Meat ages you?

bunchesonothing

It's the antibiotics, hormones, and carcinogens that are in the majority of meat now that cause this...not the meat itself.

If anything in our immediate environment that is listed as a carcinogen aged us, we'd all look like Betty White at 19.

bcattoes

I have heard a lot of talk about eating protein, but, from what this book says, all proteins are not created equal.

I am reading a book that talks about red meat versus white. The red meat can actually age you, whereas the white meat can make you younger. Has anyone heard of this before?. I don't know if the book is accurate or not.

Oooh, how much younger? How much white meat would I have to eat to take off, say, 15 years?

foodsafetyguru

This is a fad, not true. Each food item has its strengths and weaknesses. Red meat is good for you...in moderation. Heme iron is abundant in red meat which is essential for red blood cells. As with any food...if youeat too much there will be repercussions since it tends to be higher in fat, etc. As a rule, i tend to not trust books that advocate a very specific diet or cut out entire food groups. My education is in dietetics and food science. Too much of any food is a danger. Cutting foods out of the diet is also a danger. Even a twinkie won't have negative effects if it's not eaten often. Stick with moderation, exercise and you'll age just how you're supposed to.

dayzeerock

It's the antibiotics, hormones, and carcinogens that are in the majority of meat now that cause this...not the meat itself.

If anything in our immediate environment that is listed as a carcinogen aged us, we'd all look like Betty White at 19.

You know, you are totally right. On that note, I think I'm going to begin chain smoking today, because apparently carcinogens are nonsense!

bunchesonothing

It's the antibiotics, hormones, and carcinogens that are in the majority of meat now that cause this...not the meat itself.

If anything in our immediate environment that is listed as a carcinogen aged us, we'd all look like Betty White at 19.

You know, you are totally right. On that note, I think I'm going to begin chain smoking today, because apparently carcinogens are nonsense!

Do you know how they decide that CERTAIN things are carcinogens?

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some thing we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

So, no need to be a jerk.

dayzeerock

It's the antibiotics, hormones, and carcinogens that are in the majority of meat now that cause this...not the meat itself.

If anything in our immediate environment that is listed as a carcinogen aged us, we'd all look like Betty White at 19.

You know, you are totally right. On that note, I think I'm going to begin chain smoking today, because apparently carcinogens are nonsense!

Do you know how they decide that CERTAIN things are carcinogens?

Yes, in fact, I do. Now excuse me while I go rinse off my formaldehyde face mask...gotta keep looking young!

bunchesonothing

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some things we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

For most things, it's a statistics game. And, they often don't know for sure.

Perhaps, just in the way they don't KNOW that red meat is either.

And, you'd be pretty pressed to not be in contact with carcinogens in your every day life. That was the point.

So, no need to be a jerk.

gettinghealthy777

I have heard a lot of talk about eating protein, but, from what this book says, all proteins are not created equal.

I am reading a book that talks about red meat versus white. The red meat can actually age you, whereas the white meat can make you younger. Has anyone heard of this before?. I don't know if the book is accurate or not.

Oooh, how much younger? How much white meat would I have to eat to take off, say, 15 years?

OMG LOL!!!

gettinghealthy777

It's the antibiotics, hormones, and carcinogens that are in the majority of meat now that cause this...not the meat itself.

If anything in our immediate environment that is listed as a carcinogen aged us, we'd all look like Betty White at 19.

LOL! You guys are cracking me up!!
You know, you are totally right. On that note, I think I'm going to begin chain smoking today, because apparently carcinogens are nonsense!

Do you know how they decide that CERTAIN things are carcinogens?

Yes, in fact, I do. Now excuse me while I go rinse off my formaldehyde face mask...gotta keep looking young!

RCKT82

So the participants were proven to be older at the end of the study then before.... hmmm.... GREAT SCOTT, SCIENCE IS AWESOME!

dayzeerock

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some things we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

For most things, it's a statistics game. And, they often don't know for sure.

Perhaps, just in the way they don't KNOW that red meat is either.

And, you'd be pretty pressed to not be in contact with carcinogens in your every day life. That was the point.

So, no need to be a jerk.

I know I'm in contact with carcinogens everywhere I go, but I'm not going to knowingly ingest them into my body when I can do otherwise! But if you enjoy your meat filled with antibiotics, growth hormones, heavy metals, dioxins, nitrates, and various other chemicals, then that's your prerogative. I just don't understand why one would do so when a cut of slightly more expensive meat raised properly cuts out half those risks.

