Red meat can kill!!!!
Replies
-
There is actual real evidence to suggest that eating too much processed red meat, particularly smoked bacon and sausages, can increase the risk of bowel cancer. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15956652?dopt=Abstract. But if you just have your bacon sandwich with granary bread containing lots of fibre then you'll be fine.
A good overview of diet and cancer http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/causes/lifestyle/diet/#source37
It really is everything in moderation and making healthy choices. The most important thing to prevent deaths from bowel cancer is to see you doctor if you have a change in your bowel habit (particularly getting diarrhoea) or blood in your poo.
The Daily Mail (a daily paper in the UK) is famous for finding things that cause cancer. Go to http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/ before you eat or do anything to work out your chances
Pork is not considered red meat and bacon and sausages are processed, but steaks are not or should not be anyway......0 -
everything in moderation!
including moderation
As the famously immoderate Greeks said!
moderaters are likely moderating this moderatory moderation.0 -
Watch a movie called Forks Over Knives on Netflix.
I quit all meet except chicken some time ago. It took quite some time for the transformation to happen, but I eat mostly a plant based diet.
Forks Over Knives. I watched it and something felt weird. I did my own research and came to the conclusion that it's a big propaganda piece that cherry picks studies and scientists to supports it's cause. It is not objective by any means and I feel it was very misleading.0 -
Watch a movie called Forks Over Knives on Netflix.
I quit all meet except chicken some time ago. It took quite some time for the transformation to happen, but I eat mostly a plant based diet.
Forks Over Knives. I watched it and something felt weird. I did my own research and came to the conclusion that it's a big propaganda piece that cherry picks studies and scientists to supports it's cause. It is not objective by any means and I feel it was very misleading.
That is true of most documentaries. People need to really stop taking them as the hard truth every time they see one. Use them as a starting point and then do your own research. Otherwise, just use them as the entertainment they are.0 -
That is true of most documentaries. People need to really stop taking them as the hard truth every time they see one. Use them as a starting point and then do your own research. Otherwise, just use them as the entertainment they are.
^ I agree.0 -
Well that's the latest health scare in the news today anyway.
Can i just start banging my head against a wall now, in readiness for the next one. Every week, something is really bad for you, and the next it's good.
I can't keep up!!
I'll carry on down the "everything in moderation" route I think :-)
Precisely! I mean, I have to have red meat to keep my iron count up. Everything else...ie. beans etc has blockers in it that can potentially keep your body from absorbing iron.0 -
Personally I'd take that one with a pinch of salt because i......
noooo.....you touch salt and you will die a horrible painful death....and don't even mention sugar....shhhhhhh :laugh:0 -
This thread hurts my brain. Just because you don't like the implication of the study does not mean it was poorly conducted. stupid, irrelevant or otherwise. Scientists are generally quite careful about what they do - just because their findings offend you personally doesn't mean their work is cr*p - generally it means the study has been reported in the press sensationally.
For example:it was NOT a controlled experiment, merely an observational one based on crunching data from general health questionnaires used by other organisations. Also an association is not a cause.....and nowhere in the study does it say what *else* those people were eating.
Longitudinal diet studies are almost never manipulative (i.e., two groups are assigned to each eat one type of diet), they are almost always based on observation and post-hoc number crunching. That doesn't mean it wasn't 'controlled' - accounting for covariates and confounds are most of what the number crunching is. And, just to clear this perennial accusation up, scientists are very much aware of the difference between correlation and causation.How is this inflammation caused in the first place? Just interesting
Viral/bacterial infection, typically.
The inflammation related to dietary and other 'sterile' factors is not generally associated with infection. Inflammation occurs as a natural process that is far more widely utilised by the body than as a pathogen-fighting response.And applying logic ... who died of it so far? Just 'cos someone's test tube uncontrolled badly managed study says so, doesn't mean its true or actually in real life is even a factor in conjunction with everything else that goes off...
Again, just because the findings are not to your liking, does not mean the study was poorly conducted or controlled. There is enough anti-science sentiment in the western world already. We're actually not out to screw you over with bad science.
Unlikely - such a long-term study is followed, analysed and conducted by many different scientists over its course. The probability of them being 1. vegans and also 2. vegans with an agenda to publish biased science, is very unlikely.I bet this study had an agenda. I bet the researchers are vegans, lol.
They almost certainly would have analysed the covariate structure, which is probably not carefully reported in the press. ANOVA and correlation are quite different, however.Did they run an ANOVA on all the variables? I would be interested to see the correlations.
re: Forks over Knives:That is true of most documentaries. People need to really stop taking them as the hard truth every time they see one. Use them as a starting point and then do your own research. Otherwise, just use them as the entertainment they are.
Hallelujah! If you're looking for bias, agenda and improperly analysed data, look no further. The probability that this study is suffering from any of those flaws is far, far smaller than the probability that a propaganda piece such as this doco is.
