search results matching tag: meat

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (445)     Sift Talk (23)     Blogs (35)     Comments (1000)   

BACON CAUSES CANCER!!!! MCDONALDS IS GIVING FREE CANCER!

Mordhaus says...

The cancer arm of the World Health Organization has some serious concerns about some of Americans’ favorite foods. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies processed meat as a carcinogen, something that causes cancer. And it classifies red meat as a probable carcinogen, something that probably causes cancer.

Processed meat includes hot dogs, ham, bacon, sausage, and some deli meats. It refers to meat that has been treated in some way to preserve or flavor it. Processes include salting, curing, fermenting, and smoking. Red meat includes beef, pork, lamb, and goat.

Twenty-two experts from 10 countries reviewed more than 800 studies to reach their conclusions. They found that eating 50 grams of processed meat every day increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%. That’s the equivalent of about 4 strips of bacon or 1 hot dog. For red meat, there was evidence of increased risk of colorectal, pancreatic, and prostate cancer.

Overall, the lifetime risk of someone developing colon cancer is 5%. To put the numbers into perspective, the increased risk from eating the amount of processed meat in the study would raise average lifetime risk to almost 6%.

----------------------------

Read the study. The average raises almost 1 percent. This was copied straight from https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/hot-dogs-hamburgers-bacon.html.

transmorpher said:

Also your stats are way off it's not 1% it's 18% for every 50g according to the WHO after reviewing 800 studies.

https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr240_E.pdf


Lovely of you to claim propaganda, but of course, the bias is all yours here - or are you going to tell me you don't enjoy bacon?

Is Butter Really Back? What the Science Says

newtboy says...

Wow. Those are astonishingly good numbers and, considering what you eat, are conclusive enough that these foods can be eaten in a heart healthy diet with great results even without excessive exercise.

I'm curious what the numbers are in our Vegan friend's blood, I seriously doubt they would be better than yours.

It's not surprising, but is disappointing to me that he discounted your numbers as inconclusive and/or unique natural anomalies, since they don't support his 'animal products are deadly poison for all people' claims.

I would theorize that the stress caused by worrying incessantly over what you (and others) eat is far more dangerous than the health effects of all but the worst, most highly processed foods....maybe worse than any foods.

Edit: BTW, I'm 48...going on 13, and I had my blood tested last summer....I didn't memorize my numbers, but the doctor said they were all well within the safe/healthy range so I didn't feel a need to keep track. I don't eat eggs, but I make up for it with extra bacon and butter, and meat at nearly every meal (but I only eat one meal a day).

Mordhaus said:

They were arguing over which foods were healthy and unhealthy around the time I was born. I suspect such arguments will continue after I am dead.

I eat butter. I eat eggs. I eat bacon. I don't even exercise that much.

I'm 45, almost 46.

My HDL as tested a month ago was 46. My LDL was 29. My Triglycerides were 121.

USDA: Eggs are NOT Healthy or Safe to eat

newtboy says...

Um....earth dollars are fine to fund your trip off earth....you'll have to get your own Vega spending money.
Extinctions today are 99% from habitat destruction, not the bush meat trade.

Eat some protein, your brain isn't working

transmorpher said:

Earth dollars are no good I'm afraid :-)

They will be worthless since the people of earth are eating their way to extinction. (see Dr. Richard Oppenlander speaking to the EU)

The First Extinction of 2019 Has Already Happened

transmorpher says...

It's pretty clear the governments can't get their shit together, so it is up to us as individuals to drive the change.

If you want to do your part to combat climate change, then any reduction in products that come from animal farming is going to decrease your carbon (and methane) foot print.

e.g. Go for the bean burrito with guac or tahani dressing, instead of a beef and cheese burrito.

Go for the coconut/soy/almond ice cream instead.

Watch the COWSPIRACY documentary on Netflix, and look up Dr. Richard Oppenlander speaking to the EU parliament.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet

This Is Your Brain On Stale Air

transmorpher says...

It's pretty clear the governments can't get their shit together, so it is up to us as individuals to drive the change.

