Poll: Meat causes cancer :O | What will you do? | Human Evolution vs. Contemporary Science?

[MrFalconfly]

snip

If not humans, then some other omnivore or carnivore (say a wolf, or in the case of Africa a lion, or Hyena).

Just because it doesn't strictly have to happen because of humans, doesn't mean it isn't natural if humans happen to do it.

 

[Areloch]

Firstly:

https://xkcd.com/882

Yes, some scientists tweak P-values making some research useless because it might be random. In this case we know the mechanism, we can test it in cell cultures and we can see a clear correlation based on hundreds of thousands patients.

The comic was more intended to point at how media tends to over-play "dramatic" discoveries, not that scientists tweak results to make them seem jucier - though that can happen too sometimes.

I apologize in advance for this wall of text, but you have some misunderstandings that I would like to comment on. I understand if this is a bit too heavy reading.

As for the part about telomers you are making a mistake in interpreting it. Cancerous mutations are related to them, but in the complete other end of the spectrum. Some of our cells have the enzyme telomerase which prevents telomers from shortening. This is critical in our reproductive system and production of stem cells in the bone marrow. In cancer cells telomerase is most often active resulting in maintenance of the telomers which makes them able to divide indefinitely which is why cells with telomerase activity are called immortal.

Cancer is most commonly caused by mutation of certain key genes called pro-oncogenes or oncogenes. p53 is a gene which is important for regulating cell division. A mutation of that will result in a reduced ability to stop cell division in damaged cells, which is the case in some cancers. A mutation may cause increased activity of a mitogen (a gene which initiates cell division) causing cancer. In some cases there are even fused together making an entirely new gene (see the Philadelphia chromosome and BCR-Abl) which also enhances the activity of a cell. The worst kinds of mutations are those that affects the ability to repair mutations.

The sources of mutations are plentiful. Our DNA gets damaged all the time, most of the time it's fixed. The one that it's completely impossible to avoid is that our DNA replication machinery isn't perfect. The error rate is less than 1 in 10000000 which sounds extremely little, but our DNA is composed of more than 3000000000 base pairs meaning that you can end up with 300 mistakes every time a cell divides (with the maximum error rate). Most of these will be more or less harmless, others will be fixed, some cells will be prevented from dividing and some cells will die.

The exact consequence of the shortening telomers is actually disputed. We know there is a correlation between the telomers shortening and aging making us suspect that there is some regulation in rate of cell division and DNA damage due to it, but these are all hypotheses.


I hope I managed to clear up some things.

I'm not a biologist or a doctor(though my friend is and I enjoy talking to him about medical things), though I do enjoy skimming medical articles and the like, so my knowledge on the subject is broad strokes and thus subject to inaccuracies. I do appreciate you throwing in more detailed information.

The thrust of my point was that mutations happen to cells all the time, and that's where most cancer action comes from. Even basic reproductive and metabolic processes of the cells that compose your body can lead to it, and thus worrying about how meat, or any other number of low-order carcinogens can minutely increase the CHANCE of it happening is kind of a wasted effort. Obviously there's lots of stuff that is horribly carcinogenic and should be stayed away from, but it sounds like meat merely has solid proof that it increases the chances, not that the increase of the chance itself is particularly big.

And yeah, when you consider just how many cells are in the body, and how it takes some relatively specific damage to certain parts of the DNA sequence to kick off cancerous behaviors, it's pretty impressive how well the body keeps itself in check. Which just ties back to the "Guys, it's really probably not as bad as it's being made out to be"

As for the telomeres, yeah, that entire thing is kind of in a vague spot. As far as I'd read it seems to have a pretty solid prospect(though not much concrete proof) as being tied to cells becoming less ideal over time (as mutations occur, certain cells or cell factories begin to slow or shut down, such as the case for the cells that help maintain bones which is why old folks have much more brittle bones, even if they're keeping up on their nutrients).

I'll have to read on that more.

Edit: fixed quotes

 

[Dizchu]

Also, my point still stands. For something beautiful to live something else had to die.

The problem with the consumption of meat isn't necessarily that animals have to die to provide the meat, but the conditions in which they live. Battery farming is essentially a hundred Holocausts happening simultaneously. This isn't an exaggeration, chickens alone outnumber humans by about 8-10 times and the sole reason for their prevalence is for industrial farming. I find it interesting how even meat eaters are repulsed by footage of battery farms, yet they continue using them. There's nothing "beautiful" about it, no other animal does this.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Also, my point still stands. For something beautiful to live something else had to die.

The problem with the consumption of meat isn't necessarily that animals have to die to provide the meat, but the conditions in which they live. Battery farming is essentially a hundred Holocausts happening simultaneously. This isn't an exaggeration, chickens alone outnumber humans by about 8-10 times and the sole reason for their prevalence is for industrial farming. I find it interesting how even meat eaters are repulsed by footage of battery farms, yet they continue using them. There's nothing "beautiful" about it, no other animal does this.

In which case I present you this.

http://www.agricultureandfood.dk/Danish_Agriculture_and_Food/Animal_welfare.aspx

Just because conditions in the US are appalling, doesn't mean I'm guilty of maintaining it.

Especially considering, I can't even buy US produce (most of it isn't compliant with EU standards because of pesticides, and of cause animal welfare, and Denmark is even more strict in both of those areas).

