[Closed] So who's going to stop eating bacon & Italian hams then...?

Crusty white bloomer, roughly sliced into slabs. Butter. Ketchup. Lots of smoked bacon. Mug of tea.

If that kills me then I will die a happy man.

Have I missed something or is binners missing from this thread?

Hi!

*waves* 😀

Where do we stand on double sausage and egg mcmuffins then?

Are the bloody health nazi's telling me that they're bad for me now? Since packing in smoking they're the only pleasure I have in life! Are they going to deprive me of those? ARE THEY?!!! 😥

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

Actually... on a related note, one of my mates drives artics for Maccy D's. The drivers all tend to have regular Maccy D's breakfasts (he doesn't himself). But not long back, they brought [url= http://www.mcdonaldsmenu.mobi/breakfastmenu/breakfastwrap/ ]these[/url] out. They've been christened 'Heart Attack Wraps in the office, as so many of the drivers have actually had heart attacks since their introduction to the menu. They're keeling over, clutching their arms, left right and centre! I think he said that are about 1,000 calories in each one 😯

So there you have it! If you're going to eat processed meat, then don't **** about! Do it properly. You'll be dead waaaaaaaaay before you've had chance to develop cancer!

Look, bottom left. RSPCA freedom food logo, no way that gives you cancer.

[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/health/it-wasnt-worth-it-says-103-year-old-vegetarian-20151027103301 ]indeed[/url]

In other news yesterday scientists have discovered that stepping out your front door causes cancer, yup & breathing, breathing causes cancer too, in fact being alive significantly increases your chances of getting cancer, so you're better off not living at all.

A life without bacon is a life not worth living.

i disagree, but then i suppose i would...

[quote=JoeG ] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/06/worlds-oldest-woman-116-eats-bacon-everyday/73444660/

When there is a 2.6% chance of dying from bowel cancer if you eat lots of processed meat, how unlikely is that then?

[quote=ti_pin_man ]Processed food will be the death of our generation if eaten in quantity.

If that is the case, then it will be down to something other than bowel cancer. Personally I'd still rather give myself the best chance of avoiding having a colostomy bag though.

franksinatra - Member
Crusty white bloomer, roughly sliced into slabs. Butter. [s]Ketchup[/s] HP. Lots of smoked bacon. Mug of tea.

If that kills me then I will die a happy man.

FTFY.

Red meat has been placed in "Group 2A", which means it is [u]probably[/u] carcinogenic to humans.

However, there is "limited evidence" to connect red meat – including beef, pork, lamb, mutton, goat and horse – to cancer.

This might have been posted before, but:

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2015/10/26/processed-meat-and-cancer-what-you-need-to-know/

Pretty good at unpicking the headline sensationalism, including what's actually new information behind the recent headlines: the IARC's announcement that processed meat "definitely causes cancer" and some background behind that definition.

As Professor Phillips explains, “IARC does ‘hazard identification’, not ‘risk assessment’.

“That sounds quite technical, but what it means is that IARC isn’t in the business of telling us how potent something is in causing cancer – only whether it does so or not”, he says.

To take an analogy, think of banana skins. They definitely can cause accidents, explains Phillips, but in practice this doesn’t happen very often (unless you work in a banana factory). And the sort of harm you can come to from slipping on a banana skin isn’t generally as severe as, say, being in a car accident.

But under a hazard identification system like IARC’s, ‘banana skins’ and ‘cars’ would come under the same category – they both definitely do cause accidents.

Bravado of middle age or youth doesn't really matter, still bravado... I remember the same language used by smokers in the 80s/90's.

oooh if a cig kills me, I'll die a happy man.
oooh if 110 year old Doris is still smoking then I'll be fine.

snatch

In other news yesterday scientists have discovered that stepping out your front door causes cancer, yup & breathing, breathing causes cancer too, in fact being alive significantly increases your chances of getting cancer

Binners beat me to it! I was going to say that we already know that eating too much processed meat can cause heart disease so why the uproar that it also raises your cancer risk? Dying of a heart attack at 55 is no more fun than dying of colorectal cancer at 70.

This wasn't news to me and was one of the reasons I went veggie a couple of years ago. I wasn't fussed about chicken or beef but i LOVED processed meats. Chorizo, pepperoni, parma ham, salami etc. I'm actually salivating just thinking about it. I know that's a one way trip to bowel cancer and I'm not known for doing anything in moderation!

[quote=nedrapier ]This might have been posted before

I posted it on page 1, but it's well worth posting again, when most people seem to be getting their info from journos who haven't got a clue about science.

Mogrim, you are wrong on the HP sauce front but I respect your choice and will not try to convince you otherwise.

But you are wrong

No, following the guidance of a epidemiological study or agglomeration of studies, is not something I'm going to be doing.

GF's mum spent her whole life eating wholegrains and avoiding anything she saw on Breakfast TV, including this processed meat lark.

Result - bowel cancer earlier this year. Bowel removal etc.

Luckily, I'm not hugely into processed meat (save the odd sausage) and didn't steak get it in the neck at one point?

