Living eventually leads to dying. More at 11.
The more meat you eat, the younger you die and the more severe diseases you experience.
A higher intake of total meat was associated with a lower risk of stroke mortality in women
A heavy intake of red meat was also associated with all-cause mortality (Q4: HR, 1.13; 95%CIs, 1.02–1.26) and heart disease mortality (Q4: HR, 1.51; 95%CIs, 1.11–2.06) in men but not in women.
Heavy intake of chicken was inversely associated with cancer mortality in men.
Huh, fascinating that meat seems to be more harmful to men?
Doesn’t inversely proportional mean that more heavy intake of chicken correlates with lower cancer mortality in men?
Men are designed to fall apart earlier in general
Does that mean it has something to do with excess iron in their systems? As women naturally get rid of a good bit every month but men have no such mechanism.
Testosterone can increase iron absorption. I don’t think menstruation plays enough of a role reducing that given how little blood is lost for the average person. I’ve read about people who have been recommended that they donate blood to lower theirs. So to put some numbers up, most menstruation is between 25-30ml while a blood donation is about 500ml. You can donate blood a little under every two months
Living and dying are the same process.
False. One brings joy. And I’ll give you a hint, it’s not living.
Eating sugar and other carbohydrates, yeah, that’s your boy right there. No need to drag in minor actors. Meat is not something diabetics need to worry about.
Saturated fat is a stronger culprit for metabolic syndrome than even refined sugar, but yeah, “carbohydrates” are to blame. 🙄 You aren’t getting diabetes because you ate too many sweet potatoes.
You are aware that basically all the good fatty acids are saturated, for instance Omega 3, 6 and 9. These are essential fatty acids we cannot make ourselves. There are zero essential sugars, as we can make glucose from other nutrients.
It’s funny to me that people are upvoting your misinformation because they can’t be bothered to look something up themselves when it only takes a second, bullshit dietary science spreads so easily on the Internet.
Those are not saturated fats, and omega 9 and not all omega 3s and 6s are essential fats. Specifically alpha linolenic and linoleic acid are essential.
Edit:
In case it comes up later I do not want it to look like I’m shifting arguments so I’ll add this. Even if it were essential, something being essential does not mean it is harmless at any quantity, and something being unessential does not mean it is dangerous. I also did not say raw dogging glucose was good for you, it definitely isn’t. I said saturated fat was worse than refined sugar, so the broad category of “carbohydrates” is definitely not some boogeyman.Even if it were essential, something being essential does not mean it is harmless at any quantity,
Good point.
I said saturated fat was worse than refined sugar,
I am not sure the evidence actually support that. It’s pretty well documented by now that refined sugar is VERY bad, and actually the cause of many things that traditionally were blamed on fat.
Contrary to expectations, it seems that most life style problems that used to be blamed on fat, turns out to get worse when you cut the fat, and increase the sugar.I looked it up, and yes you are right Omega 3 is a polyunsaturated fatty acid. But AFAIK you get it mostly from fish that have a lot of saturated fatty acids, so you get it together with saturated fatty acids if you get them naturally.
Yes, the foods that are high in omega 3s and 6s like fish, nuts, and seeds tend to be low in saturated fat and high in unsaturated fat compositionally. So it is not necessary to consume a lot of saturated fat in our diets, we should avoid coconut oil, palm oil, butter, and lard wherever possible.
Eating refined sugar is bad for you, we should avoid things like sugary beverages for example. But this does not mean that whole fruit is bad for us, and definitely doesn’t mean that whole veg and grain is bad for us. The fiber in fruit blunts the effects of the fructose, interestingly fiber also blunts the effects of saturated fat from whole coconuts.
People love telling this mythology about how the low fat guidelines made us sick, but it’s pretty much bunk. People didn’t follow the guidelines for the most part as macro ratios have hardly varied over time in the US. Corporations also leveraged the idea to sell junk foods as healthier alternatives by lowering the fat content, but keeping or even raising the amount of refined carbohydrates.
