![1428933747233[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/zvCwIoj.png "1428933747233[1].png")
Why are normie ''fitness'' freaks such autists about food?
>>36335570
Because cutting out a certain food type is easier than to just eat less in general. And since it works, obviously obesity is to be blamed on that food type alone. Because you lost weight when you stopped eating it.
>>36335570
they're the Venn diagram where "healthy" meets "fitness"
in here, we're just /fitness/
>>36336747
You're not fit if you're not healthy.
Enjoy your heart disease and cancer, meat- and dairy-eating retards.
>>36335687
can confirm this works.
That said I still eat tonnes of processed meat and foods.
>>36336774
vegan?
>>36335570
because, in reality, our world is FILLED with shitty food that keeps ur gains away, and if u dont filter them out u won't make it.
who /vegetarian/ here
>>36336775
>processed meat
aka Group 1 carcinogen
I have no clue what you're doing on a fitness board. You're a moron.
>Something I don't do because I'm fat
>Why do normies do that?
Go back to /rk9/ you fucking faggot.
>>36336747
Pffft
If you're fit, you're only not healthy if you're roiding or doping or doing something retarded like synthol
>>36336831
Being fat gives you cancer, not meat. Removing the confounding factor that vegans will have less bodyfat is basically impossible, not that they really try.
But more importantly, yeah, burned food can have carcinogens, this occurs in both meat and plant matter. So, if you're really worried, don't heavily grill your food, problem solved.
>>36336910
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_a_disjunct
>>36336910
He's not talking about meats in general or vegans. Processed meats specifically are a definite carcinogen.
>>36336894
OP asked
>>36336894
>Why are normie ''fitness'' freaks such autists about food?
>>36336894
>Pffft
>If you're fit, you're only not healthy if you're roiding or doping or doing something retarded like synthol
you don't have to be a mega fucking autist about what you put into your mouth 100% of the time. You can still be fit without being MUH GRASSFED VIRGIN COW ANUS MEAT 100 ORGANIC CERTIFIED
>>36336910
Goodness, you're dumb.
>>36336933
It'd be one thing if they had proof of actual carcinogenic biological activity of chemicals found in meat or dairy. But they don't. It's all hypothetical. All they have are correlation studies comparing cancer rates among vegans and vegetarians, who are less likely to be fat because of their diet (even among BMI bracket) and more likely to be wealthy, white, medically proactive, physically active, with cancer rates among your normal average fucktard who never fucking exercises and doesn't pay even the slightest attention to anything about his health.
>>36336986
>The WHO report that made huge waves in Oct. 2015 about processed meats linked to 3% of ALL cancers and 21% of bowel cancers didn't make its way to this retard
Enjoy your ass cancer
>>36337043
That's not a result of people eating meat, it's a result of not eating vegetables. Most everyone should be eating more leafy vegetables and getting more fiber, it cleans out the ass and keeps organic matter from just wasting away in there forever.
>>36337071
>That's not a result of people eating meat, it's a result of not eating vegetables
Yeah, you know better than the WHO. Nowhere was that mentioned. You're purely speculating that a diet high in processed meats would ameliorate the definitive linked to increased cancer. You have no idea the quantity of veggies that would go toward improving that rate and you have no idea by how much. You're just desperately hoping your shitty diet doesn't come back to bite you if you incorporate something facile while it's still overall a shitty diet. There's a reason all the respected cancer researchers who held that report in high regard didn't say
>Don't worry 'bout it just add some veggies and it won't even be problematic
Not to mention cancer isn't the only problem with meat, but you're probably delusional about them too.
>>36337071
What people mean by processed meat is nitrate preserved meat products such as sausages and cold cuts. They are proven to be highly carcinogenic.
>People at work always trying new fad diets expecting amazing resulsts
I stopped trying to help a long time ago.
>>36337136
>Yeah, you know better than the WHO.
