__________________
....It is our deeds, the accumulated acts of goodness and kindness, that define us and ultimately are the true measure of our worth. Service is the coin of the spirit.
Processed meat increases the risk of bowel cancer and sodium nitrite is thought to be largely to blame. It is added to hot dogs to stop them going grey, and keep microbes at bay.
Studies on animals have linked sodium nitrites to an increased risk of cancer.
The World Cancer Research Fund carried out a global study on the dangers of processed meats and found that people who regularly consume 50g of processed meat a day � equivalent to one-and-a-half hot dogs � increase their chances of getting bowel cancer by 20 per cent. The charity believes nitrites are largely to blame.
In the body, nitrites can react with protein-rich foods such as meat to produce N-nitroso compounds, or NOCs. Some types of NOCs damage the DNA in our cells and cause cancer.
In 2006, scientists analysed more than 60 studies and found that nitrites are also linked to higher risks of stomach cancer.
Like always, there are two sides to correlational studies
Quote:
Which of these sources will give you the most ingested nitrites:
467 servings of hotdogs
1 serving arugula
2 servings butterhead lettuce
4 servings celery or beets
your spit
The answer is obvious ... or is it?
How often do we hear advice to avoid processed meats — like hotdogs, bacon, ham and sausages — because they contain nitrates that have been linked to cancer? There is no safe amount of processed meats, the project director for the World Cancer Research Fund report told Dr. Albert Lim Kok Hooi of The Star this month. [Dr. Hooi’s article also claimed, ostensibly based on that WCRF report, that two-thirds of all cancers could be prevented if we were all thin, ate right and didn’t smoke. It advocated plaques at the entrance of all restaurants, school and office cafeterias warning: “Obesity causes cancer!”
Furthermore;
Quote:
As is nearly always the case, food fears are short on science and tall on misinformation. Many may remember that scare from the 1970s, claiming that nitrates could be carcinogenic, based on a report said to have found lymphatic cancer in 13 rats. Few consumers heard the rest of the story: that the preliminary MIT research behind that scare had had no peer review prior being acted on by the FDA and USDA, and was later discredited as faulty when an interagency working group of scientists from the FDA, USDA and NIH was convened to review the scientific data. The study was also sent to outside reviewers. As a 1983 risk assessment from the National Research Council noted, normal FDA review procedures hadn’t been followed during that scare, in what had seemed justifiable at the time to protect public health and in response to consumer group petitions; but “normal peer review would have revealed the fatal flaws in the MIT data.” In 1981, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed the scientific literature and found no link between nitrates or nitrites and human cancers, or evidence to even suggest that they’re carcinogenic. Since then, more than 50 studies and multiple international scientific bodies have investigated a possible link between nitrates and cancers and mortality in humans and found no association. What may be more surprising to learn is that scientific evidence has been building for years that nitrates are actually good for us, that nitrite is produced by our own body in greater amounts than is eaten in food, and that it has a number of essential biological functions, including in healthy immune and cardiovascular systems. Nitrite is appearing so beneficial, it’s even being studied as potential treatments for health problems such as high blood pressure, heart attacks, sickle cell disease and circulatory problems.
Many vegetables contain nitrites. Celery is a good source of such. But sodium nitrite is not natural and not good.
Carbon is not bad for us, but carbon monoxide is. Actually carbon dioxide is too.
Fluoride, found naturally in tea, may not be bad in small quantities, but sodium fluoride is. and is found in most municipal drinking water.
It is the chemical composition that makes for bad health. And chemical composition is not the same thing as its parts. Take for example chlorine and chlorine dioxide.
You might complain about food that contains monosodium glutamate (MSG), but most plants naturally have msg. And msg makes up about 10 to 25 % of all food protein, from both animal and vegetable.
When these things are added to our food or water, they are not as small quantities was would be found in nature.
Nitric acid in strong enough concentrations can be no fun.
As you said, "strong enough concentrations". Yes. When added to our food, ---bad. Sodium chloride is the worse of the lot for me - hypertension. Processed food seems to contain a lot. Then they trick the label and say something is 2 servings, so they can halve the sodium content and other things.
Sodium chloride is the worse of the lot for me - hypertension.
Then they trick the label and say something is 2 servings, so they can halve the sodium content and other things.
You are sodium sensitive? My understanding is that it is a rare condition. Of course processed salt is nearly all sodium, whereas natural salt is much higher in chloride, which has been shown to lower blood pressure.
Yes, I remember those days! Two eight ounce servings in a twelve ounce can.
You are sodium sensitive? My understanding is that it is a rare condition. Of course processed salt is nearly all sodium, whereas natural salt is much higher in chloride, which has been shown to lower blood pressure.
Yes, I remember those days! Two eight ounce servings in a twelve ounce can.
I'm sodium sensitive too - no matter if it is table salt or sea salt, my body doesn't seem to care.
But then again when we are faced with so many chemicals that weaken the body it is not surprising that we react to things which ought to be healthy and essential.
I'm sodium sensitive too - no matter if it is table salt or sea salt, my body doesn't seem to care.
But then again when we are faced with so many chemicals that weaken the body it is not surprising that we react to things which ought to be healthy and essential.
Agreed... although my body doesn't seem to care if it's Himilayan, French "Grey", etc.
Interesting.
Our bodies seek a certain amount of sodium to keep our osmotic equilibrium in balance.
Quote:
(NaturalNews) A new European study published in the May 4 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that a low salt diet increases the death rate from cardiovascular disease and fails to prevent high blood pressure. These startling findings, reported by The New York Times, are diametrically opposed to traditional medical thought, which for decades has spurred doctors to recommend a restricted salt diet to their patients. Limitations and problems in the study, however, have fueled the debate over the salt issue.
I suspect you are being somewhat sarcastic in your gentlemanly soft spoken way Ted. However, I do like that report. I well remember, in my neck of the woods, that most of the folks were heavy into processed meats for winter storage. But to my dislike, most were heavily salted for preservation. I mean heavily. Pork bellies (bacon) has been for a very long time, but whole shoulders were too. I also remember going to the butcher and watching him grind the meats into sausage in putting it into casings.
Well, those were the good old days when we knew what was going into the process and mostly where the meat came from. No such thing as antibiotics or genetically modified anything.
Processed Meat = Early Death
Linear Mode
