The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
and of the 14 eight showed no association between red meat and cancer i'll repeat that eight of the 14 studies showed no association between red meat and cancer six showed an association but other six only one showed a significant association five out of six studies the association was non-significant
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.
and of the 14 eight showed no association between red meat and cancer i'll repeat that eight of the 14 studies showed no association between red meat and cancer six showed an association but of the six only one showed a significant association five out of six studies the association was non-significant
let's just recap here in 13 of the 14 studies from this iarc report there was no statistically significant connection between red meat consumption and colon cancer
all of those 14 studies this is crazy eight of them showed no association between red meat and cancer the majority of the studies used for the position paper in the 2015 iarc judgment showed no association between red meat and cancer
eight showed no association between red me and cancer I'll repeat that eight of the 14 studies show no association between red me and cancer
and of the 14 eight showed no association between red me and cancer