Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 106 posts

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#91

Post by cmccart »

mathgeek wrote: post #14

Anyone have a good source for articles that eschew the political commentary in favor of just presenting the study findings in a concise summary? Does anyone actually care that the global lobbyists for meat don't agree that meat is a carcinogen (or that any lobbyists against meat would care that it is)?

Not an article, but here's the paper the WHO cites to make the "16% increased risk per 100g red/processed meat" claim. It's citation 12 on the WHO paper: http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3...

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#92

Post by eivarv »

PerfectElement wrote: post #62
myth_buster wrote: post #23

a member of the Meat Advisory Panel... said "“The top priorities for cancer prevention remain smoking cessation, maintenance of normal body weight and avoidance of high alcohol intakes.”" emeritus fellow at the Institute of Food Research, also said the effect was small. The North American Meat Institute said defining red meat as a cancer hazard defied common sense. Due to economies of McDonald's, Burger King et al, t…

Cowspiracy and Earthlings are documentaries that most people prefer to ignore. Hopefully, now that DiCaprio is behind Cowspiracy, and got it into Netflix, it will be noticed by a wider audience. I doubt it will be very popular here though, given the strong cognitive bias I noticed in HN when the subject is diet.

I watched Cowspiracy a while ago. While many of its points are valid (as far as I can tell), I was personally distracted by the pseudo-conspiratorial subnarrative regarding the NGOs' focus on easier goals.

I felt the same about the storytelling in Cowspiracy as I did about many of Michael Moore's films: the "personal struggle"-style and an indignant narrator detracts from the main points, which could instead be more fleshed out in detail.

BUT: People don't ignore the points these two documentaries bring up because they haven't heard them; they do it because they are able to (and it's very easy and convenient to do so at present).

PS. Diet is one of several subjects here on HN (and elsewhere) that tend to be fraught with anecdotes and fads.

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#93

Post by tkyjonathan »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #19
0xcde4c3db wrote: post #6

This seems pretty misleading. The WHO put these meats in the same class in terms of certainty of being a carcinogen in humans, but I don't see any claim about the rates of cancer caused by each being comparable. That is, they're convinced that it causes some nonzero amount of cancer, but how many cancers it causes is a separate issue. Also, the picture at the top shows a cheeseburger, but ground beef is never actuall…

Maybe it's the Guardian's fault. The BBC article ( http://www.bbc.com/news/health-34620617 ) does mention some numbers: > Is meat as bad as smoking? > No. > Estimates suggest 34,000 deaths from cancer every year could be down to diets high in processed meat. > That is in contrast to one million deaths from cancer caused by smoking and 600,000 attributed to alcohol each year.

If you count colorectal, prostate and breast cancer as lifestyle diseases and that (a meat) diet is related to those - then the numbers are very high.

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#94

Post by tkyjonathan »

Someone1234 wrote: post #78
cruise02 wrote: post #29

It's important to understand what "increased risk" means. From the linked article: > The IARC’s experts concluded that each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%. From a related article: > To put this in perspective, the lifetime risk of colon cancer is 5 percent. If you have a hot dog every day, your risk goes to 6 percent. http://www.cbsnews.com/new…

The way the 18% figure is used in THIS article is extremely misleading/unhelpful. Thank you for clarifying exactly what they mean by that (the 5-6% thing puts it into perspective).

Meat has been linked with colorectal, prostate and breast cancer not to mention heart disease. So if you take more of an holistic view.. it is quite damaging to yourself.

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#95

Post by nacs »

thebouv wrote: post #67

The same site in the "Related Content" section show articles saying processed meats are bad in 2009, 2010, 2011 as well. Then another related article says increase of eating fruits and vegetables does not significantly help reduce risk of cancer either. No meat. No fruits. No vegetables. Good thing the air we breath and water we drink is clean and doesn't cause ... hmm, nevermind. We're all screwed.

