Report about red meat/processed meat. Confused

[himtoo]

http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2015/10/world-health-organisation-meat-cancer/

WHO statement is based on observational studies, correlation does not equal causation, yada-yada-yada, I'm not changing my diet, but I anticipate that I will have to argue with my wife about not changing my diet more. So, thanks for that WHO.

@Dillinger - perhaps you could come to our house and be "on my side" -- the discussions ( mild arguments) have already commenced here

 

[Phub]

Scouser..
I think you will find that bacon that hasn't been cured is just pork. You know it all comes from the same animal, so bacon is processed inasmuch as it is salted, and has some nitrates added. That's the only difference as far as I know. I eat bacon and sausages, and pork. And I ain't changing my methods now.

I'm going to check Celeriac's link for some organic bacon then! Thanks Celeriac...

 

[asparagusp]

Let's just get one thing very clear here. Ageing "causes cancer" too. Should we stop people getting older?

This is one of those reports that raises some interesting ethical questions regarding life. We've known for a while that there is a link between processed meats and cancer - it is not new news. Red meats may cause cancer too? Oh well. According to the WHO data, the increased risk is an increase of 18% on the existing risk.

According to the US CDC, the likelihood of getting bowel cancer over periods of time increases as you get older, or in other words, if you are 30, the likelihood of getting it in the next ten years, is 0.07% and in 30 years is 0.97%. So, the likelihood if you eat the bad processed meats is 0.083% in the next ten years and and 1.14% in the next thirty years. Really not worth worrying about.

By having Diabetes, my risk of death is increased. I am 48% more likely than normal to have a heart attack. Everything kills you in some way. It's called life, so let's just get on with it!

Ah wait! As we grow older you will have eaten more red meat! The WHO say two rashers of bacon or sausages per day is acceptable. They of course have to rule on poultry and fish!

 

[Phub]

Oh well, I am eating about half a kilo of bacon in 14 days. So that's okay then!

 

[noblehead]

The Mail has put together a list of the other group one things that can cause cancer:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...se-CANCER-according-world-health-experts.html

 

[Indy51]

Chris Kresser has just published another article reviewing the evidence on the subject:

http://chriskresser.com/red-meat-cancer-again-will-it-ever-stop/

 

[Brunneria]

Great article @Indy51

 

[Dark Horse]

If you're ever confused by media reporting of research related to health, this is an excellent website: www.nhs.uk/news
It discusses how the main health news stories have been reported in the media and then explains the truth behind the headlines. Their analysis of the processed meat story is here: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2015/10October/Pages/Processed-meat-causes-cancer-warns-official-report.aspx

It's also useful to think about "lifetime risk" of bowel cancer. At current bacon-eating levels in the UK, 6 out of every 100 people will get bowel cancer during their lifetime. Increasing bacon consumption by 50g per day would result in 7 out of every 100 people developing bowel cancer within their lifetime.

The BBC have reported the story quite well, here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34615621

 

[Celeriac]

Unless head transplants work (first one is scheduled for 2017), then mortality is 100% for everyone. We're basically talking about extending life by adopting dietary advice. As we know that the advice being given about fat and heart disease and cholesterol has tank sized holes all over the place, it seems to me like it should be an individual decision.

To me, medicine shouldn't be about drugs being given to patients just because they might be helpful in delaying or avoiding death from a particular condition. Medicine by statistics. Often these studies are flawed. Often the risks are overstated in order to get publicity for the study, journal, institutions, researchers or sponsors.

Butter is bad then good. Trans fats are good then bad. Cholesterol is bad then doesn't matter. Fat is bad then good. There is now so much information out there, that we are able to explore it in far more depth. But we are also more sceptical of the health messages that we get. So maybe the researchers and journals feel that they have to shout louder to have any impact.

As someone who was put on a low fat diet aged ten, because her father was diagnosed with high cholesterol, I feel like that wasn't a good foundation for my health. Before 1994, Flora in the UK was made with trans fats, for example.

Personally it makes me feel like ignoring the health advice. I eat real food, 99.9% of the time and always always eat additive free. I feel like that's the best I can do for myself.