That bacon kimbers posted on page 2 looks a bit dodgy, I think I'll steer clear.

[quote=rone ]GF's mum spent her whole life eating wholegrains and avoiding anything she saw on Breakfast TV, including this processed meat lark.
Result - bowel cancer earlier this year. Bowel removal etc.

Yeah, well if you read the stats, for every 66 processed meat eaters who get bowel cancer 56 wholegrain eaters will get bowel cancer. It's not a huge change in risk.

I'm wondering what the correlation is with increased risk of disease for breakfast TV watchers.

Yep, and I would say worrying about stuff, and stressing about health advice all the time takes its toll on your system too.

Fear, Fear and Fear.

You can't blame folk for getting stuff all messed up.

Lets be honest... [b]EVERYTHING[/b] gives you cancer. Or that certainly seems to be the case. Is there anything that 'the experts' can categorically prove does not give you cancer? No.... I didn't think so.

All this stuff is just scare-mongering nonsense, to further fuel the whole paranoid '[b]you're all going to die!!!!!!!![/b]' narrative so beloved of modern media, and ridiculous nanny state.

We all know the things that [i]really[/i] do the damage to your lungs/heart and important bits.

If you pay much attention to this peripheral fluff, and actually alter your behavior as a direct result of it, then you really are an idiot...

[img] [/img]

Though of course some things prevent cancer:
http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/

You can call it denialism if you want but I think people are missing the point here. This is a linked issue on a societal level, but individual people thinking 'oh I'll stop eating processed meat then so I don't get bowel cancer' is logically faulty thinking.

The chances for any given individual of that being the thing that kills you, and you having had a significant impact on it's likelihood of happening by whether you eat processed meat or not must still be incredibly tiny, no?

We all know the things that really do the damage to your lungs/heart and important bits.

Coke and hookers?

depends how niche the hookers are

Pretty good at unpicking the headline sensationalism, including what's actually new information behind the recent headlines: the IARC's announcement that processed meat "definitely causes cancer" and some background behind that definition.

Yeah sadly as usual the news channels have taken the report completely out of context. Channel 4 news last night were quite good in explaining what the report actually says rather than what the papers are reporting.

depends how niche the hookers are

29er+ singlespeed hookers?

We all know the things that really do the damage to your lungs/heart and important bits.

And why do we know?

Cos of scientists doing exactly this kind of research. Shot yourself in the foot there a bit binners 🙂

If I shoot myself in the foot, I'll bleed to death before I have chance to get cancer

You could make some black pudding out of the blood, mmm....

[quote=molgrips ]Shot yourself in the foot there a bit binners

Or does he have a dog called "trigger"?

I'm currently balls deep in series 2 of the Sopranos. My consumption of Italian hams and other such delights has risen considerably and will continue to rise throughout the time it takes to finish all 6 series.

Or does he have a dog called "trigger"?

he has a bike called trigger, is that close enough?

Edit, not the right time to post this.

[quote=hora ]Who wants to live old?

I'd far rather die of some horrible disease like bowel or lung cancer.

A few years ago a study said milk was bad for you. Two weeks later the same paper ran another study saying milk should be drunk more. Telegraph or Times I think.

Science in science shocker.

Public in not getting it shocker.

Vitamin tablets bad for you as well. And good for you. And snake oil. Eggs were bad, now good. Bread is perceived as bad, but natural wholemeal is good carbs and the list will go on....

[quote=Kryton57 ]And snake oil.

Does snake oil cause cancer or prevent it?

Survival rate in France is 90%. Perhaps due to the testing programme. My results arrived today. Negative, which isn't absolute proof I don't have cancer now but if I do the chances are it will show up next time. The test is every two years which generally means people are diagnosed while the chances of survival are still high.

Sorry - I'm going to be really boring now. Some of the posts in this thread seem in really bad taste considering what's been going on in STW recently...

[quote=hora opined]A few years ago a study said milk was bad for you. Two weeks later the same paper ran another study saying milk should be drunk more. Telegraph or Times I think.

The data suggests newspapers are shit at dealing with science and prefer inaccurate sound bites.

My meat intake will be unaffected by this news

Some of the posts in this thread seem in really bad taste considering what's been going on in STW recently.

I've obviously missed something.

Some of the posts in this thread seem in really bad taste considering what's been going on in STW recently.
I've obviously missed something.

I get it. But think the poster is way off.

The media are appallingly bad at reporting studies properly. They always mis-interpret or over-interpret, probably deliberately so they can make a story out of it.

I would rather live to 70 eating whatever the hell I want than eat healthy and live to 80 only to die of loneliness because all my friends died early from bacon related illnesses.

Or more to the point, all your friends stopped being your friends because you were so miserable!!

I get it. But think the poster is way off.

I didn't think as i was just posting a news article - it was never my intention to link the two and it never occurred to me either, and I humbly apologise if I've caused offence.

Now the two have been linked, perhaps its time for the thread to end, so I'll report this post on that basis.

Kryton, I don't mean you, I mean the person that has made the link