If you want to do your part to combat climate change, then any reduction in products that come from animal farming is going to decrease your carbon (and methane) foot print.

e.g. Go for the bean burrito with guac or tahani dressing, instead of a beef and cheese burrito.

Go for the coconut/soy/almond ice cream instead.

Watch the COWSPIRACY documentary on Netflix, and look up Dr. Richard Oppenlander speaking to the EU parliament.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2010/jun/02/un-report-meat-free-diet

We Believe: The Best Men Can Be - Gillette Ad

wtfcaniuse says...

I don't understand the mentality that respect equals weakness.

I'm also curious as to whether mechanical skill makes someone more manly. Where do I find the list that ranks manly activities? How do I figure out my manliness quotient and what is the threshold for turning into a soyboy? Is it reversible by eating some red meat or watching rambo?

I would think fishing would be manly but where does fly fishing stand? Surely all that swishing and fucking about is classic soyboyism? May as well be doing rhythmic gymnastics. Does eating a fish caught when fly fishing negate the method of fishing used?

So many questions, why didn't they teach me this in school!?

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

newtboy says...

But with population increases, even if it were up to 7% after decades, there wouldn't be a loss of business, just a slower increase, which still might be enough....but I think 7% is greatly inflated and includes non vegans and part time vegans who claim they are devout.

I think you're closer to the truth with your last. Free advertising, and vegans will flock to the business because they have so few businesses serving them, making them a good type of customer to have (at least until they start driving away non vegans with their anti-meat diatribes).

transmorpher said:

Not so much non-vegans, but companies that sell non vegan products are viewing it as a loss of revenue. Even a 7% drop in sales is a lot of money on a country sized scale. They're constantly putting industry sponsored spokes people on talk TV to tell you that being vegan will make your dick fly off like gluten :-)

Particularly primary agriculture industries. Companies further up the consumer chain just end up selling a vegan line of their product, so they aren't so worried about it - which is also why I'm more inclined to believe that the figure is closer to 7%, as I'm seeing even mainstream companies sell non-dairy variants of their flagship ice cream, and large pizza chains with vegan pizzas on their menus. I'd imagine it wouldn't be worth their while unless they had some good numbers to go by, and would otherwise leave it to niche companies.

But it could also just be that they've discovered that vegans will basically do their brand promotions for free over social media, and could just be exploiting that. (Every time a company releases a vegan version of X, a Facebook storm ensues, and companies like free advertising)

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

newtboy says...

Lol. Good point.....dirty hippies. ;-)

Um....what? Vegans should want to avoid them almost as much as the hunter's helper and slaughterhouse sucker brand lozenges, not flock to the brand marketed at meat harvesters.

Um...really? You think non vegans fear a vegan culinary takeover or something enough to falsify studies/polls? That's hilarious.
As to the 7% number, even vegan organizations in Britain disagree, as does Wiki....
According to a 2018 survey by Comparethemarket.com, the number of people who identify as vegans in the United Kingdom has risen to over 3.5 million, which is approximately seven percent of the population, and environmental concerns were a major factor in this development.[140] However, doubt was cast on this inflated figure by the UK-based Vegan Society, who perform their own regular survey: the Vegan Society themselves found in 2018 that there were 600,000 vegans in Great Britain (1.16%), which is a dramatic increase on previous figures.[141][142]
United States: Estimates of vegans in the U.S. vary from 2% (Gallup, 2012)[143] to 0.5% (Faunalytics, 2014). According to the latter, 70% of those who adopted a vegan diet abandoned it.

transmorpher said:

Clearly the statistics are stacked because we all know real vegans don't have jobs

I'd take the Fisherman's Friend study with a grain of salt :-) For starters it's going to be a biased sample, and for all we know it just means sick vegans prefer to buy Fisherman's Friend Lozengers than non-vegans.

They are going really hard with fear mongering in the UK, because veganism is taking hold - 7% of the population is now vegan :-)

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

newtboy says...

True enough about Maasai, 44+- sucks no matter what kills you.
I don't believe they have perfect dietary health, but do think they indicate genetics play a huge roll in how we process foods.

My short research indicated 1/2 serving of seafood per day on average....whatever percentage that comes out to doesn't bother me....plus occasional pork.

