Meat is a carcinogen (WHO)

[Deactivated] on 01/04/2022 - 13:31
Last edited 04/04/2022 - 07:36 by 2 other users

Is there a concerted attempt to discredit meat benefits and allege other illnesses to meat by food companies and sold out mainstream media?
For example, food companies can make potato chips for 10 cents and sell them for 5 dollars and it is shelf-stable.
Food companies can do monoculture and create fake meat and sell it for 10 times the profit once it reaches the scale.
What products can they make using meat and make 10 times more money and shelf-stable?
Do you believe in any of the medical dogmas like meat causes heart attacks?
Is there any person who doesn't eat any ultra-processed junk and eats the majority of his diet as meat has health issues?

I will say my personal story. When this meat is carcinogen news came I was eating meat weekly once and I was unhealthy. Later I removed ultra-processed junk from my diet and slowly increased the meat in my diet. Eventually eating almost daily now. And I am 20 kgs less weight and healthy as F.

Mod: WHO article for context

Poll Options

• 61
  Meat is Carcinogenic
• 517
  Meat is healthy
• 23
  Eating meat will cause some health problems
• 118
  Eat less meat to save the planet
• 20
  Don't eat meat, because I love animals

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4

• • 

    ss207k on 02/04/2022 - 23:57

    Who’s going to tell this person?

  • 

    this is us on 03/04/2022 - 09:48

    +1

    I don't think they are successful but the truth is that if they were not going to be eaten they would be extinct, because no one cares about chickens and pigs. From this perspective, as species they've managed to survive with humans for a long time.

    Moreover, if you go to https://www.sgaonline.org.au/pesticides-in-fruit-and-vegetab… you will see that when you eat most fruit and vegetables in Australia you are eating pesticides. I'm pretty sure that there are more conclusive studies about the harm of pesticides than red meat.

    And good luck finding affordable organic produce without pesticide for 20 million people. Bananas and apples (with pesticides) are probably the only fruit that are available all year round. I remember when I subscribed to one of those seasonal organic fruit box deliveries and they wanted me to be happy with banana, orange, and four varieties of apple, because there were no other options available. That's just unrealistic, particularly in Australia.

    Finally, the title of your post is not accurate. If you read the article:

    "Eating red meat has not yet been established as a cause of cancer. However, if the reported associations were proven to be causal, the Global Burden of Disease Project has estimated that diets high in red meat could be responsible for 50 000 cancer deaths per year worldwide."

    Processed meat has clearer evidence (group 1) than "red meat" (group 2) for cancer, and required the studies trying to prove that red meat is not good often suggest that it is a problem if you eat red meat more than 3x/week. Still not conclusive though.

    • 

      GrueHunter on 03/04/2022 - 11:13

      +1

      I don't think they are successful but the truth is that if they were not going to be eaten they would be extinct

      Yes, this is why all the animals we don't farm to eat are extinct.

      Snakes? Extinct
      Monkeys? Extinct
      Almost all birds? Imaginary

      • 

        this is us on 03/04/2022 - 11:59

        You are trying to be smart but it's hard to make a parallel that can actually predict what will happen to chickens, caws and pigs.

        The problem is that humans generally cause animal extinctions (hunting, deforestation). Elephants and jaguars are at risk, and it's not because we eat them.

        Snakes, spiders, cockroaches,mice are sneaky and generally undesirable. They are well adapted and will always be around, particularly because they are protected ("do not kill the ugly huntsman").

        Flying birds fly (!) and migrate. They are better adapted. Still:
        "There is a general consensus among scientists who study these trends that if human impact on the environment continues as it has, one-third of all bird species and an even greater proportion of bird populations will be gone by the end of this century." (Wikipedia)

        That's happening without us eating them, because we are changing the ecosystem.

        Monkeys are actually in the process of extinction except maybe for habitats that have little human influence, in the middle of the jungle.

        Many wild animals are threatened by human intervention.

        Unless you keep pigs, caws and chickens in a protected environment (sanctuaries), there is no way they'd survive on their own without the protection from humans.

