How risky is eating red meat? New papers provoke controversy
Eating red meat is linked to cancer and heart disease, but are the risks big enough to give up burgers and steak?
A team of international researchers says probably not, contradicting established advice. In a series of papers published Monday, the researchers say the increased risks are small and uncertain and that cutting back likely wouldn't be worth it for people who enjoy meat.
Their conclusions were swiftly attacked by a group of prominent U.S. scientists who took the unusual step of trying to stop publication until their criticisms were addressed.
The new work does not say red meat and processed meats like hot dogs and bacon are healthy or that people should eat more of them. The reviews of past studies generally support the ties to cancer, heart disease and other bad health outcomes. But the authors say the evidence is weak, and that there's not much certainty meat is really the...
The Quiet Christian wrote: .. that molecular biologists cannot deny the Designer and the genius behind what they study.
This is the classical Teleological Argument (e.g. Wm. Paley's Watchmaker), which was refuted centuries ago by David Hume: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument
Creation is convincing only to those who already believe; even if the Teleological Argument weren't fallacious (Circular Reasoning), it would still not convince a stubborn, unregenerate mind. The flesh profits nothing, John 6:63.
We live in a day in age that has over 50 years of training people to be followers of the rich and powerful...
No one thinks, no reasons, and everyone follows...
If only the majority of people would realize that this climate change thing is just a cover up to take our rights...
Who will make sure we are building our house "eco friendly"? Who will monitor our food intake and energy uses? Who will tell us how many cars, kids, and buildings we can own to save the environment? The answer to all of these is the Government, and a socialist one at that...
The power hungry socialist have done a great job at tricking the nation into feeling guilty for enjoying life. They have done an amazing job at getting people to willingly lay down their rights and the feet of the government. I just wonder how long it will be till it comes on fully...
Neil wrote: Because the Scientific Method is logically fallacious, and research often involves Conflict of Interest as well ("He who pays the piper calls the tune"), it can never achieve the certainty its credulous promoters claim it has. The only thing constant about science is its varied conclusions!
Well said Neil! I remember when I was growing up they had a similar thought. It went something like if you donâ€™t like a scientific finding, just wait and it will change.
I think you are objecting, Neil, to the scientific process rather than the scientific method. The method itself is pretty straight forward. What happens, though, is that outside influences and internal bias screws the analysis portion. If those conducting analysis could check their influences and biases at the door, then they may find something remarkable, but perhaps I just made your point for you, Brother.
We received an email this morning from a creation ministry which stated that molecular biologists face the elephant inside the room -- that molecular biologists cannot deny the Designer and the genius behind what they study. But they cannot publically acknowledge what is obvious to them or they will lose their jobs.
Because the Scientific Method is logically fallacious, and research often involves Conflict of Interest as well ("He who pays the piper calls the tune"), it can never achieve the certainty its credulous promoters claim it has.
The only thing constant about science is its varied conclusions!
Considering the recent news article regarding the supposed impact of cattle on global warming -- which caused my family to almost laugh themselves to death -- is any support, however so mild, for the eating of red meat now comletely unorthodox? Something akin to supporting anything but Darwinian evolution?
When science surpresses the truth for political or cultural reasons, demanding that the analysis of the findings are twisted to ensure orthodoxy to whatever that political or cultural standard may be, there is a danger of becoming an example of willing surpression of truth from Romans 1. As the Lord crafted, created, and sustains His creation, scientific discovery should uphold the Lord's ordered systems and ultimately point to Him.