You realize there are meats that aren't processed? Fish, poultry and such are healthy and recommended.

Not sure how "fruits and vegetables does not significantly help reduce risk of cancer" is relevant. Do you only eat things if they reduce the risk of cancer?

Vegetables are healthy and will help you live longer (fruits are also good but are a bit high in sugar if you consume a lot).

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#96

Post by thebouv »

nacs wrote: post #95
thebouv wrote: post #67

The same site in the "Related Content" section show articles saying processed meats are bad in 2009, 2010, 2011 as well. Then another related article says increase of eating fruits and vegetables does not significantly help reduce risk of cancer either. No meat. No fruits. No vegetables. Good thing the air we breath and water we drink is clean and doesn't cause ... hmm, nevermind. We're all screwed.

You realize there are meats that aren't processed? Fish, poultry and such are healthy and recommended. Not sure how "fruits and vegetables does not significantly help reduce risk of cancer" is relevant. Do you only eat things if they reduce the risk of cancer? Vegetables are healthy and will help you live longer (fruits are also good but are a bit high in sugar if you consume a lot).

I merely pointed out the same site's "related content" area had a few more articles on same subject for a few years and then one about vegetables not reducing risk was "funny".

It may have been intended as a dark joke. We're all screwed. Har har har.

I do realize there are meats that aren't processed.

I do realize that fruits and vegetables are good for you.

How did you not .. I don't know .. get it? Instead of picking it a part literally?

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#97

Post by myth_buster »

ascorbic wrote: post #48
myth_buster wrote: post #23

a member of the Meat Advisory Panel... said "“The top priorities for cancer prevention remain smoking cessation, maintenance of normal body weight and avoidance of high alcohol intakes.”" emeritus fellow at the Institute of Food Research, also said the effect was small. The North American Meat Institute said defining red meat as a cancer hazard defied common sense. Due to economies of McDonald's, Burger King et al, t…

"McDonald's, Burger King et al" aren't really affected by this. This is about smoked, salted or otherwise preserved meats. "Processed" doesn't covered mincing/grinding. They may be covered by the weaker claims about red meat in general.

I don't think they would make that distinction and let it by. They wouldn't let any kind of meat be cast in bad light as it would affect them by association.

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#98

Post by scholia »

PerfectElement wrote: post #85
boothead wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The China Study has been very thoroughly debunked. I think this article is probably the most highly thought of http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fal...

It seems Denise Minger has changed her mind: http://rawfoodsos.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-cal...

Up to a point: "Though in case you’re wondering, I stand by my criticisms of the China Study and Campbell’s rat studies. Nothing in this post supports the idea that animal protein is uniquely harmful, and acknowledging when some parts of the plant-based movement are legit doesn’t give a free pass to the ones that aren’t!"

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#99

Post by mvanvoorden »

tkyjonathan wrote: post #94
Someone1234 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way the 18% figure is used in THIS article is extremely misleading/unhelpful. Thank you for clarifying exactly what they mean by that (the 5-6% thing puts it into perspective).

Meat has been linked with colorectal, prostate and breast cancer not to mention heart disease. So if you take more of an holistic view.. it is quite damaging to yourself.

Be aware that this doesn't count for all meat. Grass-fed red meat is actually healthy, partly because it contains way more Omega-3 compared to Omega-6 and seems to prevent cancer.

See also here: http://www.anh-usa.org/you-are-what-your-food-ate/

Re: WHO says processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes

#100

Post by tkyjonathan »

cruise02 wrote: post #29

It's important to understand what "increased risk" means. From the linked article: > The IARC’s experts concluded that each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%. From a related article: > To put this in perspective, the lifetime risk of colon cancer is 5 percent. If you have a hot dog every day, your risk goes to 6 percent. http://www.cbsnews.com/new…

Is the risk 6% per day? So everyday you eat processed or red meat you have a 6% of getting or further growing cancer in your body?
Post reply on HN