Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Milk or no Milk (Dairy vs. no Dairy Diet?)

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Mr.MojoRisin' View Post
    Wrong.

    http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/

    7. Red meat was classified as Group 2A, probably carcinogenic to humans. What does this mean exactly?

    "In the case of red meat, the classification is based on limited evidence from epidemiological studies showing positive associations between eating red meat and developing colorectal cancer as well as strong mechanistic evidence."

    Cholesterol doesn't cause plagues.

    Red meat contains cholesterol. This is a fact. It is also a fact that we need cholesterol from our diet to live.

    What amount of red meat do you believe is too much ie causes health problems. Is once a week too much, 3x per week? What?
    I jus want to point out.
    "as well as strong mechanistic evidence."

    we know exactly what mechanisms are going on that causes cancer.

    And then again, show me any study that refutes the WHO foundings.


    dietary raises your serum cholesterol and therefore Cholesterol causes plague.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3603726/


    We do NOT need dietary Cholesterol in our diet.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Furn View Post
      A recent study linked being tall with Prostate Cancer. Just saying.Population studies that don't prove a cause and effect must be taken with a grain of salt.

      The first rule of toxicology is the dose makes the poison.

      Anything in a high enough dose will kill you and anything in a small enough dose will be perfectly safe, so you can't straight out say this is bad for you and this is good for you.

      You have to clarify how much and in what context. Drinking a gallon of milk a day isn't going to be great for you but having a glass or two is probably fine.

      Dietary Cholesterol is ALWAYS bad. Just because you don't die smoking one cigarettes does not mean it is suddenly healthy.

      Meat is not good for you.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Mr.MojoRisin' View Post
        I don't think anyone will argue against processed meat being bad for you. Unless they work in a deli or some ****.

        So you accept the foundings on processed meat that the WHO had but not on red meat?

        We have mechanistic data on how LDL-CHolesterol causes heart disease. How high doses of Methionine grows cancer cells.

        What are high sources of both of these? Animal products.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by BuakawBanchamek View Post
          Dietary Cholesterol is ALWAYS bad. Just because you don't die smoking one cigarettes does not mean it is suddenly healthy.

          Meat is not good for you.
          So you think 1 nanogram of cholesterol a year would have a negative effect on your health ?

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Redd Foxx View Post
            Do you need me to provide a source if I say water is wet?
            Green K...LOL. I'm going to steal that quote and use it some time.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Furn View Post
              So you think 1 nanogram of cholesterol a year would have a negative effect on your health ?
              No. And eating a steak like once a month won't have any long term or mid term health effects.

              But the thing is, animal products are extremely high in cholesterol.
              Eating it regulary will definitely have health effects unless you have some genetic mutation which protects your blood cholesterol from raising.

              And let's be honest you and the majority of people do not eat " a nanogram once a year" nor once a month meat. I'd guess you, just like others, have very large amounts of your total calories consisting of animal products.
              Last edited by BuakawBanchamek; 07-19-2017, 05:51 AM.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by jaded View Post
                Green K...LOL. I'm going to steal that quote and use it some time.
                Yeah sounding like an idiot while debating about science sure is a cool thing to pick up.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by BuakawBanchamek View Post
                  So you accept the foundings on processed meat that the WHO had but not on red meat?

                  We have mechanistic data on how LDL-CHolesterol causes heart disease. How high doses of Methionine grows cancer cells.

                  What are high sources of both of these? Animal products.
                  The WHO said themselves that it was limited evidence. Therefore inconclusive.

                  It's all about portion control. To say we shouldn't eat meat is to essentially deny science. Our teeth and digestive system shows traits characteristic of omnivores.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by BuakawBanchamek View Post
                    I jus want to point out.
                    "as well as strong mechanistic evidence."

                    we know exactly what mechanisms are going on that causes cancer.

                    And then again, show me any study that refutes the WHO foundings.


                    dietary raises your serum cholesterol and therefore Cholesterol causes plague.

                    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3603726/


                    We do NOT need dietary Cholesterol in our diet.
                    You don't know what you are talking about.

                    Mechanistic evidence is just an inference. All experiments lead to inferences. They said limited evidence therefore there is limited evidence. If it was absolute then they wouldn't have put that in there.

                    Use your head.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Mr.MojoRisin' View Post
                      The WHO said themselves that it was limited evidence. Therefore inconclusive.

                      It's all about portion control. To say we shouldn't eat meat is to essentially deny science. Our teeth and digestive system shows traits characteristic of omnivores.
                      I think this is driving too much into WHO being the only research we have.

                      "To say we shouldn't eat meat is to essentially deny science"
                      - What science. Tell me any scientific research that shows
                      meat has health benefits that you can only get from eating meat.
                      Show me any research that shows saturated fat, LDL-Cholesterol, large amounts of Methionine is completely harmless.

                      "It's all about portion control." - Tell me how much is portion control. How much meat is it safe to eat before you increase your risk of all cause mortality?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP