MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8202188.stm
Is there nothing left that some "expert" or other hasn't decided will kill us? Can anyone name a foodstuff that doesn't have some "scientist" warning that too much or too little of it is potentially fatal?
Last week we had two reports on consecutive days. The first said that red wine was likely to cause cancer (doesn't everything?) and we should be drinking less of it. Next day we were told that red wine promoted strong bones, and we should be drinking more of it.
And we pay these people to make such stupid statements!
Processed Food Not All That Good For You Shock! 🙄
[i]And we pay these people to make such stupid statements! [/i]
No, what you're complaining about are science reporters from various media outlets trying to divide the world of food into "things that will give you cancer" and "things that will prevent you getting cancer" It's never that straight forward. If you want to know what this report actually said, read it, instead of some-ones interpretation of a press release about a report...
Well said nickc
So what they are saying that consuming too much or too little of something may harm you either way? Sounds like a balanced diet is the way forward afterall. 🙄
Chocolate can kill as well, but I believe you would have to consume about 22lbs of the stuff in one sitting to achieve lethal dosage.
No, they're suggesting that processed meat, if eaten in significant quantities over decades can [i]raise the risk[/i] (my italics) of bowel cancer. In other words eating lots of bacon makes it more likely that you may get bowel cancer.
What it doesn't say is that bacon gives you cancer...
think of it as a Karmic revenge for the animals involved...
Nothing to see here, carry on.
As Nickc says it is a reporters interpretation of a full academic paper of some sort, problem is the standard of such papers is incredibly varied from utter rubbish to groundbreaking. There is no way for anyone to know how valid this is unless they choose to read the paper themselves and get the real data.
[i]I believe you would have to consume about 22lbs of the stuff in one sitting to achieve lethal dosage.[/i]
I reckon that's doable, maybe Christmas day while you're waiting for lunch?
So it does not actually mention pork pies from E Gange & Son of Slaithwaite, so that all that matters to me. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Ok, my gf is a physio. A while back a paper was published looking at difference between hands on physio (eg massage/manips) vs verbal based instruction/exercise advice in the treatment of a particular kind of back pain. Study found that both groups improved, but that there was little difference between the groups who had receieved the two approaches.
Mainstream media reported this as
, which was completely wrong and misleading.Physiotherapy does not help backpain
Reporter either missed or chose to ignore the fact that both groups HAD received physio, and both groups HAD improved.
Point is mainstream media are looking for the attention grabbing headlines, and are generally not trained/interested in reading scientific/academic studies and undersatnding their conclusions.
Why do we get all these warnings when actually the government could do with us all popping our clogs 5 or so years into retirement?