Pretty sure at this point they can work up a study to make it show that virtually anything will give you cancer.
Yeah, that's pretty much how much I drink a week. It's so addictive and has helped me reduced my intake of other sweet stuff like chocolates, etc.I used to drink a fuck load of this when I was a student. Like, 3 or 4 cartons a week.
Cutting down on the amount of sugary drinks we all consume, together with sugar taxes and restrictions on marketing, might help reduce the cancer burden, say the authors. That does not mean nobody should ever drink them. "As usual with nutrition, the idea is not to avoid foods, just to balance the intake," said Dr Mathilde Touvier, who led the research, from Inserm, the French national institute of health and medical research.
"The recommendation from several public health agencies is to consume less than one drink per day. If you consume from time to time a sugary drink it won't be a problem, but if you drink at least one glass a day it can raise the risk of several diseases – here, maybe cancer, but also with a high level of evidence, cardiometabolic diseases."
I'm gonna die of something
Bad day to post something from him (every day is but still)
Yep, that's all it takes to get in to one of the largest medical research journals, after all. Just shit out any study, say cancer, and there you go.
You can't tell but I'm rolling my eyes.
Hahaha now that is some quality humour right here!Death tends to prevent the development of cancer in 99% of the cases.
Sometimes the two are indistinguishable because of how they manipulate labeling. Apple juice, for example is already incredibly high in sugar, on par with most sodas.Are they talking about juice with added sugar or real fruit juice
For a supposedly progressive and pro-science forum, the amount of ignorant shit here is pretty telling.
Oxygen is known to degrade everything it interacts with so technically yes.
Depends on the juice. If you used a juicer to make your own apple juice at home, it'll still be loaded with sugars. You could instead make your own lemonade or cranberry juice and limit the amount of sugar in it and it'd be much better for you.
Natural fruit juices also have massive amounts of sugar, without the fiber that eating actual fruit would provide.Natural fruit juices or the boxed kind you find in stores with massive amounts of sugars and artificial shit added to them ?
If it's the former, I'm surprised.
If it's the latter, no shit.
I want semi-intelligent people with the capacity to learn new things to understand the basics of how scientific studies work and how to interpret their conclusions.Relax. We are all just joking....
Seriously, if u really want to live a super healthy lifestyle as per medical studies recommendations, you will probably be living in a sterilized room, wear a hazmat suit and eat only super sterilized food.
No way can a normal sane person living their life based on these constantly updated medical studies and adjusting on the fly ad infinitum.
Just live your life as per the classic mantra. Do every thing in moderation.
Depends, it's all about the sugar. a 1% juice drink may be low sugar or it may have even more sugar to compensate for all of the citric acid they dump into it to make you think it tastes like fruit when there is hardly any in it.
I want semi-intelligent people with the capacity to learn new things to understand the basics of how scientific studies work and how to interpret their conclusions.
Something "raising your risk of cancer" is not the same as "giving you cancer" as say gamma rays, UV radiation or asbestos fibers will. This research adds to our knowledge base and helps other actual scientists design public health programs that are pretty much the only way to keep health costs somewhat reasonable as the population rapidly ages. There's a very good chance that you'll die due to any numerous other causes before any of the risks materialize. Ridiculing the study is just adding to the general anti-science sentiment that is on the raise in most places.
This is a combination of shitty media reporting for any science news as well as scientists not really having as many good spokepeople as they should. You need both people on the science side to explain things in a way that makes it understandable for the average person as well as competent reporting on the media side. The Guardian is doing a good job here though, I do wish people actually read the article.Counter point:
Your super serious logical stance is one of the contributing factors why the anti-science crowd is growing.
U need to understand that although scientists & researchers may be able to think in numbers & logic, the mass majority do not. Trying to pimp these ideas 'as a matter of fact' and expect the mass to take in 'as is' is just a fool's errand. And then to immediately dismiss the detractors as 'simpleton', guess what is the result?
These reports can be super logical and numbers driven if it's published for peer review. Though these Scientists & researchers will need a marketing department if their findings are to be presented for mass consumption.
This is 100% shitty media reporting, as per usual for any science news. You need both people on the science side to explain things in a way that makes it understandable for the average person as well as competent reporting on the media side.
My stance is directed at ERA members, whom I usually consider better informed and educated than the average person and who have no reason to play idiots in this topic either.
Gee, go try to have some fun in any thread on a political or social topic and tell me how it works out for you.This is just a casual community driven forum. Not a formal scientific review board. Some fun should be allowed I think...
Life is cancer.
Better just stop all the research, think of how much money we'd save!so in the past five years literally everything has been discovered to "cause cancer"
smoked meats = cancer
processed meats = cancer
beef = cancer
pork/bacon = cancer
beer/wine = cancer
soda and sugary drinks = cancer
smoking = cancer
etc etc
meanwhile some people smoke every day and never get cancer and my friend whom my son is named after died from melanoma at age 30.
eat, drink, be merry, enjoy life as much as you can. You may live to 100, you may live to 35, its really a crap shoot based on your genetics, diet, exercise, luck and many other factors.
#1: It's not literally everything.so in the past five years literally everything has been discovered to "cause cancer"
Funny enough, oxygen actually does kill us slowly because it's of it's oxidative properties despite it's need for survival.
so in the past five years literally everything has been discovered to "cause cancer"
smoked meats = cancer
processed meats = cancer
beef = cancer
pork/bacon = cancer
beer/wine = cancer
soda and sugary drinks = cancer
smoking = cancer
etc etc
meanwhile some people smoke every day and never get cancer and my friend whom my son is named after died from melanoma at age 30.
eat, drink, be merry, enjoy life as much as you can. You may live to 100, you may live to 35, its really a crap shoot based on your genetics, diet, exercise, luck and many other factors.
There will be significant effects when governments will finally be forced to take direct action in limiting sugar and other parts of packaged food. We're at the baby steps phase at the moment.#1: It's not literally everything.
#2: Nearly everything on that list has been known or at least partially linked to causing cancer for decades.
You can live your live however you like, but being ignorant of these things benefits absolutely no one.
Yeah, that's pretty much how much I drink a week. It's so addictive and has helped me reduced my intake of other sweet stuff like chocolates, etc.
Why drink only water when it specifically says excessive consumption of fruit juice? Just don't excessively consume it, like literally everything else. You shouldn't be excessively consuming anything.
Yeah lol. That really sucks.
Pretty sure there was another study posted here that alcohol gives cancer too.
Better just stop all the research, think of how much money we'd save!
congratulations, you both completely missed the point.#1: It's not literally everything.
#2: Nearly everything on that list has been known or at least partially linked to causing cancer for decades.
You can live your live however you like, but being ignorant of these things benefits absolutely no one.
I absolutely did not. Your point was "Some people do whatever they want and die young, and some live to be forever. Just do what you want." My counter point is "Most people are affected by their life choices, and they should have the education and resources to make the decisions best for them."
Relax. We are all just joking....
Seriously, if u really want to live a super healthy lifestyle as per medical studies recommendations, you will probably be living in a sterilized room, wear a hazmat suit and eat only super sterilized food.
No way can a normal sane person living their life based on these constantly updated medical studies and adjusting on the fly ad infinitum.
Just live your life as per the classic mantra. Do every thing in moderation.