Is the (soience) settled? Because I'm eating it 6 out of 7
>>77322150>causeit doesn't cause cancer, it increases the risk slightly
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-nutrition/article/association-between-red-meat-intake-and-diabetes-a-crosssectional-analysis-of-a-nationally-representative-sample-of-us-adults-nhanes-20032016/C54B7B77A2BCFA13C741C57EA5D0797B
>>77322155It directly causes cancer by mechanism of TMAO oxidation in the colon. Body can heal but injure it enough and it can't. It's such a a disservice to public understanding of these things that science speak uses terms like "risk factor"
Is it the meat or the preservatives? also, what about organic free range bacon?
>>77322171>organicVegan/hippie>freeCommunist>rangeUnitedstatedsian take on America>BaconFrench Canadian
>>77322150What is that? Cow liver?
>>77322150>Because I'm eating it 6 out of 7SIX SEVEEEEEN
>>77322150>Is the (soience) settled?no evidence of causality afaik. just weak associations. the IARC committee that made this declaration was a bunch of angry vegetarians. the one author we disagreed wrote an article about how theyre all biased retards>Despite claims by the World Health Organization (WHO) that eating processed meat causes colon cancer and red meat probably causes cancer, the observational data used to support the claims are weak, confounded by multiple unmeasured factors, and not supported by other types of research needed for such a conclusion. Although intervention studies are designed to test the validity of associations found in observational studies, two interventions of low-fat, low-meat diets in volunteers that failed to find a benefit on cancer were not considered in the WHO decision.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32071794/
>>77322295see >>77322166
>>77322166You should learn what the words directly and causes mean.
>>77322171Bacon is by definition preserved. Organic and free range mean nothing
>>77322411TMAO is more from fish I thought. What's that got to do with bacon
>>77322150I like chicken and shrimp or whatever most of the time this is 10g of protein
>>77322150>HE IS EATINGSIXEVEN
>>77322450Bacon and other processed red meats cause colon cancer by four main mechanisms: curing chemicals (nitrites/nitrates) turn into N‑nitroso compounds that damage DNA; high‑heat cooking makes carcinogens (PAHs, HCAs) that harm cells; heme iron in meat causes oxidative damage and inflammation that promote mutations; TMA turnover into TMAO. These effects increase the chance cells become cancerous.TMAO (trimethylamine N‑oxide) forms when gut bacteria turn choline, carnitine, or lecithin (in red meat, eggs, dairy) into trimethylamine (TMA), then the liver converts TMA to TMAO. Higher TMAO levels cause inflammation and altered bile acids that promote colorectal tumor growth.(mostly AI gen, yes, some edits for brevity but I mean come on why not waste chatbot time in this age we live in, you can deep dive into mechanisms all you want instead of endless fucking spoonfeeding requests which is so exhausting)
>>77322515Your veggies have more nitrates than any cured meat. It's proven that if consumed with vitamin c or polyphenols, it doesn't cause cancer. Gues what, cured meat by law contains added vitamin c.Just don't cook at melting tempsIron with a low biovariability does that, which is in veggies. Iron from meat is goat.Truebut the risk is negligible. Absolutely every food causes some sort of cancer. Even gree tea does. It's risk to benefits ration. And onions, in this regard, is way worse.
>>77322150Don't listen to Muslims or Jews. Pork is perfectly healthy.
>>77322515didn't address my question about fish at all. Looks like your AI is retarded just like you. Still no evidence of causality BTW. Rcts like the Polyp Prevention Trial show no change in polyp recurrence following reductions in red/processed meats
>>77322706>>77322771you guys are retarded and mentally ill saying whatever, especially 71 who can't even read, keeps repeating "no causality" to message outlining the causes
>>77322970vegtarded cope. No causality has been demonstrated
>>77322150Red meats are probably a fairly weak carcinogen, generally hovering at around the cutoff for statistical significance in most studies and meta-analyses. I rely more on eating picrel than avoiding specific foods for cancer prevention.
>>77322994Ignored
>>77322994Oof
>>77323103>>77323114>anons 2 stupid 2 verify critical facts on mucpharm.com and PubMed>(((2026)))NGMI.
>>77323224>Calling other people stupid when you use the number two instead of the word two.
>>77322150THIS NIGGA PUTTING PIG MEAT IN HIS MOUTH, WHAT A FAGGOT
>>77323290I'll put my meat in your mouth
Every year they roll back how "bad for you" red meat is and they recommend it more and more for seniors because muscle loss and bone density loss kill them faster and faster. They now recommend old people to eat lots of red meat.But pork is probably the worst meat you can eat, just going off parasite studies. Chicken, pork, and beef were put into test trials where they test 10k samples, pork was the only one with parasites in it, granted it was only like 5 out of the 3.3k samples that made up the pork's share.But I wouldn't trust the industry itself, not that the meat is especially dangerous, more the way it's done somehow has consistently made it worse than beef and somehow even industrial chicken.>Bro it's only parasitesThey're a proxy for other things, if your shit is full of parasites I can assume that it's also full of other shit.
>>77322970Are you retarded? The is no association between any form of cancer and nitrates from meat, if the meat contains vitamin c or polyphenols. There is no data even to suggest that there is any causation.
>>77322150meat does not cause cancer. what they add in there does.
>>77322977>>77323385>no causality You turds keep repeating that lie because it's the only thing you can do. Even when known mechanistic causes for cell mutation are rubbed in your face you repeat the line.
>>77323379Pigs are just nasty creatures so you've got to cook the crap out of them and eat some horse paste occassionally to kill the parasites. The wild boar is our ancestral enemy and many men have bled out alone in the forest from a unlucky tusk to the stomach, so they should be killed and eaten. I think you're right though and it would be better to engineer ways to prevent it from happening in the first place. If I wasn't being so frugal right now I would never eat pork.
>>77322150Everything is bad for you. Everything causes cancer. Welcome to the satanistic future.It doesn't matter, nigga, if you get cancer from eating pork you could've gotten it by just existing. Accept your fate and die with dignity.
>>77324252>Everything causes cancer.>Accept your fate and die with dignity.Or you could also just... run some other new schizo-tier research natty chemo cocktail like C.Q.F.>Specific Irreversible Cell-Cycle Arrest and Depletion of Cancer Cells Obtained by Combining Curcumin and the Flavonoids Quercetin and Fisetin>https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9316914/
You have to be seriously dumb to think meat (our most ancient food) causes a modern disease like cancer, rather than all the absolute slave garbage in the diet since the 20th century. The basedence about TMAO is nonsensical, it's a small number of activist researchers citing each other when the original data shows no correlation let alone any causation. Meta-analyses have been clear there isn't a link between a meat and cancer (shocker). I think more educated and aware people understand that there is a serious issue with science these days in terms of the replication crisis and a general crisis of competency and fraud. Huge amounts of money are going into activist-science in order to shape public policy, and it's not limited to "climate-science" and "gender-science". When one of their avenues fails (TMAO) they will try to invent another one until something sticks the way the cholesterol lie did for boomers.
>>77324329cancer is a disease of old age. by the time you could get it a typical human would already have reproduced, raised their children into adults and care for their grandchildren. for most of human history sooner you'd die of other causes like injury or disease.. so there is no reason meat should not naturally cause cancer, it would evolutionary make no difference. and that is ignoring that the amount of meat eaten by an average person in western countries is much higher today than it has ever been.
>>77323385>>77324204Laser focus, without broader biological context or consideration for mitigating factors, on speculative mechanisms is a hallmark of a midwit mind. Big brained chads think holistically.
