For issues concerning:
🩺 This community has a broader scope so please feel free to discuss. When it may not be clear, leave a comment talking about why something is important.
See the pinned post in the Medical Community Hub for links and descriptions. link (!medicine@lemmy.world)
Given the inherent intersection that these topics have with politics, we encourage thoughtful discussions while also adhering to the mander.xyz instance guidelines.
Try to focus on the scientific aspects and refrain from making overly partisan or inflammatory content
Our aim is to foster a respectful environment where we can delve into the scientific foundations of these topics. Thank you!
The data showed that people who ate as little as one hot dog a day when it comes to processed meats had an 11% greater risk of type 2 diabetes and a 7% increased risk of colorectal cancer than those who didn’t eat any.
Who eats a hotdog a day? That seems .. high.
Also the researcher's comments at the bottom counteract the title, suggesting a balanced diet and not to panic.
1 hotdog a day would suggest a diet that is unbalanced and prioritizing cost and convenience. I would bet money that the comorbidities include sedentary lifestyle, poverty, limited access to fresh produce, poverty, limited education, and poverty.
You'd be amazed.
They're cheap, available damn near anywhere you go, and filling. Lots of people driving long distances will gravitate to them.
Waaaaaay back in my youth, it was often a choice between having electricity and eating. Had a friend that worked overnight at a stop n rob. Me and my best friend could go there, have a free hotdog (or two sometimes), while hanging out and reading comics from the magazine rack.
Free food? Not even able to buy a beer if we could have afforded it? You damn skippy we had hotdogs every day :)
If my schedule was tight enough and the hotdogs were convenient enough, I could see myself doing that. They’re a classic street food, so it’s not like that’s an unthinkable scenario.
My mother in law had been eating a ton of them because she thought they were a health food and she was trying to diet and be healthy
Your mother in law sounds like a moron. I have one of those too
Yeah there's few synapses firing up there at all. But don't worry she still votes
Also 7% greater risk for something that's only a 4% lifetime risk just moves the needle to 4.28% chance.... So if 10000 people ate hotdogs every day then only 28 more of them would get colorectal cancer? Sounds like a fair trade for a ton of hotdogs
Health effects associated with consumption of processed meat, sugar-sweetened beverages and trans fatty acids: a Burden of Proof study
Study title... CNN title is only about meat.
A meta-analysis of observational epidemiology
All of the issues with epidemiology apply
I don't have access to the paper, it hasn't made it to the Free Academic circles yet, so I haven't been able to read it.
Is everything we eat associated with cancer? A systematic cookbook review
I personally think the reason EVERYTHING is linked to cancer, as well as the massive surge in cancer since the 1900s, is all due to the modern metabolism (sugar burners) being very different then pre-1900 metabolism (fat burners)
The problem with these observational studies is they don't look at the modern metabolic context, so in this context, yes EVERYTHING is associated with cancer - because the studies arn't looking at the right variables.
This is exactly why hard science doesn't use association to draw conclusions, epidemiology is hypothesis generating only
If you haven't read about the Metabolic Theory of Cancer I highly recommend giving it a read. It's a much more compelling model, and explains the surge of cancer since 1900, as well as actionable steps to reduce incidence (reduce sugar and inflammation).
Couldn't the surge of cancer simply be that we're better at diagnosing it now?
That is a great point! So there is debate about our diagnostic capabilities improving. However, pick a year, any year and use that as year zero. We still have to account for the geometric growth of cancer after that year.
Going back to pre-1900s cancer, it was seen on rare occasions, if it was as common as today (50% of westerners will have cancer in their lives) then it would have shown up with some frequency in the historical medical literature.
I would use the same thought experiment for type 2 diabetes, cardio vascular disease (someone would have made a record of otherwise healthy people just falling over dead randomly in the streets), etc.... the modern chronic diseases all appear to have a common starting point in the historical record >1900, which suggests a common cause. I think metabolic health is the most likely unifying theory, I could be wrong, but improving metabolic health doesn't hurt.
We know there is a 3x risk of cancer for people with obesity. We know there is a 3x risk of cancer for people with type 2 diabetes. We also know global obesity is going up, and type 2 diabetes is going up. There are almost 1 billion people in the world diagnosed with T2D. The country with the highest T2D rate is also the country that eats the least amount of meat (India). Some new thing has happened globally since 1900 to cause this change.
I just had 4 burgers and 5 dogs in one sitting all with the poster condiments and all. Will do it again some day.