Nobody in this conversation is saying sugar is good for you. I was just pushing back against the OP of this chain who said that meat is of no concern to diabetics, and said sugar and other carbohydrates are the main culprit. Other carbohydrates would even include fiber which would be quite beneficial to diabetics. But also from the studies I’ve seen I’d be more worried about someone who puts a spoonful of coconut oil or butter in their coffee than someone who puts a spoonful or two of sugar, and not just because of diabetes but cardiovascular disease as well.
It is also tasty.
“Fentanyl feels good.” – You, probably
Steak. Nice sirloin steak, medium rare.
I like it. Just across the line of it mooing when you cut into it.
I like mine medium, light salt and pepper, with a pat of butter right smack dab in the middle so it oozes over the whole thing.
I’m kind of a rib steak man, myself, medium rare.
My wife likes it so rare that a good veterinarian could revive it.
Yeah alright Kurzgesagt.
Username checks out
Diabetes CAN BE REVERSED. It’s ridiculous that there aren’t tickertape parades in the street celebrating this fact. We have an intervention that is essentially a CURE for diabetes. And people don’t give a single fuck because it isn’t a pill or an injection. It’s a whole food plant-based diet.
Be a little careful about that; type 1 can’t be reversed this way.
There are versions of Type II diabetics who have cellular insulin resistance. Diet will not reverse that either. This is just bad information.
Cellular insulin resistance is the definition of Type II diabetes
Yet some T2’s are acquired through heredity vs those that are acquired later in life. Meaning still that diet alone will not control for those who were born with it.
Yes, thanks for clarifying for folks. The article is talking about diabetes acquired by diet, ie T2.
A carnivore or keto diet can also reverse (or at least manage) diabetes.
Even if that is true, it will still cause you to die young.
Precisely my point
“you’re going to die anyway, why fight it?” --you, probably
“you’re going to die anyway, why fight it?” --you, probably
Is this generative AI?
And that’s a block. Spreading dangerous and false information.
deleted by creator
Another clickbaity news article.
All of people who died this year died this year
has the same vibes.
This is not even recent news. This is stuff you should already know. This is just the newest study on the subject.
To be honest linking something like meat to death of people is like saying everybody that breathed air died.
correlation != causation
But your bot says that the credibility is “high.”
Like said before the bot is not a bringer of truth or “god”, its just an optional third view on the news pages bias, it CANT be 100% truthfully or unbiased itself.
We are discussing already other options / additions to the bot.
Another clickbaity news article.
Rooki puts his paper down, angrily. “Marjorie, they’re writing headlines that make you want to read them! The manipulation!”
I have pointy teeth and slicey teeth specifically meant for eating meat. Eating any amount of meat apparently will give me type 2 diabetes immediately.
So the point of this article is that god DOES exist, and he’s a sadistic prick?
Is that really news at this point though?
Don’t pandas have very carnivore-like teeth and exist primarily on bamboo? I don’t think teeth are a good argument here
I have pointy teeth and slicey teeth specifically meant for eating meat.
Your asshole leads to your digestive system, also, so I guess we could argue you’re meant to eat broomhandles by jumping onto them while someone else holds them vertically.
New York Times - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New York Times:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Holy fuck this comment section is atrocious.
Big surprise that the animal abusers would come out with their “steak tho”/“bacon tho” brain rot
I have recently heard that a dietary restriction of any kind tends to improve health outcomes (i.e. lower diabetes incidence) as they all tend to have one thing in common: thinking about what you eat.
That isn’t to say that cutting meat could have a more significant effect. I’m just saying that people who give little to no thought about what they eat will likely be overrepresented in those with diabetes (maybe the article addresses this; I couldn’t read it).
It’s a gift link. You should be able to access the article unless:
- You disabled javascript
- You ran a browser extension which strips off the gift link token from the URL
- Your device desperately needs a reboot
The study makes it clear that they did things like compare with people who engage in meat-type-specific restrictions to rule out what you describe.
bah, let them meat munchers dig themselves an early grave, who cares? World’s fucked anyway.
I honestly expected the reverse. I’m vegetarian and I’d always thought I ate proportionally more carbs than the average person because of it.
