Pigs erupt in celebration all over the world

[El Presidente]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/10/26/451211964/bad-day-for-bacon-processed-red-meats-cause-cancer-says-who

[Orion21]

Processed foods cause cancer . . .

Says every doctor for the past 25 years.

[skalls]

I'd rather enjoy life, eat bacon and red meat, drink scotch/bourbon, and smoke good cigars. Not too worried about this.

[gr8eman]

Processed foods cause cancer . . .

Says every doctor for the past 25 years.

Some years ago (about the time margarine was invented) the same was said about butter. The opposite is/was true. See if they cite statistics of the people who died from eating bacon!

[Guest rob]

Not to take away from the ludicrous nature of this..... But what are the legal implications now?

Just like the cases involving products such as tobacco and asbestos - If someone after today gets colon cancer, can they sue the company that sold it claiming that they sold a product that was known to cause cancer? What about government responsibilties?

For the record, I'm writing this as I eat a bacon and egg burger.

[MIKA27]

One day they say this, a decade later they renege on their previous theories.

Here in Australia we've had a plethora of commercials over the past 3 decades that come to mind about eat less this, eat more that, then they change and say the opposite....? Don't know what to believe.

I myself have known and heard about processed meats causing cancer but tell me, how do people avoid these when it is part of the daily norm for so many?

Even now, they are saying a nice slab of beef or pork can lead to cancer? Didn't our brains evolve from eating proteins?

[Habana Mike]

They're not coming after my bacon!

[Squarehead]

I can't be here for a long time so I want to be here for a good time.We all gonna die one day, some sick and some healthy.Also I keep my cigars and bacon in separate humidors,just in case

[MIKA27]

I can't be here for a long time so I want to be here for a good time.We all gonna die one day, some sick and some healthy.Also I keep my cigars and bacon in separate humidors,just in case

"Is that plume or mould on your bacon?"

[Warren]

Hands over ears and go LA LA LA

[PapaDisco]

Just means more bacon, for more tuxedos, for more monkeys! More funny!

[luv2fly]

They can have my bacon when they pry it from my cold, dead stomach. Pork fat rules!!!!!!

[DoubleshotTimbo]

I just celebrated with my own slice of pig

[Fuzz]

Is there anything in this world that doesn't give you cancer? Life is not worth living without bacon.

[dangolf18]

I guess Jews got it right 3,000 years ago (and later muslims).

[MIKA27]

I guess Jews got it right 3,000 years ago (and later muslims).

I guess so but in saying that, doesn't stop them getting cancers...

As Fuzz said, Is there anything in this world that doesn't give you cancer?

[MIKA27]

Here's Why You Shouldn't Panic Over Bacon And Processed Meats Causing Cancer

A startling report by an international team of scientists suggests that processed meats like hotdogs and bacon are a definite cause of cancer, while red meat is a probable cause. Here’s what this means to your health and why you have no reason to panic.

Eating processed meats like hotdogs, sausages, and bacon causes bowel cancer, while the consumption of red meats, including beef, pork, veal, and lamb, is probably carcinogenic, an international team of experts has concluded. They evaluated over 800 studies analysing associations between more than a dozen forms of cancer with the consumption of processed or red meat in different countries and among populations with diverse diets.

That conclusion is causing considerable consternation and a rethink of what a healthy diet is supposed to look like.

The Washington Post is calling it “one of the most aggressive stances against meat yet taken by a major health organisation,” adding that it’s “expected to face stiff criticism in the United States.” No doubt, it’s an important report, but health experts say that we shouldn’t exaggerate the extent of the findings, or rush to completely eliminate red and processed meats from our diets altogether.

Definite and Probable Causes

Back in 2014, an international advisory committee listed the effects of consuming processed and red meats as a high priority study area for the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs program. It’s well known that certain meats have an association with cancer; in this respect, the latest report, which now appears at The Lancet, offers very little that is new. It merely brought the existing literature together in a way that finally allowed scientists to make some definite proclamations about the cancer risks of eating processed and red meats.

After sifting through decades’ worth of scientific literature, an IARC working group of 22 experts from 10 countries classified the consumption of processed meat as a Group 1 carcinogen to humans (processed meats are defined as meats that have been transformed through salting, curing, fermentation, smoking, or other processes to enhance flavour or improve preservation). This conclusion was reached on “sufficient evidence” that the consumption of processed meat causes bowel, or colorectal, cancer.

