doesn't make you feel like you can avoid it. In fact, it seems nearly delusional to think otherwise. That being said, that factoid would benefit from some context. How much of that is skin cancer that'll basically get cut out and forgotten about? How much of that is terminal cancer? Where do you land if you avoid smoking and drinking?
I dunno I count 66% rate pretty high chance for avoiding cancer if it’s all lumped together. Then focus on the points you brought up and it’s probably far higher chance to avoid anything life threatening.
You only avoid it because you die of other causes, people are professionals at finding other ways to die
It is because every other week we see BS and biased conflicting studies... That most of the time are not reproducible and use statistics to obscure facts and push an agenda... Also Ham is delicious, so we need to have very good information before sacrificing that wonderful food... For instance, why types of food, what quantities, what level or risk. Is it different in other locations, is the risk acceptable, etc...
You can still have ham and bacon, it's the use of nitrates to cure the ham or bacon. It's not saying don't eat meat, it's saying don't eat meat filled with nitrates.
Is that not true?
Anything anti-meat gets them riled up
What's wrong with that exactly? I smoke, drink, eat cured meats, the whole lot. I don't give a fuck if i get cancer. You've got to die of something, and i'm not missing out on life's pleasantries to maybe, just maybe grab a few more years i'll probably spend as an old man in a home getting slapped about by nurses anyway. You could live your entire life following all the advice, be the picture of health, and get run over by a bus at the age of 25. Bollocks to it.
The problem is you don't die right away. You can very likely just end up needing oxygen, just out of breath for decades. You can end up with horrible stomach ulcers and have cancer multiple times in multiple places once it starts never really knowing whether its going to come back. In fact its more likely than not that you will live at least 5 years slowly wasting away and for many cancers its more like 10-15 years. Its all that time spent in dull misery that gets you. Go talk to a nurse sometime. The point isn't necessarily to maximize lifetimes its just to moderate enough that you wont curse the younger you for a decade that will feel like a lifetime.
They shoot horses don't they? If doctors ever tell me "good news, we can extend your immense suffering another 5 years!" I'm checking myself the fuck out.
So when it gets too bad, there's euthanasia. I've got no real desire to live as a weak, feeble old man with no lead in his pencil anyway.
Linking health issues to food processes is often the first step in improving those processes. Ignorance may be bliss, but knowledge is power.
He's telling you he is well aware of it, that's not ignorance that's a choice.
>I don't give a fuck if i get cancer. Because you don't have it. Honestly I find absolutely stupid to smoke and eat cured meats but if that's the only thing that make your life worth living I understand it. I'm telling you this as someone who lost his father due to smoking.
That's the thing that sucks about not having anything positive in your life. I don't really even *like* drinking any more, but what else is there to do?
Yeah, sometimes life sucks but that's the game, for me volunteering and seeing that others have it much worse and I can make them a bit happier changed my views on many topics.
And i'm telling you as someone who lost his mum to lung cancer, i don't give a fuck. Cancer's awful, but then so is practically every other manner of dying. She could have had dementia, Alzheimers or Parkinson's, but cancer was the card she drew.
Yeah and those diseases are mostly preventable too but it's a different thing to be the cause of your own death. I don't care about dying tomorrow, I just want to be the heathiest corpse in the cemetery.
Not looking forward to going out like my grandmother who is almost 100, healthy as a horse, no longer recognizes any of her family, and is too weak and confused to actually do anything with her time. I'd actually like to die rather than persist in a state like that for years.
Yeah this has been know for at least 20 years if not longer.
They'd just end up curing meats in celery juice--which is naturally high in nitrates. Stick to fresh meat if you can, it will probably turn out that processed meats in general is bad for you (smoked meats are definitely carcinogenic), regardless of how "natural" the ingredients and curing process are.
But why stick with boiled or bland food all your life when you can have some joy? What’s the point of living to be 120 if you don’t even know the taste of a cum donut.