Apparently I fucking do. Ask any doctor what causes bowel cancer. They'll tell you a diet without fiber.
>You're purely speculating that a diet high in processed meats would ameliorate the definitive linked to increased cancer.
There is no "definitive link"
Every one of these fucking studies is just going over cancer rates and comparing them to people's own self reported dietary habits. Then they control for age, smoking, and BMI (with wide brackets) and call it a day.
But more importantly, they don't even know how exactly their interpretations of their findings would be true, rather than the obvious actual truth: people who frequently eat processed meats are much less likely to consume adequate amounts of soluble and insoluble fiber, just like how they're less likely to do lots of other shit that would be beneficial to their health.
>You're just desperately hoping your shitty diet doesn't come back to bite you if you incorporate something facile while it's still overall a shitty diet.
It's only a shitty diet if I'm fucking up on my macros or micros.
>There's a reason all the respected cancer researchers who held that report in high regard didn't say Don't worry 'bout it just add some veggies and it won't even be problematic
Yeah, everyone's got a book to sell and an agenda to push. And as far as the WHO is concerned, it's far from the first time they've said that shit was really bad when it was actually fucking nothing. Like when they classified swine flu as a top level pandemic.
>>36337071
>>36337136
A couple of weeks ago, there was a video posted on /fit/ from some vegan skeleton and her pet doctor.
The doctor claimed that the supposed higher testerone vegans have, which can cause cancer, isn't a problem because a vegan diet "reverses cancer".
Not reduce the risk, as if you remove the carcinogens, but reverse it.
Logically, if it reverses it, it would be down to something in the diet. The most likely thing being the increase in fibre (google fibre cancer reverse)
So eating a high fibre diet can reduce the risk of cancer from a potential carcinogen.
Yet a high fibre diet with a small amount of meat, which will only increase a cancer risk by 18% FOR PROCESSED MEAT, the one that is actually classed as a definite carcinogen, if eaten on its own, and the fucking vegans scream that it is completely illogical, and will never work, despite it being how people have lived right up until recent decades.
If it wasn't for the fact that they act like autistics spacking out because you gave them the wrong coloured fork with their dinner, it would just be best to smile and nod when they start screaming about how absolutely lethal meat is, like licking a piece of steak will cause you to instantly drop dead of tumours.
>>36337306
The fiber doesn't affect the potential carcinogenic activity of sodium nitrate, it simply keeps the intestinal track relatively clean and regular, compromising of which can lead to a number of bowel diseases, including colitis and colon cancer.
>>36336986
>It'd be one thing if they had proof of actual carcinogenic biological activity of chemicals found in meat or dairy. But they don't. It's all hypothetical.
Given the discussion you're having is about processed meat, they do have direct proof. That's why it's listed as a class 1 carcinogen.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/2015/11/03/report-says-eating-processed-meat-is-carcinogenic-understanding-the-findings/
> Meat processing such as curing (e.g. by adding nitrates or nitrites) or smoking can lead to the formation of potentially cancer-causing (carcinogenic) chemicals such as N-nitroso-compounds (NOC) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH).
>Meat also contains heme iron, which can facilitate production of carcinogenic NOCs.
>Cooking – especially high-temperature cooking including cooking meats over a flame (e.g., pan-frying, grilling, barbecuing) – can also produce carcinogenic chemicals, including heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAA) and PAHs.
These are all things known to cause cancer through direct testing in animals and cell dishes. Processed meats are the worst, but even fresh red meat is listed as class 2a carcinogen because it shares some of the carcinogenic properties but isn't as clear from observational studies as processed meat, which is consistent enough to have it labeled a definite carcinogen.
>>36337372
>>36337393
Watch him cop-out, ignore you or beat around the bush like the delusional, fat sack of crap he is.
He's just some loser desperate to keep eating garbage and thinks he's above science and aggregated, empirical data. Like most people here.
>>36337216
i just silently laugh at their attempts at a diet.
