No amount of alcohol, sausage or bacon is safe according to cancer experts

Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
117,640
LOL - The food evangelists launch yet another salvo.

They told us banning smoking would beat cancer.

They told us eating the government approved foods would lower obesity and help us live longer.

For fifty years we've been listening to and hanging on every word these assholes have to say, and we, as a people, are fatter, stupider, sicker and dying sooner than before.


No amount of alcohol, sausage or bacon is safe according to a new global blueprint on how to beat cancer.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/health/bad-news-sausage-bacon-booze-12585028

Even small amounts of processed meats and booze increase the risk of a host of cancers outlined in World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) guidelines updated every decade.

The respected global authority has unveiled a 10-point plan to cut your risk of getting cancer by up to 40%.

Brits have been told to banish favourites such as ham, burgers and hot dogs from their diets by experts who say they are a direct cause of bowel cancer.

Processed meats also cause people to be overweight which can trigger many more cancers.

But UK experts have disagreed with the draconian advice insisting the odd bacon sandwich “isn’t anything to worry about”.

The WCRF found boozing is directly linked to increased risk of six cancers and for the first time recommended sticking to water or unsweetened drinks.
 
Last edited:
First come warnings, then come bans.

Because these people are zealots, and will never, ever stop.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.” - C.S. Lewis


Is it time for junk food to carry graphic warnings like cigarette packets?

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2018-05-junk-food-graphic-cigarette-packets.html

May 24, 2018 by Kathryn Powley, University of Melbourne

Is it time for junk food to carry graphic warnings like cigarette packets?
An example of a warning message used in the study. Credit: University of Melbourne
New research suggests graphic warnings on junk food packaging would prove an effective deterrent to consumers when deciding what to eat – and it appears the more graphic and negative the message the better.


The finding by researchers at the University of Melbourne and Cancer Council Victoria reinforces arguments for mandatory health warnings on unhealthy food as an effective tool in improving diets and combatting rising rates of obesity-related chronic diseases.

In the study, 95 hungry participants were shown colour pictures of 50 different snack foods ranging from chips, chocolate bars and biscuits to nuts, fruits and vegetables.

They were asked to rate on a scale how much they would like to eat each food at the end of the experiment. Participants were then shown a number of different health warnings and asked to rate a similar set of 50 snack foods.

The research, published in the journals NeuroImage: Clinical and Appetite, found negative text combined with images was twice as effective at changing people's choices than messages that had negative text-only content or those with images combined with positive text.

In addition, participants' brain activity was monitored with electrodes attached to their heads. The study found warning labels prompted participants to exercise more self-control rather than act on impulse.

University of Melbourne researcher and study co-author Stefan Bode said: "The study shows that if you want to stop people choosing fatty and sugary packaged foods, health warnings actually work.

"It sheds light on the mechanisms in the brain that underlie the effects of health warning messages on food processing," Dr. Bode said.

Cancer Council Victoria behavioural researcher and study co-author Helen Dixon said the project has helped identify which types of health messages are most effective at prompting healthier food choices.

"Strong cues, like anticipated taste, tend to work on us in a more unconscious way, and therefore health messages need to disrupt these more impulsive, hedonistic responses to foods and make people consciously consider the health implications of their choices," Dr. Dixon said.

She called for the government to improve and make mandatory the Health Star Rating system on foods, which was launched in 2014 and aims to encourage consumers to make better food choices.
 
Reminds me of a quote I once read, but can't find these days for the attribution... The problem with science is that it perpetually discovers an ever diminishing level of risk in everything.
 
Lol - here's my response.

9f227b15173d658dae59ff2f6c2d47f3.jpg


Come and get me, cancer. I'm living; not just surviving.



(man, are those idiots gonna feel stupid when they die of nothing)
 
I suspect the real cause of so much cancer is the radio active stuff that comes from all of those nuclear bomb tests they did.
 
All it needs is some grits and a food processor :p

That's what I'm talkin' about! We could call it Cancer Slop. :D

I suspect the real cause of so much cancer is the radio active stuff that comes from all of those nuclear bomb tests they did.

I read an article the other day about how third hand smoke causes the cancer. It's very dangerous. If someone smokes near your house, just tear it down and start over.
 
Why am I not surprised that this is the attitude the ancaps take?!

They told us banning smoking would beat cancer.
Smoking has never been banned in the USA and people still smoke and get the types of cancers associated with smoking.

They told us eating the government approved foods would lower obesity and help us live longer.
How many Americans actually followed the food pyramid?!

and we, as a people, are fatter, stupider, sicker and dying sooner than before.
And aren't you alarmed by this?!!

If you ancaps don't care about yourselves, fine, but don't mock people who do. Some of us actually have self-respect and take personal responsibility.
 
Everything "causes cancer", the answer is to properly supply the body with what it needs to defend and repair itself.
 
Why am I not surprised that this is the attitude the ancaps take?!


Smoking has never been banned in the USA and people still smoke and get the types of cancers associated with smoking.


How many Americans actually followed the food pyramid?!


And aren't you alarmed by this?!!

If you ancaps don't care about yourselves, fine, but don't mock people who do. Some of us actually have self-respect and take personal responsibility.

Who tipped over your rock?
 
Why aren't you happy to see me posting here again?

You were gone for almost two years, then you come back to post under a thread about how healthy eggs are, 4 hours after it was posted.. and the thread you started almost two years ago - Why Eggs Are NOT Healthy

It's all just a little curious.
 
Back
Top