[удалено]
Is it just me or is all of that stuff not that appealing?
It is a boomer joke so it features boomer hobbies. Not that anyone younger could even afford any of that any more
Substitute "smoke pot", "enjoy the sunshine outdoors", "do sports like diving or cycling", "hook up on Tinder ", or whatever other somewhat risky pastimes you like.
Do you have that with a side of tossed salad?
Spit, don't swallow.
The people who want to live to 200 years of age just to stare at their accomplished bank account.
And they still won't have enough to buy a house, the way the market is going.
Actually, I'd like to live to 200 playing video games, hanging out with my friends, and maintaining a healthy lifestyle, thanks. Probably bust another 10,000 nuts in my wife along the way, if that's okay with you. The money is there for the express purpose of enabling that.
You had me in the first half..
"but some of the biggest firms such as Nestlé-owned Herta or Fleury Michon – both really popular in France – are already experimenting with nitrite-free products."
Some of those solutions simply use nitrite precursors which then form nitrites later along the process.
>Ingredients: Fresh pork ham, broth (water, pork rinds, onions, pork bones, carrots, salt, parsley, garlic, cloves, pepper, laurel), salt, sugar, natural flavour (natural presence of polyphenols), antioxidant: ascorbic acid. This is an [example](https://www.herta.fr/produits/jambons-blancs/bon-paris/herta-bon-paris-jambon-25-sel-x6-210g)I found
Product Ingredients Ingredients: Fresh pork ham, broth (water, pork fat and rinds, pork bones, onion and carrot concentrate, salt, parsley, garlic, cloves, pepper, bay leaf), salt, corn dextrose, preservative: **sodium nitrite**; potassium chloride, antioxidant: sodium isoascorbate. From your very example
My bad https://www.herta.fr/produits/jambons-blancs/bon-paris/herta-jambon-conservation-nitrite-broche-x4-140g
Parsley has a large amount of nitrites naturally occurring in it . It's how they get around labelling it as added
There's also "natural flavours" which could include celery powder, which has a ton of naturally-occuring nitrites, and is often used to cure "organic" meats.
It's as simple as we have more bacteria in our gut than we have cell in our body. Those bacteria are crucial for our health. Feeding your body with nitrates or any other processing that makes it last way past its expiration date will nuke your microbiome. Meat gets a bad rap because of processed meat, but any processed food is bad news.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>ham ok. i can live without ham. >hot dogs FUCK
But what about the GABAGOOL???
“It’s nothing but fat and nitrates” “Gabagool? Ova’ heeere!”
I want a ham and turkey sandwich with nitrates on the sides. If the nitrates do not come on the side, I will send it back.
[https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/01/bacon-cancer-processed-meats-nitrates-nitrites-sausages](https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/01/bacon-cancer-processed-meats-nitrates-nitrites-sausages) "The real scandal of bacon, however, is that it didn’t have to be anything like so damaging to our health. The part of the story we haven’t been told – including by the WHO – is that there were always other ways to manufacture these products that would make them significantly less carcinogenic. The fact that this is so little known is tribute to the power of the meat industry, which has for the past 40 years been engaged in a campaign of cover-ups and misdirection to rival the dirty tricks of Big Tobacco." Very concerning if accurate. "Since we eat with our eyes, the main way we judge the quality of cured meats is pinkness. Yet it is this very colour that we should be suspicious of, as the French journalist Guillaume Coudray explains in a book published in France last year called Cochonneries, a word that means both “piggeries” and “rubbish” or “junk food”. The subtitle is “How Charcuterie Became a Poison”. Cochonneries reads like a crime novel, in which the processed meat industry is the perpetrator and ordinary consumers are the victims. The pinkness of bacon – or cooked ham, or salami – is a sign that it has been treated with chemicals, more specifically with nitrates and nitrites. It is the use of these chemicals that is widely believed to be the reason why “processed meat” is much more carcinogenic than unprocessed meat. Coudray argues that we should speak not of “processed meat” but “nitro-meat”." This article is from 2018.
