• Aldrond@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    1 year ago

    Although high in nutrients, the difficulty in digestion makes it a carciogen. Particularly red meat - bird and fish (pre omnipresent plastics and heavy metals) are relatively healthier.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s more the industrial farming and food processing practices that make it carcinogenic.

      • Aldrond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not. Remember that evolutionary incentives don’t care if you tend to live very far fast 32.

        • abraxas@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It actually is. Most carcinogenic evidence on meats come from processed meats. Per cited references, eating way too much red meat is “probably” a cause for cancer, but eating processed meats is definitely a cause for cancer.

          And by “way too much”, that’s 1.5lbs/week. I love a good steak, but don’t really eat 1.5lbs/week of it.

    • abraxas@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s sorta half the story. The official statement is that consistently eating more than 1.5lbs (500g) of red meat per week “probably” (their word) increases your cancer risk. The real story is that eating more than 50g of processed meat per week dramatically increases your cancer risk. To the extent that processed meat is ranked as a “Group 1” carcinogen.

      Flip-side, grains and legumes have been tied to cancer as well. I can’t find exactly what category, but they seem fairly convinced they are carcinogenic.

      It is, sadly, like the California Cancer joke, where almost everything causes cancer if taken to excess.

    • psud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it is hard to digest meat, why do carnivores have shorter guts than herbivores?

      • Aldrond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Hard” doesn’t necessarily mean “requiring many resources” in this case. It has more nutrients, and as such it’s usually not digested as fully as herbivores digest plant matter.

        It’s harder on the system doing the digestion.