Grass fed beef and it's organ meats are one of the best sources of nutrition most people can get. Perhaps you don't digest it well, and it's not right for you...idk..but my lineage is largely native american and they grubbed down on some bloody red bison...and I'd be a fucking fool to not eat red meat. Grass fed and corn fed beef have entirely different macro nutrient breakdowns. Corn is shit food.. basically an anti nutrient. Cows weren't meant to eat it any more than humans were and it's in almost everything you buy at the super market, due to government subsidiaries and it's incredible versatility. IMO the number one contributor to America's health and obesity epidemic is GMO corn. Do you know what GMO corn does? It kills the insects that eat it by degrading their intestinal walls. America now has to import it's pig intestines from New Zealand (where they have banned GMO) in order to use them as sausage casings, because the intestines from the pigs in the US that have been fed GMO are too brittle and will break, thus making them useless for making sausage. Did you know pigs genetically resemble humans closer than almost any other animal? Did you know that it has taken 3-4 generations to see these problems in the pigs? As humans with longer lifespans, we have yet to reach the generational threshold where we will begin to see the full effect of GMO corn on our societies health... but it's already starting to show. So yeah, lower your corn fed beef intake for sure, but keep your diet moderate in grass fed beef and wild salmon... those are some of the best sources of omega fats you can get. You know, what your brain is made of.
Yeah - not saying not to eat red meat, just that lots of people eat too much of it, and it's a risk factor for several cancers.
I really don't think you can put this into concrete percentages as you keep trying to do. This isn't Google's algorithm we're talking about here. But for argument's sake, lets assume that you can..
So according to the NY times (wonder if they have any owners that have stakes in big pharma?) study that you feel is definitive enough to cite as supporting evidence in this winner take all, uber important WF debate.. Eating an extra 2 servings of veggies lowers my chances of getting cancer by 4 percent? OK.. What kind of cancer does this lower my chances of getting? What kind of veggies did they eat? Did they all eat the same veggies? Was anything else in their diet changed? Were they GMO veggies? If I ate four servings of those vegetables would my chances be reduced by 8 percent? What if I ate 8 servings of kale, the most nutritionally dense vegetable, what would my chances be then?.. The same as if I ate 8 servings of cauliflower?
What if instead of adding 2 servings of canned green beans to my shitty diet, I instead ate 6-7 servings of a mixture of fresh kale, spinach, asparagus, seaweed, blueberries, kiwi, apples, and sweet potatoes in addition to my diet consisting of grass fed beef, organ meats, and wild salmon for protein and fat sources.. and coconut oil, avocado, and almonds for additional fat sources, and it was all eaten in a way that was based upon my activity levels. So the carbs would actually be used by the body rather than shot directly into the blood stream causing huge insulin spikes and thus inflammation which leads to the degradation and aging of cells... What would my chances be then?
I wouldn't be foolish enough to try and put a percentage on it, but I fucking guarantee you it would lower my chances of getting cancer by FAR more than what's quoted in the useless study you posted.
The study was done:
Fruit and Vegetable Intake and Overall Cancer Risk in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
The Journal of the National Cancer Institute (print ISSN: 0027-8874, online ISSN: 1460-2105) publishes peer-reviewed original research from around the world and is internationally acclaimed as the source for the most up-to-date news and information from the rapidly changing fields of cancer research and treatment. For the past several years, the JNCI has been ranked as one of the most-cited original-research cancer journals by the Institute of Scientific Information in its annual Journal Citation Reports.
Nothing to do with the NY times, they just wrote the story and their summary of it is easier to understand than the maths/stats filled sources, i.e.:
Of the initial 142 605 men and 335 873 women included in the study, 9604 men and 21 000 women were identified with cancer after a median follow-up of 8.7 years. The crude cancer incidence rates were 7.9 per 1000 person-years in men and 7.1 per 1000 person-years in women. Associations between reduced cancer risk and increased intake of total fruits and vegetables combined and total vegetables for the entire cohort were similar (200 g/d increased intake of fruits and vegetables combined, HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.96 to 0.99; 100 g/d increased intake of total vegetables, HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.97 to 0.99); intake of fruits showed a weaker inverse association (100 g/d increased intake of total fruits, HR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.00). The reduced risk of cancer associated with high vegetable intake was restricted to women (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.97 to 0.99). Stratification by alcohol intake suggested a stronger reduction in risk in heavy drinkers and was confined to cancers caused by smoking and alcohol.
I appreciate what you're saying, heck I've bought a juicer and juice all the superfoods etc myself. They make me feel great and there's tons of reasons to do it beyond just reducing your chances of getting cancer. (IMO reducing your chances of getting cancer even by 4% is worth doing if it has no negative effect on your life anyway, I mean why not?)
I'm just trying to say that it's not a cure or entirely preventative, and the actual proven effects are a lot smaller than many people anticipate. It'd be impossible to do a study whereby people took all the things you did in the manner you said for something like 10 years. It'd be very expensive to ensure people stuck to it, and the data would be extremely messed up and full of errors. On the other hand it's quite easy to ensure that someone eats 2 portions of veg a day.
All of these things have diminishing returns. There's a point where having more anti-oxidants, etc just won't help any further. You can't control e.g. background radiation damaging your DNA, and no food can stop that from happening. Much like if you smoke, or get exposed to asbestos, or work outdoors as a builder and get tons more sun exposure than you should, and so forth. Food isn't going to save you/reduce your risk by much, because chances are the cancer you'd get are due to those increased risk factors (that heck - scientists may not even be aware of.. there could be a random grass pollen which gives you cancer, who the hell knows?), rather than anything triggered by just dietary carcinogens.
Heck, going out in the sun once could be enough to give you a malignant melanoma if you're super unlucky.
Diet is something easy to change which is why so many people want to believe it can help so much in eliminating your chances of getting cancer - but the science says the impacts are pretty small. As humans we hate not having control over any aspects of our life, and aim to control risk as much as possible. The thought of being able to get cancer even if you do everything right, never smoke, never drink, eat all your superfoods and everything else isn't nice, and doesn't seem fair. Everyone wants to think that they can prevent it. Unfortunately it's just one of those things that can strike most anyone - just because so many things can cause cancer that you couldn't possibly prevent exposure to them all.
Whats a good second hand car I can buy one of my kids? Something you know is easy to work on and hardly ever breaks down if maintained.
Whats a few cars to for sure of stay away from?
What kind of cars do you buy and sell on your lot and whats the avg price you pay to get them and the avg price you sell them for to customers ( like do you always try to get 100% return out of them? ). For some odd reason I find used car sales kinda amazing in all the shit that is done to make a profit.
Haha I don't actually own a car lot. Sorry - should have made that clear, was meant to be an example.
Edit: We're just going round in circles anyway, I respect your opinion and know I won't change it. Likewise the same will go in reverse. It's an interesting topic though, and just something I feel quite passionate about at the moment with it impacting the family a fair bit.