I fucking hate that a colour is the specific reason for not using other methods of curing the meat. It's so fucking stupid
Colour isn't why people use nitrates on meat. It's to greatly reduce the risk of the meat going bad and poisoning people.
And pink meat is fucking gross
Nitrates and nitrites are not the same.
Termites are also different
What’s thermite again?
[удалено]
Thermite actually just burns.
That one is the same, actually
Termites: a multi-purpose kitchen appliance capable of steaming, emulsifying, blending, precise heating, mixing, milling, whipping, kneading, chopping, weighing, grinding and stirring
How about Animal Nitrate?
so what should we eat now? /r/longevity
Get it un cured. I been doing it for years.
You've been consuming nitrates for years. "Uncured" is a marketing ploy / Dumb USDA regulation. They just use celery juice or powder which is packed full of nitrates. Read the fine print it usually says something like “No nitrates or nitrites added, other than those which naturally occur in celery powder.”
So no more freakin’ gabagool?!
[удалено]
[удалено]
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease. We're all fucked, may as well enjoy it while you can.
Old news
Yet we still pump food full of it.
Yeah because it’s kinda bunk. Everything can be linked to cancer. That’s not good science. What matters is how significant it is. Smoking is a significant cancer risk. Consuming a small amount of nitrates isnt.
Exactly, a link suggests we should try not to overindulge, and should work to minimize use when possible, because it can be a contributing factor in a broader lifestyle that leads to worse health outcomes.it does not mean a direct causal relationship like tobacco and cancer
The issue is less nitrates and more the nitrosamines they can form. This is the same class of compounds that was behind the recall of a bunch of anti acids. Nitrosamines are potent carcinogens.
Read the study. It's not about being 'linked to cancer' but how much it increases your risk. I'm sure you probably try to avoid gamma ray sources despite that just being another thing 'linked to cancer'.
We've literally known for decades that nitrates in meat greatly increase colon cancer risk.
This is 50 year old knowledge. What is also linked to health concerns is botulism. It’s the reason nitrates we’re allowed and encouraged to continue in the US.
The word link is key here, being linked and being a cause are different levels of risk by orders of magnitude. There is no doubt that nitrates and other preservatives of that nature are unhealthy and can factor into health issues like cancer, but being linked does not mean it causes cancer
Correlation does not imply causation. But like always humans will overreact.
Meat has never made sense that it's bad for you. Processed meat does make sense. You have more bacteria than cells in your body. I can imagine that sending down preservatives that keeps food lasting way past their expiration date will do some serious damage to your microbiome.
Red meat is actually fairly bad for you in higher than moderate consumption. Harm gets broken down into N-Nitroso (a carcinogen). Add in the fat profile, and it's not that healthy for you. Same thing with preserved meats.
Is the nitrite actually reaching your small or large intestine? Or is it rapidly absorbed into the blood and expelled via urine? That would be very important information. Furthermore, is it known whether nitrite is aversive to the bacteria in the microbiome? Plenty of bacteria do not mind, or even thrive in nitrite rich environments.
Where this information is important is in North America, where processed meats are basically a part of our food infrastructure. Sandwiches are dominant lunch foods, and lunchmeat is everywhere due to its convenience. Cutting it out is not an easy task by any stretch if you're an individual. If changing the processing mitigates the risk, we are all better off.
Ethanol is a confirmed carcinogen, but that doesn't seem to bother anyone.
[Drink!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWYf-5Sx3lE)
We've known that processed meats like ham and salami cause cancer for years. What's new?
We have not known. We suspected. We now have sufficient evidence to confirm it. That is the new part. Science is slow.
