World Health Organisation says bacon, ham and sausages cause cancer.

To maintain its credibility, surely Cancer Research UK's stance should now be to give up processed meat completely.

TEN TIPS TO QUIT EATING SAUSAGES.
1=do not go cold turkey,get therapy
2=try sausage replacement therapy.fry some fresh chicken.
3=don't go it alone,get a friend to quid with you.
4=manage stress,listen to music
5=avoid fried eggs and chips,it may trigger a craving for a fried sausage.
6=toss all frying pans out of the house,wash clothes that smell of fried sausage,use an air fresh spray to help rid the home of that familiar scent.
7=try and try again,if you have a relapse.many sausage eaters try several times to quit.set a quit date.
8=take a walk to reduce sausage cravings
9=smoke a cigarette if you get a sausage craving.
10=think of all the money you will save once you stop buying packets of sausages.

Cut down not give up eh?

These research organisations usually throw a life line for those with financial interests in whatever it is that's killing us.
Just the same as those in the pay of the tobacco producers assured us that the risk from smoking was acceptable.
I remember when the asbestos scandal really blew up many years ago.
Following a damming report on the telly of the asbestos industry, a representative of Turner & Newall UK came on telly and played down the report.
Then after a strike at their asbestos factories caused by the television programme, the union rep talked the workers into going back.   
The gullibility of the masses, regarding taking advice from people with vested interests is what is harming them is quite remarkable.

Regarding that report on processed food.
There's nothing new there.
That knowledge about the dangers associated with processed food has been around for quite a long time.
It's just that they haven't shouted about it until now.

I read somewhere that there are about 40,000 cases of this type of cancer in the UK per annum.
That's about 1.5 cases per 1000 population.
Assuming that nearly all cases occur during the final three decades that gives you about a 5% lifetime risk. If eating processed meat increases the chance by 18%, your lifetime risk increases from 5% to 6%. hardly a reason to give up eating bacon is it?

Any statisticians on here agree or disagree with this assessment please?

Actually 40000 cases in 60 million is about 0.67 cases per thousand, so the final figure is about half that given. 2.5% lifetime risk increased to 3% (sorry, it was off the cuff calculation). Bit better than I thought unless anyone can see any other flaws in it.

There are far fewer cases amongst the young so your first figure is probably more accurate.

hardly a reason to give up eating bacon is it?

Foinavon, you must like your bacon.

Yes I do Dr. C. Doesn't everyone?
The over 50's group are the survivors of an originally bigger population, the rest died of something else. Think it was about 50 million when I was born.

my dads got cancer in his lower bowel & hes eaten loads of processed meat.mind you he is 96.

but they have discovered that 90% of smokers also eat sausages and rashers,now they have a big question to answer.
was the little cigarette guilty at all for so many deaths.?

Good point brassneck.

some expert on the radio said that people who smoke do not care about their health,but the ones that do care about what they eat and smoke have a reduced % of dying of cancer than that of a person that eats processed food.

The new "Electronic Sausages" are a step forward, and you don't need to go outside the pub to use them!

You live once. Enjoy it.

ALl those health freaks inevitably get run over in their prime or some such event.

I would be mighty peed off living like a saint and dying no later than somebody who enjoyed his grub, cigs and beer.

Weren't we supposed to give up eating beef a good few years back and if we didn't we were all going to die of the human form of mad cows disease?

Lots of film stars live to ripe old ages.
That's the result of having to look good for years and keeping in shape, paying particular attention to their diets.

Next time you are weighing up whether to eat a sausage and bacon sarnie or a television on a bicycle, go with the sarnie - Monsieur Mangetout died aged 57. I reckon the bacon and sausages are healthier.

Good old Monsieur Mangetout! I wish his Wiki page would expand on "Died of natural causes", though.

Yeah, dying of natural causes at 57 sounds dubious to me for a man of his...er...varied diet.

Sounds like he ate himself to death.

To maintain its credibility, surely Cancer Research UK's stance should now be to give up processed meat completely.

So how did the WHO reach the conclusions they did?

I get the impression that many people think something highly clinical went on – men in white coats staring down microscopes at tissue with cancer and traces of bacon around it. I hope it did, but from what I’ve read from their report (and I’m not dismissing it) it’s a collation of observational studies, where people answer questions about lifestyle and then they look to see what they got or died from. Then you bunch them all together and release your findings. Does it really have anything to with reality? The quality of the evidence relies first on someone giving a full and accurate picture of what they do (and folk don’t lie or forget or embellish, right?) and then on the quality of the study makers. What’s the bias risk, are they funded by grain producers who want you to arrive at a pro-grain, anti-meat conclusion? And just because there may be a correlation between the figures of read meat consumption and cancer doesn’t mean you have proved causation, when so much is open to interpretation. In my opinion studies like this are weak evidence.

And what about cancer research – they are telling you to eat fibre (by which they mean bread because it’s in their picture) and fruit – with a picture of a banana and an apple. These foods are high in sugar and sugar is at the root of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Cancer is the fermentation of the cell when it cannot get oxygen through mitochondrial damage, and it becomes the main user of glucose in your body putting out loads more insulin receptors than your fat cells can. Cancer’s a hoover for sugar and you supply it every time you raise your insulin.

I want to read more about the studies used because it should be taken seriously, but until the quality of the evidence is revealed it’s of dubious quality in my opinion and not the place of Cancer research to be making pronouncements about, we've had enough mistakes in the past.

WHO's on first?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTcRRaXV-fg

All things in moderation.  All meat that comes from farmed animals that have not been treated humanely during their lifetime should be banned.  Chickens in cages never seeing daylight, pigs in pens where they can’t even turn around ffs.  Think there is talk of massive big fk off beef factories like they have in USA where the cows are almost always indoors.  Not so fussed about farmed fish tbf.  If this makes meat too expensive for some then sobeit.   A bit more sympathy for farm animals and a little less sympathy for the poor is the way forward imo.

I think now that the WHO have found out that processes meat is carcinogenic,people who consume it in cafe's and restaurant's should have to go outside to eat it.
What person is going to allow their children sit beside a person eating sausages,bacon,or ham,knowing they are cancer causing items.
perhaps governments can find eating area's for these people who wish to eat these products.
areas clearly marked ,for example=SAUSAGE AREA,BACON AREA,HAM AREA,SPAM AREA,and so on.

Oct 27, 2015 -- 12:58PM, Pokermonster wrote:

To maintain its credibility, surely Cancer Research UK's stance should now be to give up processed meat completely.

It's a bit strange. Do they mainly get their funding from general public? I don't think the general public wants to hear that they should give up processed meats completely. It's not a donation winner so to speak. Maybe a bit like Greenpeace and other environmental organisations ignoring increased meat consumption knowing very well that it's not good for the environment. But if they started campaigning for drastically lower meat intake they might lose funding yeah? Because it would not be popular with a large proportion of the general public.

Oct 27, 2015 -- 1:35PM, Foinavon wrote:

Actually 40000 cases in 60 million is about 0.67 cases per thousand, so the final figure is about half that given. 2.5% lifetime risk increased to 3% (sorry, it was off the cuff calculation). Bit better than I thought unless anyone can see any other flaws in it.

I've read that the lifetime risk of colorectal cancer for men in the UK is estimated at 1 in 14 or about 7 percent.

if people eat sausages and bacon and then break wind they will be releasing toxic cancerous  fumes into the air,are we all to wear masks from now on if we sit beside someone why has just eaten a fry.