3 ms·

> A lot, and I mean a LOT, of nutrition research is done by vegans and sponsored by vegans. It's a cult. This cracks me up. Who do you think has more money an

> A lot, and I mean a LOT, of nutrition research is done by vegans and sponsored by vegans. It's a cult. This cracks me up. Who do you think has more money and vested interest to spend on bs nutritional studies: the meat / dairy / egg industry or "vegans"? > Maybe bacon is bad for you. I don't think so Right. Yea. It's those vegans who are irrational cultists.

hilux 2y ago
That's fine. Then show me controlled studies on bacon being bad. I have no problem with that. That's what science should be. Don't lump bacon in with "processed foods" like all that sugary crap.
- the_gastropod 2y ago
  Sure. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455534/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455534/ In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified processed meats (including bacon, salami, etc.) as group 1 carcinogens.
  - hilux 2y ago
    It's a meta-analysis. It's not a controlled study like I asked. And if you go back and dig through the original studies, not a single one of them is a controlled study. Not one. They always require people to fill out cards of what they ate months or years ago. (This problem is well known - google: nutrition observational study problem) AND there's the problem that people who eat bacon - which is "supposed" to be bad - often are overweight, and eat and drink way more other stuff that's bad, like tons of carbs, alcohol, etc. Which means that teasing out any actual harm from the bacon, is determined by a statistician. Not so obvious after all. But if you or I exercise, are healthy weight, eat bacon in a low-carb way, don't drink or smoke, and consume lots of fiber (all of which are true for me, don't know about you) ... it's really not clear how serious a risk factor the bacon is. Compared to just - the risk of being alive.

3 ms·

> A lot, and I mean a LOT, of nutrition research is done by vegans and sponsored by vegans. It's a cult. This cracks me up. Who do you think has more money an

by the_gastropod 2y ago

hilux 2y ago
That's fine. Then show me controlled studies on bacon being bad. I have no problem with that. That's what science should be. Don't lump bacon in with "processed foods" like all that sugary crap.
- the_gastropod 2y ago
  Sure. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455534/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34455534/ In 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified processed meats (including bacon, salami, etc.) as group 1 carcinogens.
  - hilux 2y ago
    It's a meta-analysis. It's not a controlled study like I asked. And if you go back and dig through the original studies, not a single one of them is a controlled study. Not one. They always require people to fill out cards of what they ate months or years ago. (This problem is well known - google: nutrition observational study problem) AND there's the problem that people who eat bacon - which is "supposed" to be bad - often are overweight, and eat and drink way more other stuff that's bad, like tons of carbs, alcohol, etc. Which means that teasing out any actual harm from the bacon, is determined by a statistician. Not so obvious after all. But if you or I exercise, are healthy weight, eat bacon in a low-carb way, don't drink or smoke, and consume lots of fiber (all of which are true for me, don't know about you) ... it's really not clear how serious a risk factor the bacon is. Compared to just - the risk of being alive.