My grandmother ate meat almost daily and lived to days from 97, healthy the whole time except for lung issues the last years. Anecdotal evidence can be misleading.

Fewer animal foods isn't none. I agree, average Americans could probably benefit from cutting their meat consumption in half or more, but none at all wouldn't be healthier for most people.

I say the lack of top athletes who are vegan contradicts your last theory. Humans are omnivores and work best as such.

transmorpher said:

At a life expectancy of 44 heart-disease for the Masaai is the least of their concerns.... but the it's also a myth that they have perfect health on beef https://nutritionstudies.org/masai-and-inuit-high-protein-diets-a-closer-look/

Traditional Okinawan's eat very little fish - less than 6% of their diet is animal products. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vnV4EGU1K4

These are the people who we now see living to well over 100 years old. Where as modern Okinawa's have a far worse life expectancy now that they have more animal foods in their diet.

Both of these cultures are further examples of how fewer animal foods in the diet always has better health outcomes.

And thanks to the vegan 7th Day Adventists in Loma Linda, we know that zero animal products has the best health outcomes.

This is a very strong indication that animal products are obsolete in the human diet.

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

newtboy says...

Maasai do not have heart disease or cholesterol problems attributed to red meat even though they eat almost exclusively cattle. Leading causes of death include pneumonia and diarrhoea, followed by other diseases not diet related issues.

Yes, people who cut out vegetables like Inuit have issues just like those who cut meat without going to extremes to replace what they're lacking, and most don't. You must be joking using them as an example of fish inclusive diets.
People with diets high in fish like Okinawans (1/2 an American sized serving per day isn't little to me, that's every other day having a full fish meal) that include other meat in moderation and is vegetable based are the healthiest in studies, as I indicated.

transmorpher said:

Both of your examples are demonstrably false.

Masaai have a life expectancy of what 44? http://www.bbc.co.uk/northamptonshire/features/2004/maasai/maasai_03.shtml


Who eats the most fish in the world? (factory farm cows actually) but in the human population, it's the Inuits. And they have the worst health of any people on earth. So clearly fish aren't the thing bringing the health. Their health actually gets better when they go to a standard american diet. that's how bad eating fresh wild caught fish is.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LvGiiZyn-M

Okinawans have the opposite diet of the Inuits - mostly plants, and little amounts of fish, and they have the opposite health of the Inuits too.

Less fish and more plants = better health. Therefore fish cannot be a health food.


It's also VERY easy to meet all of your nutritional needs as a vegan, yeah those hippie dippy idiots that eat all raw foods are asking for trouble, but anyone who eats regular food with grains, beans, fruit, nuts and vegetables will get everything they need. A few fortifided foods here and there and no supplements are required. (and please don't pretend like vegans are the only ones eating fortified foods- salt is fortified with iodine, and dairy is fortified with vitamin D by US law). Anyway, point is the cheapest and easiest foods to cook are the healthiest ones - the same foods that everyone in the bluezones eats, and nobody is saying those bluezone foods are expensive or hard to make.

That's what this whole video is about, identifying the foods that are health promoting, and in vegans and in Mediterranean diets (and other bluezones diets) it's the exact same foods that are providing the health. The plants, the cheap, easy to cook and readily available plants.

I'll even level with you, there's a lot of stupid people out there who happen to be vegan and they say a lot of stupid crap, but everything I post is backed up by science. I went vegan because of the health science, the ethics to me came later (perhaps I'm a bit slow, because I didn't want to see the ethics, while I was part of the system, but that's a story for another time )

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

transmorpher says...

He did mention fish/white meat, however he was making the point that meats aren't what is making them healthy - the Mediterraneans are healthy despite these animal foods. They are healthy because of the large intake of whole plant foods, as is the case in Japan.

And we know this, because within Japan itself there's a clear relationship between health, and amount of animal products consumed. The traditional Okinawan diet (the place which has the most centenarians int he world) is just 6% calories from animal products, the rest being from sweet potato and rice and veg. Where as mainland Japan where they eat more animal products they don't do as well as their Okinawan neighbors.

This relationship of animal food intake & rates of chronic diseases works on a local level or a global level. Less is always better, all the way to none (Loma Linda 7th day Adventists many of which are vegan by religion tend do the best out of all of the blue zones, when it comes to chronic disease).



------


Omega 3 is present in so many plant foods - such as flaxseed/linseed, hemp, chia, and even sea algae (which is where the fish get their omega 3 from)

The benefit of getting omega 3 from plant sources means almost no saturated fat, no cholesterol, no mercury, no IGF-1 raising protein structures (and no antibiotics if you are eating farmed fish). Also they say the ocean will be fishless by 2048..... (which also coincides with the Post Atomic Horror era for the Trekkies out there lol)

Fish also don't have any fiber, (the one macro nutrient everyone pretends doesn't exist, and most people are deficient in). Stay regular and prevent diverticulitis/diverticulitis, and avoid hemorrhoids, and even varicose veins.

Flax also contains lignans which prevents/treats prostate cancer https://www.healthline.com/health/prostate-cancer/flaxseed-and-prostate-cancer.


You just get so much more nutrition out of plants over all. Animal products tend to have a higher amount of a single compound or nutrient, but they have a lot of baggage with it. It's like buying a car, you don't necessarily want the one with the biggest engine, the total package is what's important.


------

Whether or not Barnard is a vegan shill, doesn't change the nutritional profiles of foods as shown above.

It also doesn't change the fact he looks, acts and speaks amazing for someone that's 65 years old - clearly putting his theory into practice with wonderful results. And while that is anecdotal, that's certainly something nobody would say about Atkins, or Loran Cordain (Paleo advocate) or Jimmy Moore (Keto advocate), who all look like they could drop dead any minute (and Atkins literally did drop dead).

Mordhaus said:

Eating fish and poultry at least twice a week is conspicuously left off the Mediterranean Diet list here.

Fatty fish — such as mackerel, lake trout, herring, sardines, albacore tuna and salmon — are rich sources of omega-3 fatty acids. Fish is eaten on a regular basis in the Mediterranean diet.

Seems from everything I see, seafood seems to be pretty predominant in Japanese diet intake, the other diet he mentioned in comparison.

So, I figured, let me look up some info on the Dr. presenting here. Neal Barnard is a well known Vegan and founding president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.

Intriguing, no? Then I looked up the PCRM he is the founding president of (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicians_Committee_for_Responsible_Medicine). OMG, they just happen to be a non-profit research and advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., which promotes a vegan diet, preventive medicine, and alternatives to animal research, and encourages what it describes as "higher standards of ethics and effectiveness in research." Its tax filing shows its activities as "prevention of cruelty to animals."

So it is a combination of a Vegan diet promotional group AND PETA. It also seems that they don't mind omitting parts of 'competing' diets to promote their own. Basically this is the equivalent of a organization like Atkins having a doctor like Iris Shai, RD, PhD, show that a low-carbohydrate diet like Atkins had a more favorable effect on blood lipid levels than both the Mediterranean diet or a low–fat diet.

Obviously she must be right, she is a doctor and other doctors support her. So this must mean all the other doctors and diets are wrong, including this one, right?

I'm calling this *propaganda, sorry.

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

transmorpher says...

You guys think that vegans are lying?

It's a shame you do not scrutinize the sellers of these products, as much as you do with vegans - Where is the *they lied to us* comments from the meat eaters about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83q9oamxmvQ

Clearly blatant number fudging, but people are happy to overlook it because vegans are the annoying ones right?

Every single study that shows animal products are good, or neutral are funded by the people that sell them. I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO FIND A STUDY THAT SHOWS ADDING ANY ANIMAL PRODUCT TO A DIET MAKES IT HEALTHIER - WHICH ISN'T TIED/LINKED TO THE INDUSTRY. In 5 years I'm yet to find one, and almost all of them have very audacious number fudging and statistic manipulation like the above egg study.

Now compare that to the 400 studies that came out last year showing meat has detrimental effects for us...... not coming from vegans. (and this happens each and every year, since 1970).



(There are also plenty of doctors who aren't vegans (like John McDougall, Caldwell Esselstyn, Dean Ornish) who all make very strong points about avoiding animal products.) These guys still eat meat on special occasions, so clearly not vegan.