        Vegans scientists often accept the idea that many of the species we eat would be extinct if we all become vegans, and they don't see a problem with that as other species of birds and wild pigs would thrive. Not all kinds of snakes, spiders or pigs have to survive and thrive. Some vulnerable animals will be eaten by other animals, but others will be able to adapt and survive.

        Found this about chicken domestication:
        https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-81589-7

        It seems that they were around and in big number before domestication, but it's hard to imagine those chickens would have survived without domestication. We will never know…

• 

  FlyingMiffy on 02/04/2022 - 22:59

  +1

  Lucky no one is having a go at fried chicken yet!

• 

  Exprise on 03/04/2022 - 03:00

  If carcinogens are meat, how come there aren't more "cooking with carcinogens" books?

• 

  Vomo on 03/04/2022 - 06:20

  Meat and 3 veg. Body says thank you.

• 

  whyisave on 03/04/2022 - 09:21

  +1

  Going forward, we will see more and more negative news about eating meats, driving petrol cars, etc.

  Most of the reasons for NOT doing these things will be justified well and rightfully, eg.
  _ meat can be carcinogenic, high greenhouse emissions, unethical to kill sentient beings for consumption, etc. etc.
  _ petrol vehicles have high greenhouse emissions, etc.

  Most of this started off, as something that is good for the environment (or good for animal welfare),
  but it's now tied to Blackrock's ESG scores that more and more companies have to abide by,
  if they want $$$ (ie. investments).

  So, ESG scores will drive this new form of control (or control-grid) that will be released onto the population,
  with the purpose of saving the planet, saving the animals, minimizing carbon footprint, etc….

  These are all the right goals for humanity, but it will be driven by Wall Street.

  I think we will see a ration on meat purchase or some kind of control on how much meat we will be allowed to eat,
  eg. a credit card company [Mastercard] or with the new programmable money coming, there will be limits imposed to how much meat a person can buy per week.

  PS:
  So, if electric cars are "better" for the environment as a less-polluting machine
  (without questioning how all of the materials are mined, eg. lithium),
  then, society will be pushed towards electric car ownership in the next 4-5 years.

  Now, all cars in USA from 2026, must have a 'remote kill switch',
  eg. Tesla will have a legislated 'remote kill switch' from 2026.

  Then, in the future, cars can be 'turned off' remotely, if the owner has not paid the repayments (this happens now with Tesla)
  or let's say, there's another of Bill Gates' pandemic and there's a lockdown,
  all cars in a certain suburb can be shut down to prevent movement.

  • 

    GrueHunter on 03/04/2022 - 11:15

    +2

    Then, in the future, cars can be 'turned off' remotely, if the owner has not paid the repayments

    So like your gas, water, electricity, phone, internet, mobile, Netflix, Amazon Prime…? Damn, the NWO really is EVERYEHWEERE!?1

    • 

      whyisave on 03/04/2022 - 11:47

      +1

      Not paying repayments is not an unreasonable reason, to enforce a rule,
      but you should see what's already happening and how it's being implemented,
      to get a preview of what kind of future is ahead, as we all rush towards it.

      Gas, water, electricity, phone, Internet, mobile, Netflix, Amazon Prime… are all subscription-based services.
      You enter into a contract with them, for the service.

      For owning your car, and the freedom of moving around in it, requires no subscription nor permission from anyone,
      other than having insurance, a road-worthy vehicle, proving your knowledge of the road rules and adherence to it (ie. not zero demerit points).

      It's Biden's recent US$ 1T Infrastructure Bill, that all cars in U.S. (I'm unsure if 'In USA' or 'Made In USA')
      from 2026, must have a Remote Kill-Switch built-into the car.

      So, one of the last 'freedoms' that we have, ie. moving around in a car, will be under 'remote control'.

      • 

        inasero on 06/04/2022 - 09:25

        +1

        One example that came to my mind was how those in the Candian truckers protest movement had their ACTUAL BANK ACCOUNTS FROZEN for daring to voice dissent to government COVID policies. People might think it's a far fetched conspiracy, but government and corporate overreach into our personal lives is already here.