Seriously, can we ever have a thread about a published study that doesn't automatically devolve into science bashing? It's disheartening. I work hard at my job trying to publish work that is of use to society. Most of us do the same every day, and do a very careful job of it. Can we get a little respect here???0 -
Ruminants' systems are designed to eat grass. Grass fed beef has a higher proportion of omega-3 fats. Feed lot cattle are, amongst other things, fed a diet of corn and other grains.You know I was thinking...............
I wonder if this study was done with grain fed beef (which cows were not meant to eat because they are ruminant animals) or with their natural food, grass fed and free pastured?
I am willing to bet this study was done using grain fed cattle.
And the difference in nutritional value that you're implying
I'm aware that corn a grain feed along with large numbers of cattle cramped together at feedlots is largely responsible for the increased levels of e-coli, are there other implications?
As for the study, the article I read said the participants ate meat every day. As far as I could see no other dietary factors were considered. Fries with that??0 -
pretty much anything can kill you in certain circumstances,(note the probability of these outcomes are of a low union , so the risks are worth taking in these cases.)
Carries on eating bacon.0 -
Well that's the latest health scare in the news today anyway.
Can i just start banging my head against a wall now, in readiness for the next one. Every week, something is really bad for you, and the next it's good.
I can't keep up!!
I'll carry on down the "everything in moderation" route I think :-)
Oh noes... not da red meat!! I'm so worried now I think I'll have a cigarette.0 -
Yes and here is another just posted today..
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/523792-124-ways-sugar-ruin-your-health0 -
The academic community is pretty much in agreement about this. It's popular perception and propaganda from industry that profits from the sale of red meat that dissents. Not entirely unlike the scenario we see with science of climate change and the Republican party (conservative agenda, whatever you want to call it).
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-red-meat-20120313,0,565423.story0 -
@ RobynC79
I don't think anyone is "science bashing". There are so many "studies". Each one designed to produce a previously suspected outcome. And, there is no way a person can tell who, or how qualified or the intent of a group of researchers would be. Are they promoting a specific lifestyle or product? Are they attempting to make quality of life better? It depends on who they work for and what their employer's ultimate purpose is all about.
Look at this supposed list of facts going on right now in our message boards:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/523792-124-ways-sugar-ruin-your-health
Does that look like a set of researched facts to you?
I think you are being a little sensitive to the opinions posted here. You are probably a very intelligent and trustworthy person and you shouldn't take the opinions here as a personal attacks.0 -
HAHAH! good one!
My husband came home last night and I swear that was the first thing he said to me... DONT COOK RED MEAT!
it was funny :P0 -
@ RobynC79
I don't think anyone is "science bashing". There are so many "studies". Each one designed to produce a previously suspected outcome. And, there is no way a person can tell who, or how qualified or the intent of a group of researchers would be. Are they promoting a specific lifestyle or product? Are they attempting to make quality of life better? It depends on who they work for and what their employer's ultimate purpose is all about.
Look at this supposed list of facts going on right now in our message boards:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/523792-124-ways-sugar-ruin-your-health
Does that look like a set of researched facts to you?
I think you are being a little sensitive to the opinions posted here. You are probably a very intelligent and trustworthy person and you shouldn't take the opinions here as a personal attacks.
Yeah, I'm not taking it bitterly personally, I'm just exasperated at how frequently (as you mention!) these sorts of threads come up, with the same old, same old responses about how scientists are all actually idiots who don't know anything because the poster's grandmother's best friend's child once had an experience TOTALLY DIFFERENT from what the study said (I'm sure you know the type!!
Also, if you want to check the qualifications, affiliations or potential conflicts of interest for any of scientists listed as authors, a quick google will usually get you that info right away - it's required with every published study and usually listed on their academic websites too.0 -
everything in moderation!
including moderation
As the famously immoderate Greeks said!
moderaters are likely moderating this moderatory moderation.
0 -
so can the sun, driving, walking down the street, sex, having kids...
carry on .....0 -
I believe the only way red meat will kill me is if it's still breathing, and angry.
you, sir, are correct...0 -
Now I just want a burger.0
-
My attitude is that something is going to kill me eventually, whether it be getting into a fatal car accident on my way to work, getting shot walking to my car, smoking, or eating steaks.
If I live my life in fear, there's no reason to even leave my house, because something could kill me.
I had bacon today and it was delicious.0 -
Red meat can kill...as can being run over by a bus :grumble:
or being run over by an angry cow...0 -
I believe the only way red meat will kill me is if it's still breathing, and angry.
you, sir, are correct...
No not really I had to go to the emergency room cause I was eating a steak and it got stuck in my throat and I couldn't breathe.
See Red meat can kill!0 -
Life is pretty much a game of dodgeball; something's going to slam you sooner or later and it could be cancer or it could be your cat (80,000 a year die by tripping over their cats....and that's only the start of the feline killing spree!)
[/quote]
OMG...now I wonder if I should get my cat before she gets me...0 -
I believe the only way red meat will kill me is if it's still breathing, and angry.
you, sir, are correct...
