CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:12
Arguments:29
Total Votes:12
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 WHO says processed and red meats could increase the risk of several cancers. (11)

Debate Creator

Iulmi(252) pic



WHO says processed and red meats could increase the risk of several cancers.

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

What's your opinion on the issue? Are you going to control more the consumption of this kind of meats?
Add New Argument
2 points

Life is a terminal disease. Keep eating meat and enjoy.

1 point

After evaluating 800 studies on the subject, twenty two experts from around the world were not able to establish a causal relationship between red meat or processed meats and any type of cancer. What they have is correlation rather than causality. In other words: This happened, then that happened, so maybe this caused that. Pretty weak science.

J-Roc77(70) Clarified
2 points

http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2015/pdfs/pr240_E.pdf

Red meat

After thoroughly reviewing the accumulated scientific literature, a Working Group of 22 experts from 10 countries convened by the IARC Monographs Programme classified the consumption of red meat as probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2A), based on limited evidence that the consumption of red meat causes cancer in humans and strong mechanistic evidence supporting a carcinogenic effect.

This association was observed mainly for colorectal cancer, but associations were also seen for pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer.

Processed meat

Processed meat was classified as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1), based on sufficient evidence in humans that the consumption of processed meat causes colorectal cancer.

They certainly think there is enough evidence that these meats as a cause of a specific type of cancer. The reason not to worry (well kind of) is because this is not a measure of risk. These things are known causes for certain ailments under certain conditions but many people will be fine. Red meats risks are much lower than smoking risks despite them both rated as carcinogens.

outlaw60(15368) Disputed
1 point

"They certainly "THINK" there is enough evidence that these meats can cause cancer. The reason not to worry (well kind of) is because this is not a measure of risk. These things are known causes for certain ailments under certain conditions but many people will be fine. Red meats risks are much lower than smoking risks despite them both rated as carcinogens."

Any facts to backup what they "THINK" ?

Atrag(5666) Disputed
1 point

Please actually go and read the studies. The studies also include the mechanism by which chemicals produced in the process of curing etc meat causes cancer.

1 point

"Are you going to control more the consumption of this kind of meats?"

No you have missed the point altogether !

The control is meant to be from government !

Don't you get it ?

Iulmi(252) Clarified
1 point

No, not really. You can do whatever you want at your own risk. This is just information.

Always err on the side of caution. I mean moderation, always err on the side of moderation!

There's a lot of talk about cancers, autoimmune disorders, etc in relation to specific foods now a days. I think it would be hard to prove any "diet" to be better than another; It seems that there are far to many "factors". Honestly, it seems everything causes cancer. So what does it matter?

However, i personally believe moderation could be an appropriate action for most things in life.

1 point

I just said it. Am I in trouble?

Iulmi(252) Clarified
1 point

You just said it?

I don't think we should worry about it, unless you are eating lots of this kind of meat. That would be unhealty for a lot of reasons.

31337(560) Clarified
2 points

its ok I'll just poop it out.

1 point

I am definitely going to cut down. I live on a budget though and processed meat is cheap.

1 point

Whilst the report on the consumption of red meat was somewhat ambiguous, the findings about the dangers of eating processed meats was clear cut. All that organizations such as the WHO and the IARC can do is place their findings in the public domain and let people make their own choice. If people wish to knowingly take the road to hell and drive like blue blazes that's their choice. When the association between smoking tobacco and lung caner was revealed decades ago there were always those who knew of people who had smoked 1000 cigarettes a day and lived to 150. The same attempts to pooh pooh the validity of this report will be plentiful. But then there is the argument that everyone has the right to choose their own fate.

1 point

I don't believe that crap. WHO also says that saturated fat and butter is bad for you. They also say that sugar is good. WHO is full of crap.