5 ms·
> 5% risk is a gigantic chance. 5%! One in twenty! I can't tell whether or not you understand that 5% is supposed to be the base chance of getting colorectal c
by tomxor 6y ago
> 5% risk is a gigantic chance. 5%! One in twenty!
I can't tell whether or not you understand that 5% is supposed to be the base chance of getting colorectal cancer. Cancer in general is very common, we basically all get it eventually in some form or other. The difference nitrate processed meats are supposed to make is an 18% increase of that base 5%, moving 5% to 5.9% (this is why the article feels a little deceptive, because the correct interpretation of the statistic completely relies on the word "by" and a preexisting knowledge of the baseline statistic).
> I don't think I'd accept the risk to give up a piece of my colon for the joy of eating ham.
I'm not saying it's nothing, but to be clear the OP is suggesting the _absolute_ difference is 0.9%. So that is the additional risk you would be accepting over your lifetime for regularly eating it.
- YeGoblynQueenne 6y ago>> I can't tell whether or not you understand that 5% is supposed to be the base chance of getting colorectal cancer. I suggest the following as an easy to make, strong interpretation of my comment: "5% chance is already pretty high and I would prefer to do nothing that increases it any further". To clarify, that was the intepretation I had in mind when writing the comment (and still now). Edit: >> Cancer in general is very common, we basically all get it eventually in some form or other. That sounds counterintuitive and from a cursory look at incidence statistics, it seems to be an exaggeration. e.g. Wikipedia says: About 20% of males and 17% of females will get cancer at some point in time while 13% of males and 9% of females will die from it.[196] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer#Epidemiology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer#Epidemiology