No not really I had to go to the emergency room cause I was eating a steak and it got stuck in my throat and I couldn't breathe.
See Red meat can kill!
Anything that you are not going to bother chewing before attempting to swallow can kill you...slow down!0 -
More evidence of how red meat can (attempt) to kill you:
And yes, the cyclist is ok, she was interviewed the other night, just scraped & bruised.0 -
HAHAHAHAHAH!! Love this!******Breaking News******
Scientists have discovered that the leading cause of death is being born. Based on the observation that 100% of persons born in the 19th century have since died it has been determined that there is a direct correlation between being born and dying.0 -
This thread hurts my brain. Just because you don't like the implication of the study does not mean it was poorly conducted. stupid, irrelevant or otherwise. Scientists are generally quite careful about what they do - just because their findings offend you personally doesn't mean their work is cr*p - generally it means the study has been reported in the press sensationally.
For example:it was NOT a controlled experiment, merely an observational one based on crunching data from general health questionnaires used by other organisations. Also an association is not a cause.....and nowhere in the study does it say what *else* those people were eating.
Longitudinal diet studies are almost never manipulative (i.e., two groups are assigned to each eat one type of diet), they are almost always based on observation and post-hoc number crunching. That doesn't mean it wasn't 'controlled' - accounting for covariates and confounds are most of what the number crunching is. And, just to clear this perennial accusation up, scientists are very much aware of the difference between correlation and causation.How is this inflammation caused in the first place? Just interesting
Viral/bacterial infection, typically.
The inflammation related to dietary and other 'sterile' factors is not generally associated with infection. Inflammation occurs as a natural process that is far more widely utilised by the body than as a pathogen-fighting response.And applying logic ... who died of it so far? Just 'cos someone's test tube uncontrolled badly managed study says so, doesn't mean its true or actually in real life is even a factor in conjunction with everything else that goes off...
Again, just because the findings are not to your liking, does not mean the study was poorly conducted or controlled. There is enough anti-science sentiment in the western world already. We're actually not out to screw you over with bad science.
Unlikely - such a long-term study is followed, analysed and conducted by many different scientists over its course. The probability of them being 1. vegans and also 2. vegans with an agenda to publish biased science, is very unlikely.I bet this study had an agenda. I bet the researchers are vegans, lol.
They almost certainly would have analysed the covariate structure, which is probably not carefully reported in the press. ANOVA and correlation are quite different, however.Did they run an ANOVA on all the variables? I would be interested to see the correlations.
re: Forks over Knives:That is true of most documentaries. People need to really stop taking them as the hard truth every time they see one. Use them as a starting point and then do your own research. Otherwise, just use them as the entertainment they are.
Hallelujah! If you're looking for bias, agenda and improperly analysed data, look no further. The probability that this study is suffering from any of those flaws is far, far smaller than the probability that a propaganda piece such as this doco is.
Seriously, can we ever have a thread about a published study that doesn't automatically devolve into science bashing? It's disheartening. I work hard at my job trying to publish work that is of use to society. Most of us do the same every day, and do a very careful job of it. Can we get a little respect here???
Seriously. THIS. I don't think I could have said it better myself.
One thing- some of you have been accusing the scientists in the study of "going into it with a specific outcome in mind already". Let me give you a refresher on the Scientific Method- Observe, hypothesize, test. All experiments/studies begin with a hypothesis, which you aim to prove or disprove with your planned research. That's how it works. So I'm not sure why you're complaining that they had a hypothesis going into the study. As Robyn stated many times- just because you are uncomfortable with/don't like/feel threatened by the findings of a study does not give you license to make unfounded science-bashing claims against the validity of it. Studies like this that are published in peer-reviewed scientific journals are very carefully scrutinized from all angles before they are published. So you can relax and stop worrying about that.0 -
I was watching QI once and they said eating nothing but rabbit can kill you but if you eat peas and carrots with it you'll be fine.. lol!... so eat ya veggies and you'll be ok! :happy:0
-
The Daily Mail (a daily paper in the UK) is famous for finding things that cause cancer.
The Daily Mail Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue8GOry52xo
Royals on the front page
Swine flu and road rage
Find Maddie
Foreign Baddie
Put him in a big cage
Beaurocratic red tape
Facebook gang rape
Gordon out, Dave in before the country caves in
Ian Huntley gets his own jacuzzi and a gym in jail
It's absolutely true because I read it in The Daily Mail
Ban this gay smut
I'm not racist but...
Car crime; knife crime
Hang the cheating wife time
Pop stars take drugs
Teen boys wear hoods
Sports stars have sex
Bears **** in woods
Brussels politicians want to stop us drinking English ale
It's absolutely true because I read it in The Daily Mail
Poles pay for kids' blood
Immigration 'like a flood'
Soft touch British Isles
Cancer from your mobiles
Cancer from your laptop
Cancer from your root crop
Cancer from your shoes
...from your dog
...from your pen top
Immigrants arriving on an unprecedented scale
It's absolutely true because I read it in The Daily Mail0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions