Junk Science: Not a single epidemiological study credibly links meat-eating with cancer
Consider the data presented for processed meat, which the AICR report claims to be too dangerous to eat.
Of the 17 study results concerning processed meat and colon cancer comparing high consumption to low consumption 15 are way below, and one is at the 100 percent-risk threshold. Thirteen studies aren’t statistically significant. Not only is the lone study claiming a risk above 100 percent (a reported 250 percent increase in risk) barely statistically significant, it has a margin of error four times the size of the reported risk.
Of the seven studies reporting a cancer risk per serving of processed meat, all reported risks are substantially below the 100 percent threshold. Four results are clearly not statistically significant and two are borderline insignificant.
On the basis of these dubious statistical results, the AICR report concludes that “processed meat is a convincing cause of colorectal cancer.” This is an appalling and unsupported conclusion.
That a lazy intellect and pathetic math skills are a direct cause of lousy journalism, however, is beyond dispute. (h/t nold)
One need only ask “How did the Eskimos survive?” to disprove this one.
They’ll have to pry my steaks out of my cold dead fingers.
Miss Kate
It would be good if you could share the information in the letter to the editor of newspapers, otherwise the LIV’s will never know.
I had a hunch the science was suspect. I also think this is just another piece in the push to a one-world government: meat’s bad; fossil fuels bad; free speech bad etc. Stories like this have a huge impact on low-information voters.
No surprise. It’s another crapulous meta-study (meaning that all they do is cherry-pick for studies that show the results they want, and then average them). The infamous EPA second hand smoke study in 1990 was the same thing. And even after it dropped its statistical confidence levels, it only had an RR (relative risk) of 1.13. General rule of thumb is that any epidemiological study which has an RR of less than 2 should be automatically rejected.
Curiously, the report only singles out pork products as carcinogenic.
Scratch a bit deeper on the author of this report to find out the agenda.
The timing, right before the Paris global warming conference, could be a factor considering the WHO is an arm of the United Nations. That could explain the meat bad, vegetarians good angle.
Or, there could be a religious element to it. Unless I’m mistaken, pork is verboten to followers of the Muslim faith as well as a dietary restriction in the Judaic faith since it’s considered unclean meat.
Just finished off a tasty breakfast of ham sausage and eggs and am determined to not let any warmists or fanatics run my life.
Could well be I’m just trying to create a conspiracy theory, though 🙂
Heres a big blow to PETA and PCRM and the UCS who are always pushing this veganism on people more bunk from the health freaks with alfalfa sprouts stuck between their teeth
Considering the scientific link has now been established and there has long since been knowledge of the harmful effects of processed meats, will Schneider’s and Maple Leaf et al. be sued unmercifully into non existance 20 years from now, like the tobacco companies are being done to now?
I can just hear the howls; “My mother ate bacon and died!! She was addicted and the meat companies lied to us! She was 450lbs and didn’t exercise and died, and that was the fault of the evil meat packers’.
Malloy is right that this is junk science with an agenda.
I noticed on the sidebar that Poland may still be courageous enough to opt out of the Paris climate scam conference.
set you free
OF COURSE they singled out process meat especially since it is mostly pork. Look at the authors of the report.
http://www.meatpoultry.com/~/media/Files/MP/IARC-summary.ashx
Additionally, when I reviewed the WHO report on alcohol consumption, which was also alarmist given the actual data, there was a high number of Arab countries and organizations crunching the data.
Having said that, processed meats in large amounts ARE associated with stomach cancer (high rates in China etc where there is little refrigeration). However, the nitrosamines which can be carcinogenic are reduced if ingested with acid. So make sure you have oranges with your breakfast sausages and tomatoes with your bacon.
As in all things, moderation is key.
They believe that they understand the climate impact of the meat industry and that the climate impact of producing a food impacts health (Both dubious at best) so they feel justified in producing this crap.
They have long ago abandoned the idea that they should be truthful and accept losing an argument on the merits.
Ah yes. Steve Milloy. This guy is as dirty as you can get. He is actually a paid advocate for tobacco companies who fights against the established fact that second hand smoke is linked to lung cancer and other ailments.
And if that’s not enough… the guy still thinks asbestos is a pretty good idea. I recommend he go breathe some in. After all, it’s not dangerous. What harm could there be?
Ah yes, John. Can’t deal with the science, so ad hom is his only response.
I’ll take Steve Milloy over the Science Guy every day of the week.
toilet
against the established fact or the science IS settled
I can shorten those 2 statements for you john, BULLSH1T pretty well covers it
recent studies suggest 70% of cancers are “chance” happening, and not attributable to outside effects
Nothing wrong with a healthy intake of low fat fresh meat protein – processed meat that has little more than salt and spices is fine too – other food chemistry in it – not so sure – I avoid it,
Stick to fresh venison chops, moose roasts and wild goose fricassee – great lean protein from all natural sources. When that runs out I have a beef producer I buy a 1/4 side from now and then.
Processed meats cause cancer?
That’s BALONEY!!
Seriously, is life even worth living absent BACON? Seriously?
Making way for Sharia law.
John is an English major.
At times like this, it becomes very apparent. You know, times when facts, logic and actual numbers are involved.
Because what is most important about anything is how you feeeeeel about it.
Stand ready to start hearing about the new MEAT tax. Because MEAT is sinful, like tobacco and alcohol. That dirty b@st@rd Steve Milloy probably takes money from Big Meat too.
My only question is how much did PETA and similar other animal rights groups pay the WHO to come up with this study of BS