        • 

          whyisave on 06/04/2022 - 10:23

          +1

          @inasero: Yes, I read about the .CA government and bank accounts.

          All I'm saying is, many "unarguable" reasons will be used to usher in new forms of control.

          I do not disagree with saving the environment and eating less animals,
          or highlighting the negatives of eating animals,
          but the people in charge of doing implementing this 'environmental agenda',
          will actually the same power-hungry tippy-tops.

          Read about Blackrock's ESG scores.

• 

  twocsies on 03/04/2022 - 09:25

  +3

  The poll poses a false dilemma. Something can be carcinogenic yet contribute to good health. In the OP's example, he increased his intake of meat and felt like he was healthier as a result of the nutrients. Later in life, he has an 18% increased rate of colorectoral cancer. That risk could have been reduced, but the intake of protein and other nutrients may very well have provided health benefits that help him live longer.

  • 

    ChickenTalon on 05/04/2022 - 08:26

    Good way of thinking about it. However that 18% is based purely on association. There is still no causal evidence to support the claim.

    Basically how do people eat meat nowadays, do they cook a steak and eat it? Or do they order a large Big Mac meal with fries, coke and sundae? Causation can never be attributed from the epidemiology they've used in making the meat = cancer claims.

• 

  ihbh on 03/04/2022 - 11:08

  -3

  1. Animal protein increases risk of cancer, heart disease, etc. and shortens life and healthspan.

  2. Plant based foods do the opposite.

  3. There is no doubt that processes/refunded carbs and unhealthy fats are bad for you.

  But you should compare 1. With 2. Not 1. With 3. 1. With cutting out processes crap appears to improve your health in the short term but will get you in the medium term. Some recent celebrity news are food for thought

• 

  EDM on 03/04/2022 - 11:16

  The demographic on OzBargain seem so conservative, these topics come up on the front page often and are met with a lot of resistance from the community. 75% of the poll believe meat is healthy despite evidence to the contrary, whether that be to our current health or our environment.

  They are disconnected from the process of everything and are incapable of looking outside of the bubble they're in. It seems that the majority of the community are actively engaged in consumerism and purchase products they do not need but often do so because they are cheap or as a form of status.

  It's 2022 and some of you are still denying the science of climate change. Get real.

  A whole lotta cognitive dissonance…

  • 

    whyisave on 03/04/2022 - 11:54

    -1

    … despite evidence to the contrary, whether that be to our current health or our environment.

    They are disconnected from the process of everything and are incapable of looking outside of the bubble they're in.

    So, will you forgo using toilet paper ?
    Many of us have.

    If people who have been using toilet paper for the 40+ years,
    are still "disconnected" and "incapable" of looking through the bubble of toilet paper?

    1) It's good for your health
    2) It's good for the environment

    :)

    Even better is using squat toilets !

    The closer we move to nature, is the remedy to the environmental issues,
    otherwise, it's a perpetual argument about which "balance" is the right balance.

    • 

      EDM on 03/04/2022 - 13:10

      Sure, I could easily give up toilet paper.

      I don't use nearly the amount of toilet paper as I used to as a meat eater, I need to invest in a bidet but that's quite the expense and has its own environmental concerns. TMI maybe but I mostly have ghost poops these days. Thank you fibre!

      You are right though, environmentally speaking 90% of the things we do on a day-day basis are devastating to the environment in one way or another, as a lot of our actions involve fossil fuels. I would argue that the transition to a plant based diet is relatively easy, healthy and the biggest reduction in harm to the environment individuals can undertake.

      • 

        whyisave on 03/04/2022 - 16:04

        -3

        Plant-based diets = eating plants = less plants = more greenhouse warming

        :-D

        You will eat ze bugs

        • 

          EDM on 03/04/2022 - 16:29

          +1

          @whyisave: Eating meat requires more plants than a plant based diet.

          Try again.

          • 

            whyisave on 04/04/2022 - 08:57

            @EDM: Why bother retorting about 'eating meat',
            when I don't even mention meats,
            but referring to eating insects
            (to supplement protein needs).

