Fad Diets and Quackery

Remove this Banner Ad

I process meats at home and cure my own bacon, so guaranteed healthy and actually reduces the risk of cancer.
What sort of crystals do you use to cleanse your meat of bad energy?
 
70g per day?
Honestly, who sticks to that? If I'm buying a steak I'm looking at anywhere between 250g to 350g, the fattier the better (most of the flavor is in the fat).

I certainly wouldn't be lumping processed meats with fresh cuts either - no rocket science or fancy diets required, just simply avoiding processed foods and sticking to a basic principle of the closer a food is to it's original source, the better.
Nobody. Which is what is increasing the risk of cancer.

The WHO doesn't lump processed and fresh red meat together.

They are in two different categories. The case for red meat has less evidence than for processed meat, which is at the highest proof (strength of evidence) level. The same strength of evidence level as cigarettes. Which is why people are raising the straw man of "the WHO rekon it iz lyk smoking!"
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I certainly wouldn't be lumping processed meats with fresh cuts either - no rocket science or fancy diets required, just simply avoiding processed foods and sticking to a basic principle of the closer a food is to it's original source, the better.
Its exactly what Zoe Harcombe said

"Meat needed to be naturally preserved with salting, curing, drying, smoking etc or we would have needed to binge on the kill and risk dying of starvation before the next kill. The WHO report should have separated traditional ways of preserving meat from modern manufactured processing (where sugars and chemicals are added – just read the label). Similarly – if there is any harm in red meat, it will be because manufacturers have got involved and fed the poor animals grains, which they cannot digest and then pumped them with drugs to medicate the resulting illness."
 
Its exactly what Zoe Harcombe said

"Meat needed to be naturally preserved with salting, curing, drying, smoking etc or we would have needed to binge on the kill and risk dying of starvation before the next kill. The WHO report should have separated traditional ways of preserving meat from modern manufactured processing (where sugars and chemicals are added – just read the label). Similarly – if there is any harm in red meat, it will be because manufacturers have got involved and fed the poor animals grains, which they cannot digest and then pumped them with drugs to medicate the resulting illness."
Now that's science!
 
Its exactly what Zoe Harcombe said

"Meat needed to be naturally preserved with salting, curing, drying, smoking etc or we would have needed to binge on the kill and risk dying of starvation before the next kill. The WHO report should have separated traditional ways of preserving meat from modern manufactured processing (where sugars and chemicals are added – just read the label). Similarly – if there is any harm in red meat, it will be because manufacturers have got involved and fed the poor animals grains, which they cannot digest and then pumped them with drugs to medicate the resulting illness."

I'd say it's probably got to do with Xenu injecting Thetans into our cows in order to poison the world against the one true religion of Scientology.
The World Health Organisation won't release the truth as 76% of their funding comes from the Galactic Confederacy of Teegeeack
 
Another interesting article on the meat and cancer brouhaha.

"The World Health Organization (WHO) just announced that red meat is “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Yep–Right up there with glyphosate, cigarettes, alcohol and asbestos.

——–> insert facepalm <——–

This announcement is absurdly misguided and largely based upon the notoriously two least reliable forms of science we have:

1) Observational studies driven by…

2) Food questionnaires

(By the way, what did YOU have for lunch on Thursday of last week/month year?)

This is all fully based on the idea of “guilt by weak association” and any rational person knows that association is NOT causation.

UGH–Back to the nutritional Dark Ages we go…"



http://www.primalbody-primalmind.com/who-red-meat-brouhaha/
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

No wonder processed meat causes cancer

12190009_482560271918607_8915500812265359421_n.jpg
 
That's why we can never have prohibition of hotdogs no matter how much cancer they cause - things will get a lot worse once the mafia move in and make them out of homeless people.
 
Just on the meat thing (correct me if I'm wrong because I can't be bothered reading up on it) but it's likely that most studies todate haven't considered exercise habits, overall fibre intake and how the steak is actually cooked (rare vs charcoal) antibiotic use etc to ensure that they are comparing "high" red meat intake vs low/none and not missing other factors.

I will never completely trust a system where promotion of cereals and grains are the most economically sustainable.

Just eat real food and stress less for good health
 
Pedantry is no laughing matter.

OK.

Who said sausages would be labelled as lethal as cigarettes?
The report the WHO released.

The report classifies processed meats, like bacon and sausages, as a Group 1 carcinogen based on "sufficient evidence" they cause bowel cancer.

Group 1 carcinogens are defined as known causes of cancer. According to the American Cancer Society these include asbestos, alcohol and tobacco smoking.
 
Who are we not to trust WHO.

"The World Health Organisation has come under fire for its handling of the recent global influenza pandemic.

A joint investigation by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and the British Medical Journal (BMJ) has revealed that key scientists advising the WHO on pandemic influenza had financial links to the drug companies which stood to profit from the organisation’s decisions."


https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2010/06/07/who-swine-flu-advisors-had-links-to-drug-companies/
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top