It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Well, you managed to step around every point I made, referring to every disease as "cancer" and thinking that inflammation plays some role in that specific disease process.
I find it very funny that your failure to produce any studies is your way of "not holding my hand". Sounds like a piss-poor excuse to me. I'll gladly pull references once I see yours.
I think maybe you may need to re-read the OP. Notice I said *disease*, that's a huge contextual clue. If you don't understand context I will be more than happy to go over it with you in U2U.
There are numerous cancer studies I have read around the web all indicative of red meat consumption being linked to various diseases and cancers. All you've told me was that, yes they do, but poultry contains more of one specific inflammatory compound.
If you do your research, grains are linked to a variety of diseases. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Yea, I remember reading that the Inuit get ascorbic acid by eating the stomach contents of Caribou... Last I heard, they don't eat meat. The eggs we get from our supermarkets are all 'factory' farmed eggs which contain carcinogenic chemicals. Woo, vitamin A and cancer to boot! OM NOM NOM NOM!
Are you serious? It's the process coupled with the intensity of HEAT. Go do your homework, I'm not your mommy and I refuse to hold your hand.
Yea, biochemistry is a great tool also for making farm animals fatter. OK, so what exactly do you want me to learn? Proper nutrition or factory deeeelicious nutrition?
Yea, it's a common practice amongst druggies to shoot up. Again, just because you can doesn't mean you should!
Really, all I've learned from this diatribe of nonsensical un-sourced garbage (yes I know I haven't sourced either ) is that you disbelieve the numerous studies available around the internet.
Yet, like you said you can't hold me accountable for not reading every single post by you, I also can't really hold you accountable for not doing proper research on human nutrition. As much as I wish I had the time to hold your hand every step of the way, I sadly don't have that much time, so I leave you to your own opinions and devices.
*sigh* I'll be the bigger person between the two of us and post references. I trust you'll do the same, though keep in mind any source that is selling a book, refers to itself as a reference, or doesn't provide any supporting data will be ignored as misleading.
Again, please re-read the OP. You asserted in your post that eating meat leads to disease. Nothing in the OP would lead me to believe that.
Rather, it suggests that certain diseases lead to an inability to properly digest certain components of meat.
Please cite these cancer studies. Also, bear in mind that inflammation (which is what you were referring to before you changed the subject) is not an indicator of cancer, nor is it required for oncogenesis.
Grain allergies certainly are, yes. However, that's not the point you made. You suggested that grains were not "part of out diet" until we developed into agrarian societies. I provided an example of this being factually untrue, showing that even nomadic groups have been eating grains for a long time. This would suggest that we have been eating grains for a long, long time and thus have more than enough digestive power to handle them. Grain-related disease is nearly always linked to an underlying genetic disorder or an allergy.
The Inuit most certainly eat meat. In fact, they rarely eat the fruits and veggies you've been pushing as a replacement to such meats:
HCAs are produced in such a low amount and excreted efficiently enough that they have not been shown to be a substantial cancer risk, unless given to lab animals in excessive amounts. As I stated earlier, the process, not the heat, has been shown to be the key. Exposure to carbonaceous sources introduces carcinogenic carbon compounds not found in the meats themselves.
A good starting point for you would be learning the basic digestive processed that exist in the human body. You've made several basic errors that can be corrected with an introductory biochem text.
I've yet to see any of these studies. Post some pubmed links, please.
I've made the time to support my argument. Now it's your turn.
Originally posted by sirnex
Take out the intentional dietary effects and the grain based intolerance's. Note the word "disease" and the contextual clue "disease dietary listings".
Now ask yourself, is an intentional diet looking for a desired effect a disease? How about a grain intolerance?
Hmm, yea... Consume a lot of 'X' food, get disease, stop consuming 'X' food disease symptoms get better.
Again, mind you that context is very applicable when discussing a topic with someone.
Read it again: "There are numerous cancer studies I have read around the web all indicative of red meat consumption being linked to various diseases and cancers."
Are you not aware that some diseases are *inflammatory* diseases? Seriously? Public school right?
Thanks for the links and excuse me if I don't link from pubmed. Will you except cancer.org?
cancer.org Search term: Red meats linked to cancer
Uh, the ancient Hebrews came to be the ancient Hebrews well after agriculture. Your African link also places grain usage within the Mesolithic period, which was just before the neolithic when we started agriculture. As a dietary staple, grains were not consumed in high quantities until the neolithic.
Where did I say they didn't? Maybe take a screen shot of you see, maybe my post is different than the one on my monitor.
I suppose this is source dependent. =3&search[sort]=date+desc&search[has_multimedia]=]link
Last time I checked, humans weren't factory farmed. That being said, I'm looking for health and longevity rather than factory deeeeliciousness.
Hypocrite, please don't bitch about the non post of sources when we begin a discussion with each other in which neither initial post in said discussion by either party contained any sources in themselves.
Great, so the "big boy" finally posted links after the fact of being called out as a hypocrite. Good boy! Now I've posted a couple too. We cool?
Read it again: "There are numerous cancer studies I have read around the web all indicative of red meat consumption being linked to various diseases and cancers."
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
So, infants who are born with celiac disease developed such a disease by eating a lot f grains? Interesting viewpoint. It's wrong, but interesting nonetheless.