            • 

              EDM on 04/04/2022 - 11:05

              @whyisave: Insect populations are in serious decline "in 100 years you will have none". What are you proposing exactly?

              Why not just eat plants? There is more than enough protein in a plant based diet.

• 

  polarq on 03/04/2022 - 13:05

  Crap, i fat fingered the option I did not agree with facepalm

• 

  Yatoc73 on 03/04/2022 - 14:49

  Probably the biggest concern with meat is the increasing amount of meat required to feed the ever increasing population coupled with the increasing standards of living.

• 

  catbug on 03/04/2022 - 20:53

  +3

  Just my own 2c: I’m a vegetarian, I eat eggs and don’t consume dairy. I ate meat my whole life; when I was 21 I was diagnosed with PCOS. At 25 I watched some of those docos on Netflix and decided to stop eating meat - along with switching to a healthier lifestyle (I started working out and actually put more thought into what I am eating everyday). 7-8 months later my PCOS went away, no more cysts and my other symptoms went away too.

  This experience has made me wary of what is actually in FOOD and more predominantly meat. Animals are fed fattening foods and injected with chemicals to grow faster and I do believe this has an effect on our bodies and our hormones. I don’t preach not eating meat but I do think it’s important to know the facts and be more considerate of the planet and how we can all eat better for our health.

  • 

    inasero on 06/04/2022 - 09:32

    How about if people consciously choose healthier meats - e.g. grass-fed and organic? Do you still maintain your position?

    BTW I agree with you regarding the chemicals and hormones…

• 

  justgooddeals on 04/04/2022 - 00:05

  When they make broccoli that tastes like bacon then I’ll eat more broccoli. Until then …..

• 

  liongalahad on 04/04/2022 - 00:32

  Red meat is healthy as long as you don't burn it and as long as you don't eat it every day. Say 3 times a week max. That's it.

  I believe white meat is ok in all circumstances as long as you don't buy heavily industrialised poultry, which contains a lot of antibiotics, hormones etc.

• 

  tonyp on 04/04/2022 - 04:51

  +3

  According to the reports I saw ( from doctors ) that meat is unhealthy is a con. Meat is the best source of nutrition for humans.
  The big food manufacturers don't make much money on fresh meat products, but they do on processed foods like cereals, pasta, rice, sugar, cakes, soft drink and the like.
  Do you think they are concerned about your health or their profits.
  People used to eat more meat 40yrs ago, and there weren't many overweight / obese people or people with diabetes then.
  Funny that now we have a "balanced diet" ( a marketing term ) and promoted by many nutritionists and food experts, that we now have a lot of illness. Have a look who owns the food companies and come to your own decisions ( hint - tobacco companies and religious orders pushing agenda's are there )

• 

  Dack Smith on 04/04/2022 - 13:42

  Animals have rights, don’t eat meat.

  Surely you don’t want someone eating you or your loved ones as a cooked steak?

  • 

    rektrading on 05/04/2022 - 07:11

    +3

    Animals are personal property.

    They don't have civil rights like humans.

  • 

    Gnostikos on 06/04/2022 - 17:55

    Which court of law recognises an animal's human rights?

• 

  jaimex2 on 04/04/2022 - 15:58

  The sun is a carcinogen therefore everything under it is.

• 

  pogichinoy on 04/04/2022 - 16:53

  Everything is a carcinogen.

  • 

    AlienC on 13/04/2022 - 07:23

    we are all geniuses and idiots.. just some more and less than others

    which ones are what and who.. well i have no (profanity) know

• 

  Ryxxi on 04/04/2022 - 22:15

  anything of too much is bad..

  • 

    inasero on 06/04/2022 - 09:33

    Bad of anything is too much…

• 

  Dowhatuwant on 05/04/2022 - 09:50

  Pretty much any studies related to things that have been politicized shouldn't be trusted at face value.

• 

  thirtysixd on 05/04/2022 - 10:13

  +1

  Most meat is unhealthy since its raised with commercial goals (fed for maximum weight gain at lowest cost)

  Fake meat is just as bad (Ingredient list is always heavily processed crap)

  Difference in fat profile for domestic vs wild animals is pretty crazy.

