The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
specifically red meat is a source of new 5g C so many who do ride the benefits or seek to denigrate red meat or its benefits or say that it's bad for us have laughed on the new 5 GC saying AHA this is something that could explain the mechanism of colon cancer for red meat which is kind of silly when you think about it
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
I think that the authors of this paper are hoping to support the notion that new 5 GC a cyalic Acid found in red meat but not found in human physiology after a mutation in a gene called cmah two to three million years ago maybe driving some of this colon cancer risk