21–30 of 120 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I couldn't grow it or raise it 100 years ago, I don't want to eat it. Open to being convinced otherwise.
What happened in 1921? Or is this one of those baseless "before we had cancer" comments?
In all seriousness, things like pasteurization and refrigeration make our food supply a lot safer than it used to be.
Hopefully good news for Orangutans if this leads to less palm oil consumption.
Palm, Canola, Rapeseed, Soybean, etc, they're all terrible. I avoid this shit like the plague.
Yet another thing on the cancerogenic pile sigh At some point you have to ask yourself if everything but water gives us cancer.
A transformed cell is most likely to occur in a "cancerised field" of cells. Those fields might be induced to be transformed in-turn by the original transformed cell(s).
It's in this way that the snowball turns from a pea to a boulder, but all along the way there are trees ready to stop its momentum. Be it DNA repair systems, the immune system, the extra-cellular matrix, etc...
An oncologist once told me (and its not hard for me to conceive), that we're all likely die with a number of tumours in us... just not likely from them.
All this to say, yes everything causes cancer. When you consider the molecular biology behind it all, it's a wonder we're anything but giant, spherical, innervated tumours.
Just like everything else, you make your own risk assessments in life, but the advice boils down to: avoid undue risks of cancer if you can. What "undue" and "if you can" here mean is deeply personal.
[0] A fun euphemism for a cell that is cancer-like.
Take one look at the modern production process for vegetable oil and this sort of effect is starting you right in the face. Palm, Canola, Rapeseed, Soybean, etc, they're all terrible. I avoid this shit like the plague.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Palm oil seems to be in everything.
It's a cheap oil in Asia due to a bunch of countries trying to develop their agriculture by planting palm (Indonesia etc.) Makes me think twice about having yan yan snacks and pocky's.
The problem is that yes, it takes less land, but the land that it can be suitably grown on is very important for other things.
Well, this study passes the "we dumped a bunch of X on cancer cells in a petri dish and they did a funny thing" red flag test. Xenographs (implanting human cancer cells into mice) have their own caveats (the immune system is almost always severely compromised), but this seems like a cool study. I'm no expert on oral cancers however. Curious to see the implication of the neuronal cells here, I'm looking forward to rea…
Is nerve growth commonly considered critical in tumor growth and metastasis? So much of this sounds weird to me and I'm not sure if it's my ignorance or if this is some wacky theory.
It's why I'm interested to read the manuscript closely and see what they reference re: this neuronal growth.