1mo ago

There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research | CNN

edition.cnn.com

vegan @lemmy.world

technocrit @lemmy.dbzer0.com

1mo ago

There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research | CNN

edition.cnn.com /2025/07/02/health/processed-meats-sweet-drinks-disease-wellness

Public Health @mander.xyz

sabreW4K3 @lazysoci.al

1mo ago

There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research | CNN

edition.cnn.com /2025/07/02/health/processed-meats-sweet-drinks-disease-wellness

science @lemmy.world

cm0002 @lemmy.cafe

1mo ago

There is no safe amount of processed meat to eat, according to new research | CNN

edition.cnn.com /2025/07/02/health/processed-meats-sweet-drinks-disease-wellness

9 comments

Not the same a US Francfurter and one from the EU, which has a strict regulations regarding preparation and content. US food in general is one of the most unhealthy of the first world, due to additives banned in the rest of the world, to disguise bad and cheap quality.
- I once read an article about a football club who wanted to make pasta in their colours as merchandise. They weren't allowed to, because one of the colours were blue and through some regulations, blue is not a "natural" colour that can be achieved with beets for red or spinach for green for example. I thought: oh interesting. And just a bit later i saw that cursed sonic curry that they sell in the us.
  
  There are also natural blue colors, but the problem isn't the color, the problem is that in US food the color is artificial, because it's cheaper than natural colors. If it is unhealthy, the industry give a fuck, important to gain more money. Collateral damages are nice for the friends from the pharma industry.
  Life expectancy in the US is more than 7 years lower than that of other first world countries. Too much stress, anxiety, crappy food with to much shugar and additives, inexistent healthcare. Capitalism kills
people who ate as little as one hot dog a day
Who TF is eating a hot dog every day? That's their idea of a minimum amount of a particular food?
- I know, right? One hot dog a day sounds like excess junk food consumption to me, not minimal consumption. These people clearly already do not have a decent diet and probably have other poor lifestyle choices. So it seems disingenuous to say that there is no safe minimum level of processed food consumption when their "minimum" is already excessive.
  I get that this stuff increases cancer risk, but so does everything. Enjoying life without being too excessive with anything is what we should all shoot for. Life is a balance.
- I know people who eat at McDonald's like 5 or more times a week.
  
  They should have used MacDonalds. That, I could believe.
The only things not linked to cancer are the things not yet been studied. Seems like everything at some point has been linked to cancer.
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. And drinking the equivalent of about a 12-ounce soda per day was associated with an 8% increase in type 2 diabetes risk and a 2% increased risk of ischemic heart disease.
Sounds like a correlation... someone who eats one hot dog and drinks one soda per day is probably doing a lot of unhealthy things.
It’s also important to note that the studies included in the analysis were observational, meaning that the data can only show an association between eating habits and disease –– not prove that what people ate caused the disease.
Yup, that is what it is. A correlation. So overall not really worth the effort involved IMO. Not eating any processed meats at all is not likely a big issue, but your overall diet and amount of exercise/lifestyle. I would highly suspect that even if you did eat one hotdog per day, but had a otherwise perfect diet for the rest of the day and did plenty of exercise, got good sleep and all the other things we know are good for you then these negative effects would likely becomes negligible. But who the hell is going to do that? That's the problem with these observational studies - you cannot really tease out the effect of one thing out of a whole bad lifestyle.
I hate headlines like this as it makes it sounds like you can just do thins one simple thing and get massive beneficial effects. You cannot. You need to change a whole bunch of things to see the types of reduction in risk they always talk about. Instead they always make it sounds like if you have even one hot dog YOU ARE GOING TO DIE.
- I always loved the simple statement that:
  Death is inevitably caused by swallowing tiny bits of saliva over time.
  It illustrated the utter senseless linking of observed events to results with dubious research. Is it technically wrong? No. Is it correct? Of course not. (I hope.)
  We are constantly being sold something. Sometimes it's obvious - other times it's not. Frequently its a bent truth to just nudge us in the direction the advertiser wants. Health is extraordinarily complicated. We know we should be healthy - but there is so much ~~noise~~ potential profit in the space... that it becomes hard to determine the correct path to take.
  Shit like the above is effectively tabloid journalism. If it is sensationalist - and urging you to act without thought ... you absolutely should give it as much credence as an article about bat boy in the checkout line. Until these pseudo journalism "half-truth" adverts get degraded to tabloid levels they will continue to pollute our information channels with their snake oil.
  It is possible to distill correct - or at least better information from questionable sources: we play the overlapping circle game. If you compare multiple sources of partial truth... each source added can begin to define the boundaries of what is true (or at least accepted as truth.) Now this isn't perfect and certainly doesn't replace real research - but this method in combination with learning to identify masked advertising is a way to protect yourself from falling prey to their trash.
  What's to be done about this shoddy reporting? When you see it - call it out for what it is. Shame the publisher. Trash the poster. Openly mock them. Do what you can to tarnish the perceived reputation of that outlet. If they sell sewage then make sure the stink sticks to them. Enough people doing this will start a positive feedback loop and eventually lead to visible improvements.

9 comments