Heather75

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some things we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

For most things, it's a statistics game. And, they often don't know for sure.

Perhaps, just in the way they don't KNOW that red meat is either.

And, you'd be pretty pressed to not be in contact with carcinogens in your every day life. That was the point.

So, no need to be a jerk.

I know I'm in contact with carcinogens everywhere I go, but I'm not going to knowingly ingest them into my body when I can do otherwise! But if you enjoy your meat filled with antibiotics, growth hormones, heavy metals, dioxins, nitrates, and various other chemicals, then that's your prerogative. I just don't understand why one would do so when a cut of slightly more expensive meat raised properly cuts out half those risks.

Because I'm cheap.

bunchesonothing

Well, they also give rats chemicals that would in no way be consumable in human sized quantities and then say it is a carcinogen because it gave the rat cancer.

gettinghealthy777

I am more confused now, than when I posted this subject :drinker: lol

KayakAngel

I'm a vegetarian, so I have no dog in this fight and don't really care what anyone else chooses to eat anyway. But, think about it, oxygen ages you. The resulting effects of burning oxygen create oxidants in your body (antioxidants were all the rage a few years ago). My point is that if you want to avoid red meat, cool, do it. But the "aging" effect of red meat is not a factor I'd worry too much about.

dayzeerock

Well, they also give rats chemicals that would in no way be consumable in human sized quantities and then say it is a carcinogen because it gave the rat cancer.

Thanks for the science lesson, but I don't see what that has to do with known chemicals in our meat supply.

gettinghealthy777

Well, they also give rats chemicals that would in no way be consumable in human sized quantities and then say it is a carcinogen because it gave the rat cancer.

I guess it's just a rat race.. has anyone eaten rat? I wonder if the rats that they test in the labs have cancer before they do the testing on them? Hmmm, now that's something to ponder....

gettinghealthy777

I'm a vegetarian, so I have no dog in this fight and don't really care what anyone else chooses to eat anyway. But, think about it, oxygen ages you. The resulting effects of burning oxygen create oxidants in your body (antioxidants were all the rage a few years ago). My point is that if you want to avoid red meat, cool, do it. But the "aging" effect of red meat is not a factor I'd worry too much about.

This is interesting, so all that deep breathing my yoga instructor has been telling me to do is actually aging me? :grumble:

veganbaum

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some things we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

For most things, it's a statistics game. And, they often don't know for sure.

Perhaps, just in the way they don't KNOW that red meat is either.

And, you'd be pretty pressed to not be in contact with carcinogens in your every day life. That was the point.

So, no need to be a jerk.

I know I'm in contact with carcinogens everywhere I go, but I'm not going to knowingly ingest them into my body when I can do otherwise! But if you enjoy your meat filled with antibiotics, growth hormones, heavy metals, dioxins, nitrates, and various other chemicals, then that's your prerogative. I just don't understand why one would do so when a cut of slightly more expensive meat raised properly cuts out half those risks.

Umm, this. I don't understand why some like to use the reasoning that there are various pollutants around us every day, so why should they worry about consuming them. Precisely because we are exposed to them all the time, and we can't control that. I will control those that I can in order to minimize my exposure where I can. Spend a little more to buy meat that doesn't have all that crap in it. Too expensive? Cut your portions a little - pay for quality, not quantity.

gettinghealthy777

They look at causality, try to work out the statistics and give a warning that things *might* give you cancers. Some things we are more sure of than others. Others, they are pretty much just a guess. And so that people don't get sued, they issue warnings.

For most things, it's a statistics game. And, they often don't know for sure.

Perhaps, just in the way they don't KNOW that red meat is either.

And, you'd be pretty pressed to not be in contact with carcinogens in your every day life. That was the point.

So, no need to be a jerk.

I know I'm in contact with carcinogens everywhere I go, but I'm not going to knowingly ingest them into my body when I can do otherwise! But if you enjoy your meat filled with antibiotics, growth hormones, heavy metals, dioxins, nitrates, and various other chemicals, then that's your prerogative. I just don't understand why one would do so when a cut of slightly more expensive meat raised properly cuts out half those risks.

Umm, this. I don't understand why some like to use the reasoning that there are various pollutants around us every day, so why should they worry about consuming them. Precisely because we are exposed to them all the time, and we can't control that. I will control those that I can in order to minimize my exposure where I can. Spend a little more to buy meat that doesn't have all that crap in it. Too expensive? Cut your portions a little - pay for quality, not quantity.

Agreed