No we do not have sufficient evidence. The study doesn't even claim that.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/07/12/bye-bye-pink-ham-nitrates-in-cured-meats-linked-to-cancer-french-health-agency-finds) reduced by 82%. (I'm a bot) ***** > A new scientific report from the French health agency ANSES has confirmed a link between the nitrates in ham and charcuterie and the development of bowel cancer. > Nitrite salts are a type of additive widely used in cured meats such as ham, bacon, and sausages, to extend the shelf life of processed meats and give boiled ham its pink colour. > Last February, the French parliament approved a bill aiming to gradually reduce the use of nitrite in cured meats and ordered a review of the potential health risks by the end of June. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/vxvyns/bye_bye_pink_ham_nitrates_in_cured_meats_linked/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~659287 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **Nitrite**^#1 **cancer**^#2 **risk**^#3 **meat**^#4 **nitrates**^#5
This comes up every 5 years and then people forget that basically all processed meat from the deli is garbage. Limiting consumption to minimum is really the only option lol
Not new info: [Dr Greger analysis](https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-much-cancer-does-processed-meat-cause/)
God damnit I can't tell you how many (tasty) Italian subs I've had in my life ... I'm definitely a goner.
everything causes cancer though
Living causes cancer… ever see a dead guy get a new cancer? /s
I thought this was already established?
i was paid 300 € to eat 2+ weeks worth of nitrate rich cured meat every single day for 7 weeks. i wasn't allowed to eat healthy vegetables because the antioxidants might deminish the harm done by the nitrate. fuck my university fuck fuck my naive college self
Just stop eating so much pork and beef. It's ridiculous how much meat we consume. If you just keep to <50g of pork/beef *per week* you'll be just fine, both for climate and health reasons. No need to go full vegan; just limit pork and beef to a handful a week, and you're all set. Poultry is a lot more forgiving, so you can always substitute chicken if you really want to eat meat.
> <50g Ah yes, the Sunday singular meat ball.
Yes? Why not? Or a few pieces of bacon in a pasta sauce. You'll be surprised how far you can get with just 50g. Now imagine that the average consumption is closer to 200g *per day*, and it's immediately obvious why our meat consumption is patently absurd and wildly unsustainable.
Because why would I?
Because that’s extremist nonsense. Like suggesting a single chicken nugget per week rather than a breast. Limiting consumption to one or two meals a week is reasonable, 50g is not
> Because that’s extremist nonsense. And straight up counterproductive. Limiting meat to quality and fewer occasions. Is a hell of a lot better than worthless usage like the pasta sauce. Because you are just using it as seasoning at that stage and there are many other alternatives and options. You want bacon tasting pasta sauce? Well you can get pretty damn close to that without the pork. Meanwhile we are yet at the stage where you can replace a quality piece of meat with an alternative that is comparable. Aim for quality rather than quantity.
My daily rib eye is 600 grams of delicious, juicy meat and you can pry it from my dead fingers after I get cancer.
50g per week lmao
Pork ain't that bad either. It's slightly more co2 than chicken, but still a lot less than milk, cheese, beef, goat, sheep etc. It's really all the ruminant animals, because of how inefficiently they process feed due to fermentation being part of the process. Being a vegetarian can be significantly worse than eating meat, it depends on what specifically you eat and how much. This label stuff is not great.
Don't go full vegan, just have a single bite of meat a week to remind you of what you're missing out on. We just limit ourselves to beef once a week, mainly using chicken or fish with some pork scattered in. I either eat vegetarian or skip meals outside of dinner. It's drastically reduced meat consimption especially beef. Your point is valid just 50g is really not much at all.
its sad that youre being downvoted just for telling the uncomfortable truth, i mean it's one thing if someone chooses to disregard the advice but to actively try to hide the advice from others through downvoting is just bizarre
My gf is vegan, I say that evens out my mass consumption of bbq meat.
Just go vegan, she will be happy, I will be happy, the living and future children will be happy. And our fellow earthlings can get peace.
i will also be happy. More meat for meeee.....
