2 ms·
Although I agree with you in general, I feel like I have to raise some points... Unless I've missed something, the evidence for red meat being a carcinogen is
by TheAceOfHearts 8y ago
Although I agree with you in general, I feel like I have to raise some points...
Unless I've missed something, the evidence for red meat being a carcinogen is actually still up for debate and it's nowhere near conclusive. I've skimmed some sources making this claim, but I wasn't convinced by their research methodology.
I've discussed the weed issue enough times that I luckily have this article [0] in my bookmarks, which analyses our current knowledge. I'm not aware of any more modern article which does the same in-depth analysis on the state of things. I won't claim that weed is a magical drug without any kind of side-effects, but the research on its impact still seems fairly young. My key take-away from the linked article was that young people should probably avoid regular usage, maybe aside from trying it out once or twice.
[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604177/
- jf- 8y ago> but I wasn't convinced by their research methodology This is the problem with all of science, or at least the popular discussion of it. Things get presented in little bite-sized chunks stripped of all context. It's significant effort to read the original papers and supporting papers and decide for yourself, and that's neglecting the domain knowledge that's required to do that properly. On top of that there are conflicting results where even experts may disagree. All you can do is wait for a consensus position to emerge.