this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
349 points (92.3% liked)

News

30898 readers
2872 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 week ago (12 children)

I'm not a nutritional epidemiologist.

But I've started to get into learning about it in the last few months.

It's really starting to feel like this is a giant bullshit field, and as much as they are trying to find useful results, there's something severely wrong with how they seem to arbitrarily assign causality and correlation.

In a contrived example: "People who live near power lines have more cancer" - "No, poor people live near power lines because they're poor, and poor people have more cancer"

What are the kind of people that eat processed hot dogs? I can promise you they are not millionaires. I can promise you it's not people who can afford filet mignon but decide to have a steamed hot dog. It's not people who work out and take care of their bodies. It's not people who cook.

So when a study is done like this, what answer are you actually getting? probably finding out that the type of people who eat processed meat are more prone to these conditions for a variety of considerations that are just totally left out of the analysis.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So I have to eat raw meat?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Mett gang assemble!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Considering humans have been eating processed meats like these for centuries, I think I’ll take my chances.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Nitrites only date back to the middle of the 19th century.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

We've been smoking, salting, and otherwise preserving meat for way longer than that, though. People usually died off from other things before cancer got them, that's all. The relatively high number of cancer deaths is a product of medical intervention getting so good and so widespread that we don't regularly die of sepsis from stepping on a splinter or catching communicable disease anymore.

Absolutely, fuck cancer. But cancer went from being a minor concern to a relatively common one because we conquered so many other avenues of death, systematically and carefully, until we're down to time, neglect and negligence as the three main ways humanity gets itself to the Reaper.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

And our rates of intestinal cancer have been rising steadily to the point where now it's a common killer, so we've become afraid of it in our quest to live long, pain-free lives.

Things change as we learn. Why we don't use lead in our pipes anymore. Safe, biocompatible plastic only.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If the rates have been rising, wouldn’t that prove it’s not processed meats like these? It would be something that’s being introduced at a steady rate lately, not something that’s been around for centuries.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Nitrites have being slowly "introduced" at a steady rate lately

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

It is likely many factors at once but it's also important not to assume causation where there is a correlation. Keep in mind also our mechanism of detection is better now than it's ever been.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, but I think I'll take 60 years of eating really tasty meats and foods at the risk of slightly increasing my chance of getting cancer and dying at like 65 instead of 85.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

But it's also about quality of life; do you want the last decade to be in increasing pain with challenged mobility or not as bad?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I try not to make it my entire diet, but… no pepperoni? Why live?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

7% increase of an already small chance in exchange for 1 hotdog/day doesn't sound that bad to me.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It never seems that bad unless you're in that small percent. Cancer's a damned awful way to die.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Sure but there are a ton of things, genetic, environmental, dietary, neurochemical, etc. that can contribute to the development of cancer. You can do literally everything right and end up in the exact same place as someone who did all the wrong things because the causes are innumerable and many are literally unavoidable.

Would I regret my choices if I got cancer after I did all the things the studies say would increase my odds? Of course I would. Would I regret my choices if did everything "right" and still got cancer? Of course I would. But that's because being in that position inherently biased you against your past. If I did all the wrong things I would regret that I indulged too much, and if I did all the right things I would regret that I never really indulged at all and enjoyed life fully. Either way you got shafted. You're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

But to me it's better to just live intentionally but without having this constant concern about every single thing I eat, drink, or breath maybe, possibly, eventually contributing to developing cancer. Like I'm not about to start smoking, I rarely drink, I try to eat enough veggies, etc. because those things have much more tangible direct consequences that I'm mindful of, and I'm not about to eat a hotdog every day mostly because I'm a really good cook and that sounds sad as fuck. But the next time I do eat a hotdog, a salami, or a Reuben sandwich, I promise you that no part of my mind is going to be worrying that it will give me cancer. Constant dread is its own form of cancer and life's too short and uncertain to live with that shit 24/7.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Worrying too much causes cancer

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

Words to live by. Well put.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

...and what do they say about just plain meat, I wonder? 🤔

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

YOLO 🤷‍♀️

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Dang, you mean to tell me that animal refuse blended into mush and saturated with salt is bad for us?!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

Refuse? Why do you think processed meat is animal refuse?

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Eh, "refuse" makes sausage sound worse than it is. In the modern world anyplace with a food inspection system will typically see sausage made from cuts of meat that are perfectly edible but don't meet the grading standards likely to sell on the shelf , or the excess pieces of muscle left over after breaking primal cuts down into smaller pieces. No one wants to buy USDA certified Meh grade steak, or a palm sized wedge of uneven thickness. So they get sent off to make hamburger, sausage, and various canned or commercial meat products that don't need to be pretty.

Processed meat also includes much more benign seeming foods, like sandwich meat, ground meats, and bacon. We've known for a while that eating meat, and more so red meat, is a risk for colon problems. Red meats are more likely to be processed and therefore cheap and salty.

The new thing the study adds is that there isn't a lower bound. For a lot of things there's a quantity that isn't associated with any issues, and it's only when you go above that limit that the risk goes up.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Let's begin by reading the article, and noting this key sentence: "“Habitual consumption of even small amounts of processed meat, sugary drinks, and trans fatty acids is linked to increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease and colorectal cancer,” said lead author of the study, Dr. Demewoz Haile, a research scientist at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Seattle. "

Health effects associated with consumption of processed meat, sugar-sweetened beverages and trans fatty acids: a Burden of Proof study https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-025-03775-8#author-information

Abstract

Previous research suggests detrimental health effects associated with consuming processed foods, including processed meats, sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and trans fatty acids (TFAs). However, systematic characterization of the dose–response relationships between these foods and health outcomes is limited. Here, using Burden of Proof meta-regression methods, we evaluated the associations between processed meat, SSBs and TFAs and three chronic diseases: type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease (IHD) and colorectal cancer. We conservatively estimated that—relative to zero consumption—consuming processed meat (at 0.6–57 g d−1) was associated with at least an 11% average increase in type 2 diabetes risk and a 7% (at 0.78–55 g d−1) increase in colorectal cancer risk. SSB intake (at 1.5–390 g d−1) was associated with at least an 8% average increase in type 2 diabetes risk and a 2% (at 0–365 g d−1) increase in IHD risk. TFA consumption (at 0.25–2.56% of daily energy intake) was associated with at least a 3% average increase in IHD risk. These associations each received two-star ratings reflecting weak relationships or inconsistent input evidence, highlighting both the need for further research and—given the high burden of these chronic diseases—the merit of continuing to recommend limiting consumption of these foods.

Then I hit a paywall. Anyone got a ladder?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

One of us is gonna have to email one of the authors to ask for a copy. I've read that they want the public to read their work and that the paywall is just like a default setting.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›