  I try to only eat 'real foods' so no processed stuff and no supermarket meat.

  • 

    Ughhh on 05/04/2022 - 10:16

    Road kill?

  • 

    inasero on 06/04/2022 - 09:35

    Where do you obtain your meat that hasn't been processed? I agree with your position BTW, but found it unpractical to source grass fed/free range/organic meat…

    • 

      GG57 on 06/04/2022 - 11:28

      Unpractical?
      Plenty of butchers have grass fed meat.
      Same for free range and organic (even Coles / Woollies have them), including something called "macro organic…"

      • 

        inasero on 06/04/2022 - 22:27

        They're super expensive

    • 

      Gnostikos on 06/04/2022 - 17:56

      +1

      Pssst, they're called Kangaroos and they're usually cheaper than the equivalent cuts of beef at your local supermarket.

      • 

        inasero on 06/04/2022 - 22:27

        I've eaten kangaroo before, but it tastes so tough and gamey I don't think it comes close to beef unfortunately

        • 

          Gnostikos on 07/04/2022 - 01:52

          +1

          @inasero: I hear that so often and 9 times out of 10 it's because people don't understand it's molecularly different from ordinary beef and needs to be prepared and cooked differently; they expect they can cook it like the chuck steaks or sirloins they ordinarily eat. You have to trim it well and you have to marinade kangaroo meat beforehand and because it's very lean meat, it barely needs 10 minutes on a barbecue for a typical 500g portion; overcooking it by even a minute or two turns it into shoe leather.

          If it's properly prepared and seasoned with a good marinade, any gamey flavour is completely absent and it's as tender as a good veal. Every person I've had over for Kangaroo who told me they hated it were instantly converted when they had a piece of properly prepared and cooked Kangaroo. Some people didn't even notice it wasn't beef until I told them. Sadly, most Australians have never had a decent piece of Kangaroo meat in their lifetime and I know so many people who have some story about trying boiled Kangaroo tails on NAIDOC day back in their school years or something similar and then swearing themselves off it for the rest of their lives, which is a ridiculous experience to base the rest of the animal meat's taste/flavour profile on. The tail by far the worst part of the animal.

          • 

            inasero on 07/04/2022 - 08:42

            @Gnostikos: Is that so? How come it's the part thats so often used in native cuisine?

    • 

      thirtysixd on 07/04/2022 - 11:40

      +1

      Its pretty easy to buy direct from farms but you do need to buy in bulk (i.e side/quarter at a minimum). Upside is that its better quality and much cheaper.

      If you were in tassie I could give tips.

    • 

      AlienC on 13/04/2022 - 07:22

      obviously what he meant was he hunts his own meat.. and sometimes hunts the hunters

• 

  AlienC on 13/04/2022 - 07:21

  it is all in the mind nowadays I believe.. sure physical properties of what you put into yourself physically affects your body more or less but the mind plays a huge part now I feel like it has a bigger influence on cancer causing properties than physical properties.. as my friend keeps telling me dis ease causes disease.. and yeah i have always believed that.. but in saying that eating something unhealthy ain't good for both the mind body and soul

  stay healthy y'all

  eat what feels good and tastes good just everything in moderation unless you are crazy then eat whatever the fluck you like

• 

  funnysht on 15/04/2022 - 17:32

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nX1KUPZC3Ck

  watch this and read the comments…

  • 

    funnysht on 15/04/2022 - 17:36

    at 18min- nitrates was almost banned in the US

• 

  justwaitingforamate on 09/05/2022 - 23:38

  I love meat and will continue to eat it inspite knowing that it will increase my risk profile for certain cancers.
  Do you even science….. "sold out mainstream media" aparently not.
  Why ask when you are deciding what is fact in spite of peer reviewed evidence to the contrary. You can decide what you have a prefernce for and what you have anicdotaly witnessed but please do not compare that with established evedence.

  Oh hang on I just reread your question properly (just skimmed before) and picked up the conspiracy Q- esk red flag language. I can see I have wasted my breath with using "mainstream" pro 5G science.

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4