EDIT:

I'm not saying we're absolute saints here, but at least it isn't the factory-floor hells like in the US, or even in the rest of the EU.

EDIT:EDIT:

You know what really pisses me off?

The self-righteous pontifications of the British press.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/denmark-bans-halal-and-kosher-slaughter-as-minister-says-animal-rights-come-before-religion-9135580.html

"Ooh lookie here, a country that killed a giraffe and showed the kids what such a creature looks like inside, dares to speak about animal welfare"

I firmly believe that these, so-called, journalists (scheisters really) would be against putting down my cat like we did when it suffered from an incurable disease that made every day a living hell for it.

I will not be lectured by a these kinds of twats who get wobbly-knee'd because an animal has "cute eyes" or a "name".

 

[GrumbleGrump]

You know what the leading cause of cancer is? Being alive.

Yup, that's pretty much it. I live in a big city where breathing is pretty much equivalent to smoking so PBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

 

[MHR]

Came here just to click the "I'm a vegetarian so HA!" button
*high-fives other person who chose that option*

Hi-Five, bro!

*Smack*

 

[Soviet Heavy]

It'll give me as much cancer as if I ate fifty big macs made me fat.

 

[Aeshi]

Who cares? Everything causes cancer these days. I'm surprised our planet hasn't just poofed up into one giant tumor.

 

[Lightknight]

It is actually possible that it isn't meat that is causing cancer but rather the fact that it is competing for produce in your diet. People who eat highly processed meats may also be more likely to forego healthy salads and other things that would be high in anti-oxidants.

Regardless, the increase risk is minimal at best. Not even close to the ballpark of smoking. Different field altogether. It raises it by a factor of like 1.1 they think. Incredibly minor and they aren't accounting for other factors like the one I mentioned. This is also only for colon cancer which has been dropping steadily over the past decades despite processed foods only increasing.

So Lucy gots some explaining to do.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

I'm a vegetarian, so it doesn't really affect me. Even if I wasn't, I wouldn't really care. Used to smoke a pack a day of cigarettes, and I only quit to get a better lung capacity for the line of work I'm pursuing, not out of caring much about my long-term health.

 

[Leg End]

All I heard was "blah blah blah cancer blah tasty".
Cancer be tasty.

 

[RJ 17]

The thing I love about studies like this is that all it "proves" is one thing:

Everything you know and love will kill you with cancer. It's just going to happen, might as well get used to the idea.

 

[-Ezio-]

a life without bacon is no life at all.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Sounds like another scare tactic to me.
Every few months there's something diffirent that supposedly causes cancer, making it highly unbelieveable.

 

[Lightknight]

Again, has anyone postulated whether or not meat is merely competing with high antioxidant options on the plate and ergo increasing the risk of cancer by reducing the consumption of things that would otherwise assist in reducing the risk of cancer?

Additionally, would the people who regularly eat highly processed meats (the meats at the center of this study rather than red meat) be the sort of people who also take less care of their dietary intake?

There are significant other explanations that would drastically change the interpretation of the data. It is disturbing to see a correlation presented as though it were causative.

 

[RJ 17]

Again, has anyone postulated whether or not meat is merely competing with high antioxidant options on the plate and ergo increasing the risk of cancer by reducing the consumption of things that would otherwise assist in reducing the risk of cancer?

Additionally, would the people who regularly eat highly processed meats (the meats at the center of this study rather than red meat) be the sort of people who also take less care of their dietary intake?

There are significant other explanations that would drastically change the interpretation of the data. It is disturbing to see a correlation presented as though it were causative.

The problem with that is that you're attempting to apply "logic" to a study that clearly had a goal of demonizing meat.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Again, has anyone postulated whether or not meat is merely competing with high antioxidant options on the plate and ergo increasing the risk of cancer by reducing the consumption of things that would otherwise assist in reducing the risk of cancer?

Additionally, would the people who regularly eat highly processed meats (the meats at the center of this study rather than red meat) be the sort of people who also take less care of their dietary intake?

There are significant other explanations that would drastically change the interpretation of the data. It is disturbing to see a correlation presented as though it were causative.

Interestingly enough, apparently anti-oxidants are BAD for you if you already HAVE Cancer. They accelerate it.

 

[MonsterCrit]

You know what? This makes me less worried. Now that there's no way for me to avoid getting cancer from everything, I don't have to bother trying anymore.

LOL for real. Look. SOmething is gonna kill me. I might as well enjoy it. Vegetables will also cause cancer and many fruits are actually poisonous if consumed exclusively for long periods of time.

Also note the word 'probably' which basically means they can't really prove it doesn't. Besides, they don't spoecifically say what form of cancer is caused. Because cancer isn't one disease any more than canines are just one species. There are many different subvarieties and each one while sharing certain pathologies is unique.

Heck for all the fear of cancer, it's not the leading killer in any part of the world. Violence and car accidents far out pace cancer... heck you'd be more right to be worried about falling in the bath or down stairs.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Just living by itself causes cancer. I'm pretty sure reading all those cancerous topics about what gives you cancer does too.

My grandmother lived to be 97 while eating plenty of real freaking bad stuff and often very little at all when the second world war hit. I don't intend to grow older than that unless some miraculous science comes out.

So fuck that.