>>36337372
Fibre is just one part of the equation.
What about the antioxidants, which are also present in a plant based diet, which are proven to counter carcinogens?
Or do those suddenly stop functioning if they smell bacon, like microscopic cancer fighting muslims?
>>36337425
I'll admit, I was wrong about the nitrates. Further reading suggests that that line of thinking is correct, a clear causal link, albeit with a relatively insignificant clinical relevance as far as normal dietary intake is concerned.
However, man vegan and vegetarian promoters suggest that all meat is inherently carcinogenic, despite a complete lack of evidence for an actual causal link rather than just correlation with other lifestyle choices that actually matter.
>Cooking – especially high-temperature cooking including cooking meats over a flame (e.g., pan-frying, grilling, barbecuing) – can also produce carcinogenic chemicals, including heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAA) and PAHs.
As I stated myself. But it is worth noting that this is NOT limited to meat. Any organic material which is cooked in a highly oxidation manner (primarily over open flame) will contain highly oxidative chemicals which in many cases are carcinogenic.
>>36337461
It depends on the mechanism of sodium nitrate. I couldn't tell you exactly without further research. Anti-oxidents, as the name suggest, counter oxidents. This means that they would be effective at countering the carcinogenic effect of say, benzopyrene. Whether sodium nitrate has carcinogenic effect as an oxident is beyond my knowledge
>>36337461
>>36337512
Isn't that a bit like eating vegetables to counter smoking?
>cigarettes aren't bad for you if you just eat your veggies
>there's no direct link, it's just that people who get lung cancer and smoke don't do cardio
>>36336947
In the 1960s maybe. Now that nitrite levels are more strictly controlled (to concentrations less than found in celery and leafy greens), and vitamin C and E are now used in cured meats to help combat nitrosamine formation, not so much now. And even prior to strict regulation, cancers caused by dietary nitrosamines were believed to be rare at only a couple hundred cases per year. If you think you shouldn't eat bacon, you probably shouldn't saute celery either.
>>36337561
Well, that vegan doctor did seem to suggest that eating your veggies would protect you from testosterone induced prostate cancer.
Can he be trusted?
What's the risk of getting cancer from 200g of meat daily as in comparison to 1 hour of direct sunlight each day?
>>36337666
Sunlight is much more definitely a primary cause of skin cancer than meat is of bowel cancer.
>>36337575
>In the 1960s maybe
It was recognized by the WHO just last year and many other groups like the AICR and WCRF within a decade before.
>Now that nitrite levels are more strictly controlled (to concentrations less than found in celery and leafy greens), and vitamin C and E are now used in cured meats to help combat nitrosamine formation
Which doesn't help at all and may even make things worse because the fat in the meat reacts with the vitamin C to produce even more nitrosamines.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2095705/pdf/1678.pdf
>If you think you shouldn't eat bacon, you probably shouldn't saute celery either.
Nitrates themselves aren't the cancer concern, it's when nitrates are added to meat and form nitrosamines that they're carcinogenic. This guy's right >>36337425, you're just fucking around and making shit up in your head to comfort yourself.
It's not that hard to eat good food.
Things you want:
>Vegetables
>Fresh cuts of meat and/or fish
>Grains that aren't processed out the ass
So only really consider avoiding tons of processed meat, like most anything like and made out of mince meat (cow assholes and spider legs), cheap bacon (shit cuts of meat flavored with liquid smoke, YUM) and premade fish products (made of fish that's literally so ruined it's just one step above getting dissolvd with formic acid and sold to animal feed companies instead). Take it easy on the sugar and salt, eat fresh when possible, and count your calories.
>>36335570
you plebs still eat food? I stare at the sun for 10 hours a day to get all my nutrients for the day
>>36336774
>meat and dairy
>being the only carcinogenic agents to be concerned about
>ignoring the pounds of sugar in just about any other food that inevitably turns to fat and also leads to cancer
1/10
