Total Pageviews

Tuesday 27 October 2015

This latest report from the WHO is about as much use as a rubber beak on a woodpecker.

Yet again we see complete and utter bollocks re diet from the WHO. Meat has been ate since the beginning of time, 4 million years on it's a health hazard. This latest report from the WHO is about as much use as a rubber beak on a woodpecker. When a man gives up eating bacon, he might as well take a one way walk up to Beachy Head. It's no wonder why so many Muslims are so pissed off. affraid And don't waste your money starting a bacon factory in Tel Aviv. No bacon and you have grief big time.  rofl  Am I right or am I right?

Beachy Head  Eastbourne

""For an individual, the risk of developing colorectal (bowel) cancer because of their consumption of processed meat remains small, but this risk increases with the amount of meat consumed," Dr Kurt Straif from the WHO said."

Link to info here.

So, logic says to me, I know I will stop eating meat and become a vegetarian, err no, they get more colorectal cancer than meat eaters FACT!

Cancer incidence in vegetarians: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-Oxford).

Key TJ1, Appleby PN, Spencer EA, Travis RC, Roddam AW, Allen NE.
Author information


Few prospective studies have examined cancer incidence among vegetarians.

We report cancer incidence among vegetarians and nonvegetarians in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Oxford (EPIC-Oxford) study.

This was a prospective study of 63,550 men and women recruited throughout the United Kingdom in the 1990s. Cancer incidence was followed through nationwide cancer registries.

The standardized incidence ratio for all malignant neoplasms for all participants was 72% (95% CI: 69%, 75%). The standardized incidence ratios for colorectal cancer were 84% (95% CI: 73%, 95%) among nonvegetarians and 102% (95% CI: 80%, 129%) among vegetarians. In a comparison of vegetarians with meat eaters and after adjustment for age, sex, and smoking, the incidence rate ratio for all malignant neoplasms was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80, 1.00). The incidence rate ratio for colorectal cancer in vegetarians compared with meat eaters was 1.39 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.91).

The overall cancer incidence rates of both the vegetarians and the nonvegetarians in this study are low compared with national rates. Within the study, the incidence of all cancers combined was lower among vegetarians than among meat eaters, but the incidence of colorectal cancer was higher in vegetarians than in meat eaters.

Link to info here.



Roses and Lilacs said...

It's true meat has been a staple of our diets for thousands of years, but... It's only recently that we have begun to live into our 80's and 90's. Not many cancers show up in our 40's and 50's. Just something to think about. Cancer frightens me to death.

John U said...

This was not even a research study. It was a review of 188?? research reports by a committee of "experts" who then supposedly prepared the report. Since there were no RCT's, this report was based on observational data and therefore cannot show a causal relationship. This is critical. It could be that something else in the diet (sugars and other carbs? toxins in vegetables? beer consumption? etc.) which caused the cancers. Also, the 18% is thrown around like it means something. That is just pandering to our fears. As Zoe Harcombe reported in her blog, in the UK something like 47 per 100,000 people die of colorector cancer. Even if 18% more died, your risk of being one of them is about as high as wining the weekly lotto jackpot (ok a little higher, but still very low). I believe that WHO gets financial benefit from some kind of organizations who want to stop this move to meat before it starts to affect their profits. I think the carb and specifically the sugar industries are already panicking. Grains will be next.

Galina L. said...

I would treat it as another piece of stupid while politically-correct diet advice, but unfortunately, such stupidity affects health of millions.

chris c said...

Agree with all the above. If meat was so toxic we'd have become extinct millennia ago (same for saturated fat). Since it only appears to have become toxic recently it must be something else that has changed recently that is the actual cause.

Actually if you look in the village churchyards around here you will find plenty of octagenerians going back a century or two. It would be useful to dig some of them up and ask them what they ate. Just like the still alive old folks, "none of that low fat rubbish!" would probably be the reply.