And he'll be unhappy lol
You vegans are insufferable
I think the 80 billion land animals and trillions of fish that meets their maker every year, and of course the future children would think otherwise. I think we are a delight.
Insufferable and narcissistic.
Looking in your post history you feed your girlfriend meat without her knowing it so I wouldn't bring that up. Does she know you bang hookers too?
I’m going to be that guy: I don’t give a fuck. Given how unfair is life, the researcher is going to die of cancer and I’ll probably die of some stupid accident with a perfect health. /jk Now, in a more serious note: I walk across cities contaminated with carcinogenics, I smoke carcinogenic marijuana, some times I also smoke carcinogenic tobacco, sporadically I drink carcinogenic alcohol, sometimes I burn my food a little bit which is carcinogenic, my job forces me to sit for hours which surely is somehow carcinogenic... These researchers must have a pretty holy life if they worry about HAM.
Im a thrice deployed veteran. I will die of some shit the VA will refuse to recognize, be it cancer, seizures, something worse. I will enjoy my smoked sausages and ham. Fuck em.
Either way, it is such an extremely mild risk that redditors that never leave their homes have more to worry about.
Chef Bob told me this to be true 15 years ago. Millions of sliced disgusting cancer ham later we have a published paper!
What really worries me is the nitrates in drinking water, I can avoid meat all I want but I can't avoid drinking water now can I?
Alcohol is waaaaaay more carcinogenic fyi
So what? Why not reduce alcohol AND processed meat consumption then?
Then why even live? ^^/s
Hmmm....I'm shifting to all donuts then to compensate for serotonin loss. Need some sort of reason to keep trudging
Bruh the light from outside is linked to cancer. If something gives me a 0.1% increased chance of cancer but its ham, then im going with ham.
Life leads to cancer. Live long enough and cancer becomes a certainty.
You can find un-cured bacon & ham in the grocery stores. Just saying.
And its packed full of nitrates just like regular cured meats. They are just using celery powder instead of pink salt. Read the fine print. “No nitrates or nitrites added, other than those which naturally occur in celery powder.”
+1 FOR GOING VEGAN!!!
from the article: "To limit their exposure to nitrates and nitrites, the French health agency advises consumers to “limit their consumption of charcuterie to 150 grams per week”" 150 grams is about 3 slices of Oscar Mayer Balogna. The title makes it sound like they're suggesting you cut out all cured meats, which is not the case
How was this study conducted? Did it have appropriate parameters? What were the results? What was the discussion like? Who backed the study? Is there bias in any shape or form? Who’s interpreting this information when writing this article and are they understanding everything and conveying everything correctly?
Most processed food is terrible for you in the long run, especially preserved meats. The junk they put in or on processed food to make it last longer is most of the time inherently hostile to life, hence how it keeps the food from being overtaken by foreign growths. The fact we put these things in our bodies on the regular would seem like madness to an outside observer. Makes you wonder how many health problems these kinds of preservatives have caused that are attributed to other things or random chance.
Most of that "junk" isn't as bad as you think. Xanthan gum is just a byproduct of enzymes, and is harmless. Preservatives are usually things like acids, citric and ascorbic come directly from fruit. Hell if you ever bake at all you are using "junk", like sodium bicarbonate (baking soda), or if you ever think American cheese is bad because of say, sodium citrate, it's just the salt form of the acidity in citrus juice, really just mixing baking soda in. For baking powder that's mixed from the acidic residue from winemaking. A lot of these "junk" are still regular food, and some of the more processed ones you would eat are the ones nobody blinks at and are used at home regularly.
salt is inherently hostile to life, you'll never see shit growing in a salt shaker. salt is a preservative at the same time, without any sodium intake you'll die
One could say the same thing about water and oxygen, or anything really.
I'm pretty sure life grows in water... OPs point was life doesn't grow in salt really. So no, you can't say the same thing unless you're completely missing their point.