It’s all over the Internet: the WHO has announced that eating processed meat and red meat in general causes cancer. Many people seem to embrace this and I seem to be the only one that is highly suspicious. The WHO is bought by Big Pharma, Big Food and Big Cancer, so why would they try to prevent cancer? It doesn’t make sense. And when something doesn’t make sense, all my red lights are turned on.
Junk food is unhealthy and a big source of cancer. That’s a fact, but you never hear the WHO about that. They should warn against sugar, but they can’t do that, as the sugar industry would object. The meat industry is not so clearly defined and not so powerful. When politicians get involved it’s always worth digging deeper.
Let’s state that I don’t know much about how meats are processed and it’s possible that nowadays different methods are used than 200 years ago. But fact is that ham, bacon and sausages have been on the menu in many countries for a very, very long time. And nobody got cancer from it. And people have been eating red meat for as long as there have been humans.
Of course it’s possible that the way meat is processed nowadays is so dirty that indeed it causes cancer, but this study doesn’t seem to make that difference. And I don’t doubt that meat from a grain fed cow that was stuffed with antibiotics is unhealthy, but there is no recommendation to stop with this kind of commercial meat production.
“In view of the large number of people who consume processed meat, the global impact on cancer incidence is of public health importance” Funny that they don’t do anything about the general consumption of junk food. “The IARC added processed meat to the same group 1 category of cancer-causing agents as tobacco smoke and asbestos.” Wow, that’s a stretch, especially as “processed meat” is a huge category that puts hot dogs at the same level as the oldfashioned bacon. Not a lot of details are given about how the study was set up, but it has a strong smell of bias in it. “unprocessed red meat was classified as a “probable” carcinogen in its group 2A list that also contains glyphosate,” So when is the WHO going to lobby to ban glyphosate? That would help a lot in the fight against cancer. And yes, if cows are fed glyphosate laden grain then that poison gets in the meat and it can cause cancer in the humans eating that meat.
As usual the WHO then starts to throw around numbers that aren’t based on anything and are meaningless anyway. Red meat consumption doesn’t kill anyone, unless it’s highly toxic red meat. Why this fight to put meat into a bad light? I don’t know, but it’s clearly not based on any scientific evidence. Simple basic logic tells you that it can’t be based on facts.
“processed meats being placed in group one means there is convincing evidence that it does cause cancer in humans,” OK then, where is the convincing evidence that American hot dogs are the same as organic ham? I would love to see that.
So how much is science in this study? That’s hard to say, but it’s not much. I’m sure there are some facts, like meat from glyphosate laden grain fed, antibiotics filled cows is unhealthy. Oh wait, they didn’t specify that, so actually that fact doesn’t show up either in this study. Then there is very little left. I’m sorry for all the vegetarians and vegans who welcomed this news, but it’s a lot of fiction. So why does the WHO publish this? It’s a smoke screen. By occasionally publishing some warnings about things that can cause cancer they are pretending to be interested in preventing this dreadful disease. But if you dig a tiny little bit deeper you will find that they have no interest in preventing anything. That’s how nowadays politics work. And politics and science just don’t make good friends.