WHO says my bacon is not good for me :-(
Replies
-
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
The only people I have ever heard think this way are chain smokers defending their decision to smoke. Who knew bacon could have the same effect as nicotine on people?
Carry on.0 -
The only people I know of who think ad hominem proves something are people who are wrong trying to defend how they're wrong.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
The only people I have ever heard think this way are chain smokers defending their decision to smoke. Who knew bacon could have the same effect as nicotine on people?
Carry on.
Carry on.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
But they aren't saying it is guaranteed to cause cancer or that it is the only cause of cancer. Personally, I appreciate that they share information on foods that are carcinogenic. Why would anyone not want to know this information?
because then people like the OP think they are going to get cancer if they eat two strips of bacon a day...
I don't see anything in the OP that suggests that, but even if it were true I don't see how it would be relevant. It sounds as though you are suggesting public health organizations should only share information that will be correctly interpreted by every person on Earth. THAT would be ridiculous.
to review, here is OP's OP:
"Having recently found out that I can have bacon and eggs with baked beans every day and still keep my deficit, I've just read this report regarding processed meats increasing likelihood of colorectal cancer http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-34615621.
Could someone please put this into non-scaremongering terms for me, because I've just bought 3 packs on offer!"
so OP obviously had some fear from the report...
And please find the direct quote where I said anything about public health organizations only sharing certain information that can only be interpreted by everyone. I simply said that there are many factors that lead to cancer. Please stop trying to attribute quotes to me that I have never made.
Yes, I read the OP twice and now a third time. Can you please highlight the direct quote that says they believe they'll get cancer if they eat 2 strips of bacon per day? Forgive my ignorance, but I still don't see it.
And what are you saying exactly? Why is the WHO's information on processed meats and it's relationship to cancer "ridiculous"?
Again, stop attributing things to me that I never said.
what I have said is that attributing once cause to cancer is ridiculous, I never said anything about WHO, except that they fear monger sugar. OP clearly found the article disturbing or OP would not have created this post to ask if eating bacon was OK.
Was your 'ridiculous' remark not about the WHO's information at all? It was just a random off topic remark?
And yes, the OP was concerned, which is not even close to believing they will develop cancer from 2 strips of bacon per day. But to be fair you did say "people like the OP" so perhaps you think the OP is not like the OP and meant other people who are like the OP when you made that statement.
go back and read that comment and see if even mentioned the WHO in it, and you will have your answer.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
The only people I have ever heard think this way are chain smokers defending their decision to smoke. Who knew bacon could have the same effect as nicotine on people?
Carry on.
that point is so ridiculous, I am not even going to....0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
The only people I have ever heard think this way are chain smokers defending their decision to smoke. Who knew bacon could have the same effect as nicotine on people?
Carry on.
that point is so ridiculous, I am not even going to....
Claiming that it is impossible to point at individual causes of cancer because of genetic predisposition is so ridiculous it is hard to top...0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »i eat two strips a day and blood work comes back perfect every year.
sounds more food fear mongering by the folks over at WHO, just like they do with sugar.
Also, a lot of things are related to colon cancer, and I would be curious to read the entire study, and that article does not link to it.
eat your bacon and be happy. If you were eating a package a day then you might have something to worry about.
/sigh the who did not do a study. They analyzed around 800 studies. This isn't based off one study. I think a lot of people just read the title without actually reading what the WHO released. Blood work does not generally test for cancer, only one I know off hand is prostate, admittedly not an oncology nurses. Most is detected through other means.
i never said blood work tested for cancer….my point is that bacon can be part of a healthy overall diet…
A lot of factors lead to cancer and singling out one is utterly ridiculous. I would like to review the studies to see what was actually studied, without that the information in the article is useless.
I was not aware that there was a report saying that eating processed meat is the one and only factor contributing to cancer. Are you sure you are referring to the same report?
where in any of my quotes did I say that?
My point is that to try to point to one cause of cancer is ridiculous.
Why is it ridiculous?
because it is impossible to point to one cause of cancer as some people may be genetically more inclined to getting cancer and processed food would have nothing to do with that. Unless, you want to claim that processed foods now affect genetics?
take the example of skin cancer. You can have moles that are never exposed to sunlight and they still develop into a melanoma, because of ones family history or other factors.
The only people I have ever heard think this way are chain smokers defending their decision to smoke. Who knew bacon could have the same effect as nicotine on people?