Other forms of cancer, such as stomach and pancreatic cancers, have also been linked to certain meats, though these associations have been more difficult to prove. The IARC group categorized red meat as a Group 2A probable carcinogen to humans based on the “limited evidence” showing that the consumption of red meat causes cancers in humans.

When the researchers say that there’s sufficient evidence, they’re claiming that there’s enough convincing evidence to show that these types of meats actually cause cancer — evidence gleaned from animal experiments, studies of human diet and health, and so-called mechanical causes, such as cell mechanisms, of cancer. As for the limited evidence showing that red meat is probably carcinogenic to humans, the researchers are saying that a positive association has been observed as it relates to the onset of colorectal cancer.

As noted in The Washington Post, the report will “likely play out with political lobbying, and in marketing messages for consumers,” but negative reactions to the report also shows how difficult it is for scientists to link any food to a chronic disease:

Experiments to test whether a food causes cancer pose a massive logistical challenge – they require controlling the diets of thousands of test subjects over a course of many years. For example, one group would be assigned to eat lots of meat, and another less, or none. But for a variety of reasons involving cost and finding test subjects, such experiments are rarely done, and scientists instead often use other less direct methods, known as epidemiological or observational studies, to draw their conclusions.

“I understand that people may be sceptical about this report on meat because the experimental data is not terribly strong,” said Paolo Boffetta, a professor of Tisch Cancer Institute at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine who has served on similar WHO panels. “But in this case the epidemiological evidence is very strong.”

Other scientists, however, have criticised the epidemiological studies for too often reaching “false positives,” that is, concluding that something causes cancer when it doesn’t.

The report will be subject to considerable scrutiny over the coming weeks and months.

Understanding the Risk

“For an individual, the risk of developing colorectal cancer because of their consumption of processed meat remains small, but this risk increases with the amount of meat consumed,” noted Kurt Straif, Head of the IARC Monographs Programme, in a statement. “In view of the large number of people who consume processed meat, the global impact on cancer incidence is of public health importance.”

Specifically, the researchers say that risk of colorectal cancer increases by as much as 18% with each 50 gram portion of processed meat eaten daily, and increases by some 17% with each 100 grams of red meat consumption. But it’s important to keep these figures in perspective. Writing at Cancer Research UK, Casey Dunlop explains:

Remember these are all ball-park figures — everyone’s risk will be different as there are many different factors at play.

We know that, out of every 1000 people in the UK, about 61 will develop bowel cancer at some point in their lives. Those who eat the lowest amount of processed meat are likely to have a lower lifetime risk than the rest of the population (about 56 cases per 1000 low meat-eaters).

If this is correct, the WCRF’s analysis suggests that, among 1000 people who eat the most processed meat, you’d expect 66 to develop bowel cancer at some point in their lives — 10 more than the group who eat the least processed meat.

Tobacco smoking and asbestos are also classified as Group 1 carcinogens, but that doesn’t mean — as this Guardian article falsely suggests — that processed meats are as carcinogenic as those agents. Rather, the IARC classifications merely describe the strength of the scientific evidence as it pertains to a possible cause of cancer. Yes, processed meats and smoking both cause cancer, but to dramatically different degrees.

Recent estimates suggest that, around the world, 34,000 cancer deaths can be attributed to diets high in processed meat each year. Diets high in red meat, which has not been positively linked as a direct cause of cancer, could be responsible for as many as 50,000 deaths per year worldwide, though it’s difficult to know exactly. By contrast, smoking causes about a million deaths per year, while alcohol consumption results in about 600,000 deaths each year globally.

As to why certain meats cause cancer, here’s what the IARC has to say:

Meat consists of multiple components, such as haem iron. Meat can also contain chemicals that form during meat processing or cooking. For instance, carcinogenic chemicals that form during meat processing include N-nitroso compounds and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Cooking of red meat or processed meat also produces heterocyclic aromatic amines as well as other chemicals including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are also found in other foods and in air pollution. Some of these chemicals are known or suspected carcinogens, but despite this knowledge it is not yet fully understood how cancer risk is increased by red meat or processed meat.

The jury is still out on red meat, and its carcogenic effects likely have something to do with how it’s cooked.

How Much Meat to Eat?

So what does all this mean in terms of adjusting our meat-eating habits?

“These findings further support current public health recommendations to limit intake of meat,” says IARC Director Christopher Wild. “At the same time, red meat has nutritional value. Therefore, these results are important in enabling governments and international regulatory agencies to conduct risk assessments, in order to balance the risks and benefits of eating red meat and processed meat and to provide the best possible dietary recommendations.”

It’s an admonition that’s echoed by many health and diet experts, including physician David Wallinga from the University of Minnesota:

These are WHO’s two highest cancer classifications. The risk rises with the amount of meat consumed. It would not be good medicine to wait longer before strongly advising the public to eat less red meat and especially less processed meat. WHO recommendations also include eating diets higher in whole grains and vegetables, in addition to limiting red and processed meats, because of evidence that dietary fibre protects against cancer.

Luckily, the WHO’s ruling comes on the heels of a growing trend toward eating less and better meat – at least in America. American red meat consumption has already dropped about 25% since the mid-1970’s. But Americans on average still eat about 860 grams of red meat per week – approaching double the E.U.-recommended amount of no more than about 500 grams of cooked red meat per week.

Wallinga says that we should eat less and better meat.

Dunlop says that red and processed meat still have a place in a healthy diet. “Regularly eating large amounts of red and processed meat, over a long period of time, is probably not the best approach if you’re aiming to live a long and healthy life,” he said.

However, “Meat is fine in moderation — it’s a good source of some nutrients such as protein, iron and zinc. It’s just about being sensible, and not eating too much, too often.”

Dunlop points to a government report advising people who eat more than 90g (cooked weight) of red and/or processed meat a day to cut it down to 70g or less.

It’s also a good idea to substitute these meats with chicken, turkey, or fish, while adding more fibre, fruit, and vegetables. And given the detrimental impacts of raising livestock on the environment, not to mention the intense suffering endured by factory farmed animals, it’s also worth considering a vegetarian or vegan diet.

MIKA: ...it’s also worth considering a vegetarian or vegan diet. NO WAY!

[airtrade]

Damn, just grilled pork chops... Time to go to the DR.

[SCgarman]

As with everything....Moderation, Moderation and Moderation. EXCEPT SEX !!!!!!!

[LordAnubis]

So can someone explain to me how bacon is a "processed" meat? I thought it was just a cut of pork meat?

As for this study. I can't see anywhere (granted I skim read) where they talk about the participants and their exercising habits. I would think the lifestyle of the high processed meat eaters would be less active than the non processed meat eaters.

I'm a big believer in a eat everything in moderation and live an active lifestyle type of life.

Drinking 20L of water a day will kill you. Breathing 100% oxygen for long periods of time will kill you. From the day you stop growing ( I think it's at 25 years) you're always slowly dying.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cigcars]

I recall a similar topic about eating "right"; eating "bad", etc., etc., and I quoted Redd Foxx (paraphrasing): "Some people avoid red meat, don't eat liver and onions, no biscuits, no gravy with onions in it because they wanna live. You gonna feel like a damn fool laying in the hospital dying from "nothing"!

This kind of topic has come up again, and again, and again through the years. And our response was, "Look, Cancer's in the air. 'Everything' causes Cancer. Might as well eat and enjoy."

And finally, to quote Master Oogway from Kung Fu Panda when counseling Shifu: "One often meets his fate on the road he takes to avoid it".

***When it's time for your ticket to get punched - 'aayyy...

[Fuzz]

So can someone explain to me how bacon is a "processed" meat? I thought it was just a cut of pork meat?

As for this study. I can't see anywhere (granted I skim read) where they talk about the participants and their exercising habits. I would think the lifestyle of the high processed meat eaters would be less active than the non processed meat eaters.

I'm a big believer in a eat everything in moderation and live an active lifestyle type of life.

Drinking 20L of water a day will kill you. Breathing 100% oxygen for long periods of time will kill you. From the day you stop growing ( I think it's at 25 years) you're always slowly dying.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Processed in the terms of being preserved to be eaten later (as opposed to fresh cuts that are to be eaten in the near future), not obliterated and blended into a single homogenous blob, then formed into something resembling semi digested meat.

[thetek]

Smoking causes cancer. Eating meat causes cancer. Using your phones cause cancer. Using laptops in your lap causes cancer. The sun causes cancer.

Maybe we're just not supposed to live until we're 90?

[CaptainQuintero]

Stats just on itv news which this report is based on.

Take 100 people who don't eat processed meats and 6 of them will likely get bowel cancer.

Take 100 people who do regularly processed food every day and 7 of them will likely get bowel cancer.

Compared to cigarettes:

Out of 100 non smokers, 1 will likely get lung cancer.

Out of 100 smokers who smoke 20 a day, 20 will likely get lung cancer.

[Warren]

Maybe we're just not supposed to live until we're 90?

I can't afford to live that long.

I'll be a self funded retiree as long as I'm dead 1 year after I stop working.

Bacon could just be my retirement plan.