Grossly fake science from Canada. Some BS correlation study (*) purports to link a 4-fold increase in prostate cancer risk from
intake of saturated fats. I dare these scumbags to explain why Canadian Inuit whose diet is super high in saturated fats from
fish and sea mammals are not all dying from prostate and other cancers.
This fake study is the general level of "medical research" for the last several decades. The "researchers" writing this crap
apparently do not know what confounding variables are in regression analysis. Western diets high in saturated fats are completely
overlapped with high carbohydrate and sugar intake (think choux creme pastry or stake and potatoes). So the saturated fat
intake is correlated with other variables that are true causal factors and is being spuriously tagged as the causal factor.
These clowns have no idea of what mechanism would explain saturated fat "causing" cancer. Saturated fat is not a mutagen,
teratogen or carcinogen. The only possible association is there are such toxins dissolved in the fat. This is actually a
serious possibility. That animals (e.g. cows) are exposed to carcinogens and store them in their fatty tissues. This is
an established detoxification response in animal and human metabolisms. The response involves insulin which not only controls
sugars (and is generated in response to them) but any strange chemical substance that enters the blood stream. Insulin is
the fat storage hormone.
Instead of spreading false advice, these clowns should tell people what is really going on. We have a cancer pandemic with
people having a 33% chance of getting cancer. This pandemic is due to the spew of never-before seen chemicals into the
environment and the high sugar (carbs are glcuose and fructose as far as the metabolism is concerned) diets. Stopping
saturated fat intake will not solve this problem since the contamination is in the water supply and in the air we breathe.
It is time to address the problem and not whore for Big Agro, industry and Big Pharma. The profits of these outfits cannot
come before the health of the population. (Oh my, such socialist thinking...)
(*) The study claims to identify an "oncogene" (MYC) expression stimulus from saturated fats. This sounds like a mechanistic
study but it isn't. It is basically impossible to separate food chemicals into non-interacting bins, study them alone and
then combine them linearly. MYC expression could be triggered by other chemicals in the food and the whole premise of
a "cancer gene" is BS. It is hyperbolic labeling. I can call cortisol the death hormone. But it is there for a reason
and its detrimental effects are triggered by other factors. Under normal conditions cortisol is released concurrently
with adrenaline and acts to maintain homeostasis. But stress from psychological abuse, chemical exposure, and other
modes that do not involve adrenaline can release cortisol as well. Then it is a problem. Similarly for these so-called
oncogenes. They must have anti-oncogene partners. And so the question is what is about the food intake that can promote
the wrong regime of operation. Nobody eats 100% saturated fats and 0% other compounds. But cancer requires glucose
to survive. Heart cells do not consume glucose but operate on a ketogenic "diet" and one does not hear about any heart cancer.
Sugar can trigger all sorts of nasty effects. And elevated blood sugar levels (compared to our ancestors) is likely a key
factor in cancer onset. So the oncogenes are not merely responding to saturated fat. They are responding to a certain
spectrum of food intake and sedentary lifestyle.
Last edited by kvs on Tue Dec 03, 2019 6:05 pm; edited 1 time in total