Vegan Diet or Mediterranean Diet: Which Is Healthier?

newtboy says...

Indeed....
In this interview Neal Barnard admits he exaggerates and lies to get people to consider going vegan.....
https://www.livekindly.co/dr-neal-barnard-accused-cherry-picking-studies-netflixs-health/

Edit:
Far from the first time, I have yet to hear a vegan doctor who wasn't a bold faced liar about the science. One claimed the WHO had declared eating moderate levels of red meat more dangerous than smoking cigarettes when in fact the study he cited was for high consumption of highly processed cured meats and only said they appear to be carcinogenic and need more study, they did not make a comparison with cigarettes or rate the danger levels, but vegans still make that false claim based on these "doctors'" exaggerated claims because it seems being vegan rots your brain.

Mordhaus said:

Vegans seem to lie a bit sometimes

Are The Bees Ok Now?

newtboy says...

Lol..no.
CCD is barely studied in wild hives because it's not been seen in the wild in statistically meaningful numbers, and it's much more of a problem for commercial hives because they move, making them more prone to weakness and diseases, they are kept together, making them more prone to parasites like nosema and Varroa mites and disease spreading problems like the Israeli virus, and they are constantly in contact with crops sprayed with various pesticides weakening and confusing them. Wild hives don't have these extra deleterious factors, so are far less effected by CCD if at all, and are not noticeably effected by most if not all commercial or hobby beekeeping that targets human agriculture, not native flowers. I kept a hive of bees for years to pollinate my orchard, so I checked on this stuff before jumping in.

Commericalized bee operations (commercial pollinators who's byproducts are honey/bees wax/pollen/royal jelly/bee venom/and bees themselves) don't displace natives. If there were native bees pollinating the crops they are hired to come pollinate, there wouldn't be a commercial bee industry. Honey is mostly a byproduct of the pollination industry, without which America at least would starve. Native bees simply can't pollinate at the industrial scale and timetables required for your vegetables, so without commercial beekeepers we'll all have to eat more meat.

transmorpher said:

lol Hank Green makes yet another video to tell us he doesn't know about *insert topic* I'm starting to think it's his way of telling himself he doesn't have to do anything to help.

We know exactly why CCD happens https://youtu.be/lKKVznGTni0?t=35

TL:DW

Commericalized bee operations (to sell honey/bees wax etc) ends up affecting pollinating species of bees in the wild. As per usual, industrialized animal farming screws up the environment.

Even local bee farming displaces and infects the wild populations, so all honey is bad.


Leave the honey to Winnie the Pooh, and swap your honey out for maple syrup or agave nectar or rice syrup etc, and this whole thing stops.

Or make your own date paste. Bit of water, bit of dates, blend the crap out of it. It's delicious on anything. Particularly with peanut butter.

Who Needs Wingsuits?

transmorpher says...

I've done enough arguing with you in the past to know not to waste my time making a proper response. I know you're not interested in the sources, you just want to nitpick them.

For anyone that's not in the cattle business and gets triggered as fuck like this guy....just google for plant-based diet arthritis, and it's pretty clear it's what helped this diver HE EVEN SAYS IT HIMSELF, and just about everyone else has the same results, being able to switch their arthritis pain on and off like a light switch by adding/removing dairy and meat.

newtboy said:

No, sorry, ditching meat and dairy didn't cure his arthritis. It's likely that swimming and training to freedive relieved his symptoms by effectively oxygenating his blood more efficiently and to higher levels. There is no cure for arthritis.

Free diving requires excessively high iron levels in your blood, which is exceptionally difficult to achieve on a vegetarian or vegan diet. That's why very few top ranked freedivers (or other top ranked athletes) are vegan instead of all of them.

True, vegetables don't have cholesterol, but poly and monounsaturated fats they do contain can still raise human cholesterol levels when over consumed. It's just not as simple as plant good, meat bad.

No clue where you get this 20% boost of O2 use efficiency claim....have any references or even explanations? It contradicts everything I find that shows only around 1/2 the iron found in those few vegetables that contain iron is useable by the body unlike iron found in dark and red meats.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon