Vegetarians 'Avoid More Cancers" (2 Viewers)

[Wobbler]

growing soybeans isn't innovative and do we really want to disrupt the markets/farmers in the developing world that depend on soy?

You know what he means though.

 

[broken arm]

You know what he means though.

ah yea.

 

[Froog]

agree with wobbler above, veggies are also less likely to smoke. and flashback, if what you say is true and the boffins were truely diligent with their stats, then they would have to select a population of veggies that were on average of the same lifestyle as the meat eating population or vice versa. do you really think they did that?

 

[Wobbler]

agree with wobbler above, veggies are also less likely to smoke. and flashback, if what you say is true and the boffins were truely diligent with their stats, then they would have to select a population of veggies that were on average of the same lifestyle as the meat eating population or vice versa. do you really think they did that?

In fairness, Flashback suggested that there are ways for allowing for the other differences between the two groups.

 

[Wobbler]

agree with wobbler above, veggies are also less likely to smoke. and flashback, if what you say is true and the boffins were truely diligent with their stats, then they would have to select a population of veggies that were on average of the same lifestyle as the meat eating population or vice versa. do you really think they did that?

It is worth going back to my point that the whole point of this thread - Meat causes cancer - is seriously flawed.

 

[flashback]

agree with wobbler above, veggies are also less likely to smoke. and flashback, if what you say is true and the boffins were truely diligent with their stats, then they would have to select a population of veggies that were on average of the same lifestyle as the meat eating population or vice versa. do you really think they did that?

No, they didn;t do this. This would be ~impossible.

How these studies are run is they take all patients, they take as much information of all patients as they possibly can, and then this data is used to test hypothesis.

Its not that easy to think about it. Say if you consider that this dataset contains a large number of people, and has a large number of dimensions (some of these dimensions are to do with smoking) they can start using statistical tools to see what dimensions correlate positively or negatively with what other dimensions.

You can then build up likelihoods of these correlations being chance, and once you are happy that they are not chance you can then formally write down what you did and submit to be published.


That's when the fun starts. You are then going to have usually three groups, (some journals like Nature use 4, I dunno exactly what the number is here, 3 is normal) all very familiar with different aspects of the area, pulling every line apart. Each of these groups will go to their friends, and get them to read it and criticise it. Their job is to be extremely pedantic, and sceptical about the claims, often obsessively so.

These people are, with all due respect, going to see all the mistakes that people like us are going to see, plus a lot more.

Even if these people screw up, the original crew and the three reviewer groups, the article will be published, and at that point the entire planet is free to criticise the work, at any point. And they do, they will have some tiny problem with some tiny aspect of something, and there will be a stink kicked up. This will almost always have no bearing on the central message of the paper, which will almost always be conservative, and correct.

But at that point, a journalist will see this shit storm, not really understand the minutia of the arguments, and publish something like "This Study now being called into question!!!11".
Then the public are going to go, AHHH, See!!! I told you it was bollocks. Science is retarted.


The end.

 

[therealjohnny]

"Warning: Consuming hot dogs and other processed meats increases the risk of cancer."

That's the label that a vegan advocacy group wants a New Jersey court to order Oscar Mayer, Hebrew National and other food companies to slap on hot dog packages.

"Vegans complaining about hot dogs is like the Amish complaining about gas prices," said Susan Thatcher of Irvine.


LINK

 

[Lolo]

The fact is that cows, pigs and sheep don't make good pets.

On the contrary, pigs make excellent pets, and are cleaner and less smelly than dogs if given the chance.

Sheep make, em, interesting pets. They kind of like to eat everything in sight. And wander into neighbours' houses and bounce on their beds (true story - a Kiwi friend of mine had a pet sheep when she was a kid).

If we stop rearing them, in order to save the planet, what will happen to them?

It will never happen that suddenly, gradual decrease in demand would lead to a decrease in production. And if it came to the crunch I'm sure lots of veggies would be happy to pay for the upkeep of a few decommissioned moo-moos.

 

[Wobbler]

It will never happen that suddenly, gradual decrease in demand would lead to a decrease in production. And if it came to the crunch I'm sure lots of veggies would be happy to pay for the upkeep of a few decommissioned moo-moos.

But it will come to the crunch (if vegetareanism becomes universal, which surely is the favoured outcome among veggies). People stop eating meat, keeping species from becoming extinct will become an issue. I don't think that relying on a few vegetarians to pay for the survival of several species is a sustainable, reliable solution. Could be wrong - I also didn't think that pigs make good pets!

 

[CitySickness]

I'm sure lots of veggies would be happy to pay for the upkeep of a few decommissioned moo-moos.

I'll put them beyond use, if yiz need a hand.

 

[nooleen]

But it will come to the crunch (if vegetareanism becomes universal, which surely is the favoured outcome among veggies). People stop eating meat, keeping species from becoming extinct will become an issue. I don't think that relying on a few vegetarians to pay for the survival of several species is a sustainable, reliable solution. Could be wrong - I also didn't think that pigs make good pets!

why would anyone want to save cows from extinction, unless we're going to eat them?

 

[Wobbler]

why would anyone want to save cows from extinction, unless we're going to eat them?

Their milky goodness?

 

[Wobbler]

why would anyone want to save cows from extinction, unless we're going to eat them?

To answer your question, I don't know. Lolo suggested that some animal welfare types might pay for their upkeep. Fair enough, but really?

I think if we stopped eating them and drinking their milk, they're fucked. This mightn't worry too many people, but probably wouldn't sit too well with many people concerned about animal welfare. Which is why I asked.

 

[nooleen]

if meat-eating was to be phased out it might make more sense to eat the remaining livestock rather than setting herds of veggies to tend herds of retired cattle....
it would be like giving thousands of people a single blade each of carefully uprooted grass to look after instead of mowing the lawn.

 

[Wobbler]

if meat-eating was to be phased out it might make more sense to eat the remaining livestock rather than setting herds of veggies to tend herds of retired cattle....

It depends on your point of view

 

[therealjohnny]

What if cows grow opposable thumbs and learn a rudimentary language that enables us to communicate? They might decide to turn carniverous and doom the human race to being the main course on Sundays.

Seeing as we've strayed into the realms of fantasy....

 

[nooleen]

It depends on your point of view

so does everything

 

[snakybus]

The lions and tigers will eat the cows, sheesh. It's population dynamics, folks. Ecology 101.

 

[nooleen]

then we'll have a lion and tiger population explosion and they'll eat our babies and the feeble

.....so win-win?

 

[Wobbler]

then we'll have a lion and tiger population explosion and they'll eat our babies and the feeble

.....so win-win?

Exactly. Pete, lock thread we've settled it. Seriously, lock this thread.