Carry on.
that point is so ridiculous, I am not even going to....
Claiming that it is impossible to point at individual causes of cancer because of genetic predisposition is so ridiculous it is hard to top...
oh really? so the only way to get lung cancer is from smoking then right?
0 -
You all are so funny.0
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.0 -
GirlNGlasses wrote: »I think the OP just wanted to use the really cool picture of the eggs and bacon frowny face. I have enjoyed that the most of all. Everyone knows bacon isnt the healthiest choicecan be a part of an overall healthy diet. Yet we are drawn to it like a moth to a flame. Life is short. Eat a little bacon along the way.
FIFY
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Having prepared my own bacon (cured and uncured) I find the inclusion of bacon in the report of this study suspicious. Mankind has been smoking meats for thousands of years. Why would bacon get singled out versus other meats (chicken, beef, goat, etc...) We know bacon is a high fat food. Those of us who eat it, still do so knowing the risks.
I won't claim to have read the report. However, I feel moderately comfortable stating that the news agencies reporting it made some correlations without any empirical link to causation.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?
Celery powder. In organic bacon and hot dogs. "natural" nitrates.
http://www.applegate.com/products/organic-sunday-bacon/
sorry for Wikipedia, but it's quick:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celery_powder0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
Having prepared my own bacon (cured and uncured) I find the inclusion of bacon in the report of this study suspicious. Mankind has been smoking meats for thousands of years. Why would bacon get singled out versus other meats (chicken, beef, goat, etc...)
I won't claim to have read the report. However, I feel moderately comfortable stating that the news agencies reporting it made some correlations without any empirical link to causation. We know bacon is a high fat food. Those of us who eat it, still do so knowing the risks.
It's not singled out. All processed meat is associated with cancer. Bacon is a popular meat so it's mentioned, but it's no worse/better than pepperoni, chorizo, ham, or other processed meats.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?
Celery powder. In organic bacon and hot dogs. "natural" nitrates.
Does all organic bacon contain celery powder or some other form of added nitrate? Is it comparable in risk or makeup to whatever nitrates are added to your run of the mill bacon?0 -
I feel like this gif needs to be in this thread...and am shocked we're on page 5 and it isn't in here yet.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?
Celery powder. In organic bacon and hot dogs. "natural" nitrates.
Does all organic bacon contain celery powder or some other form of added nitrate? Is it comparable in risk or makeup to whatever nitrates are added to your run of the mill bacon?
comparable. Also, "uncured" is misleading as organic products cured with celery powder can be labeled "uncured".
http://fyi.uwex.edu/meats/files/2012/02/Nitrate-and-nitrite-in-cured-meat_10-18-2012.pdf0 -
So let me get this right.......... By NOT eating processed meats I simply improve my chance of NOT getting colon cancer by 1%???????
Please, kindly pass the bacon while I weigh the pros/cons....
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?
Celery powder. In organic bacon and hot dogs. "natural" nitrates.
Does all organic bacon contain celery powder or some other form of added nitrate? Is it comparable in risk or makeup to whatever nitrates are added to your run of the mill bacon?
comparable. Also, "uncured" is misleading as organic products cured with celery powder can be labeled "uncured".
http://fyi.uwex.edu/meats/files/2012/02/Nitrate-and-nitrite-in-cured-meat_10-18-2012.pdf
Interesting. I think things like this are why some people would rather just stick to whole natural foods.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
also, it still includes ingredients with a lot of nitrates.
Would organic contain added nitrates? Has nitrates been identified as the carcinogen?
Celery powder. In organic bacon and hot dogs. "natural" nitrates.
Does all organic bacon contain celery powder or some other form of added nitrate? Is it comparable in risk or makeup to whatever nitrates are added to your run of the mill bacon?
comparable. Also, "uncured" is misleading as organic products cured with celery powder can be labeled "uncured".
http://fyi.uwex.edu/meats/files/2012/02/Nitrate-and-nitrite-in-cured-meat_10-18-2012.pdf
Interesting. I think things like this are why some people would rather just stick to whole natural foods.
Now that food sources can be varied we lose the perspective of how important to human survival the discovery of curing meat was for food safety.
The curing process makes those products A LOT safer overall, as bacterial growth on meat (and its inhibition increasing shelf life) is a huge food safety issue, certainly more important than cancer...
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions