This ^^^
Bacon = Bad for you
- Thread starter DrunkleJon
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
DerbyshireNick
Member
As somebody who has a bit of an unhealthy obsession with nutritional science I can shine a bit of light on this.
As usual with these things "They" are making misleading statements. As is often with these things they make blanket statements as they apply to the 95% of the population.
The reality is, its not bacon itself that is bad. Its bacon the way it is produced in 2015 that is bad. If you were to hunt a wild bore and make bacon at home from it, this would be a very healthy food source (assuming a balanced diet).
What you get from the supermarket / store is a very different beast.
There is also the usual cause and causality. With this kind of "science" the variables are not isolated. It may be that people that eat x amount of bacon have more of x y and z but... is it that people who eat x amount of bacon dont give a **** about their health generally and there are loads of other factors at play.
I remember watching a comedy type talk once about exactly this. It gave a few examples of common "facts" like this that are nonsense. One such one was "kids who grow up in houses that have lots of books perform better in school". The insinuation is that the physical presence of the books have an impact on that childs development. So it could be that... or it could be that children born to the type of parents that have lots of books, probably belong to intelligent parents and thus are more likely to be intelligent too? Another example was living under powerlines increases your risk of cancer. Maybe its the powerlines or... maybe living under powerlines is undesireable thus less fortunate people tend to live there and as such eat cheaply. Eating lots of processed junk (like mass produced bacon), sugary crappy cerials, and so on.
End of rant
As usual with these things "They" are making misleading statements. As is often with these things they make blanket statements as they apply to the 95% of the population.
The reality is, its not bacon itself that is bad. Its bacon the way it is produced in 2015 that is bad. If you were to hunt a wild bore and make bacon at home from it, this would be a very healthy food source (assuming a balanced diet).
What you get from the supermarket / store is a very different beast.
There is also the usual cause and causality. With this kind of "science" the variables are not isolated. It may be that people that eat x amount of bacon have more of x y and z but... is it that people who eat x amount of bacon dont give a **** about their health generally and there are loads of other factors at play.
I remember watching a comedy type talk once about exactly this. It gave a few examples of common "facts" like this that are nonsense. One such one was "kids who grow up in houses that have lots of books perform better in school". The insinuation is that the physical presence of the books have an impact on that childs development. So it could be that... or it could be that children born to the type of parents that have lots of books, probably belong to intelligent parents and thus are more likely to be intelligent too? Another example was living under powerlines increases your risk of cancer. Maybe its the powerlines or... maybe living under powerlines is undesireable thus less fortunate people tend to live there and as such eat cheaply. Eating lots of processed junk (like mass produced bacon), sugary crappy cerials, and so on.
End of rant
Let's put this big number (18% increased risk) into perspective. With processed meat out of the equation, a healthy 40 year old white male (using my approximate demographic) has less than a 1.5% chance of developing colon cancer by the age of 70. Using the high end (1.5% risk), and increasing my odds by 18%, this means my odds went from 1.5% to 1.77% of getting colon cancer by age 70.
Not quite the shocking increase in risk that draws clicks on articles...so let's just say 18% to make people get the sky is falling effect.
Not quite the shocking increase in risk that draws clicks on articles...so let's just say 18% to make people get the sky is falling effect.
The sky's not falling it's raining bacon.
Similar threads
