bacon

is it unhealthy? the who considers it a group 1 carcinogen (same tier as cigs??) isnt it just pork meat and salt?

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why would it be grouped with cigs? they still haven't managed to figure out the mechanism causing cancer so it can't be similar to cigs.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous
      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        double vaxxed tripple boosted fully flaccid riden on biden, #blm, lets show these chuds what truth really is

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I eat a lot of those group 1 foods all the time...

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        how the frick are they gonna have a
        >RED ALERT 110% CAUSES FRICKING CANCER YOU WILL FRICKING DIE
        classification but not a
        >YOU CAN HAVE THIS IN ETERNAL ABUNDANCE AND NEVER GET CANCER FROM IT
        classification? did they admit defeat in that picture and concede that everything on earth will give you cancer or kill you? lol. literally breathing air can give you cancer, and no i dont mean polluted air, the perfect ratio most pure air literally can give you cancer. oxygen ages you very fricking slowly but very much consistently

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        salami bros where we at

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Peppered salami with some hard cheese and olive oil

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Cancer Research
        >"We've scientifically proven inhaling burnt things is bad for you."
        >"Therefore, any smoked meat MUST be bad for you. Class 1A radioactive."
        >"Let's win against cancer and live forever."
        I see.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >probably causes cancer
        Its amazing they can just spout shit like this. They cannot prove it but that doesn't stop the propaganda, same with saturated fats lmao.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Are you saying information is useless if its not 100% certain?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            IST posts are stupid.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Answer the question

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                processed meats dont have anything to do with cancer according to the best evidence

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Sure is a good thing. I never said that then. Are you going to answer the question or not?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                im not that anon so no

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks. Please avoid wasting peoples time in the future

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30638072/
                > Several studies have found that high consumption of red meat—especially processed red meat, a mainstay of Western diets—is associated with an increased risk of developing CRC

                >https://www.wcrf.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Colorectal-cancer-report.pdf
                >Consumption of red meat is probably a cause of colorectal cancer

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12750250/
                >Endogenous N-nitrosation, arising from ingestion of haem but not inorganic iron or protein, may account for the increased risk associated with red meat consumption in colorectal cancer.

                >https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/43/4/943
                >processed meat intake may adversely affect lung function and the risk of COPD

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17255565/
                >Frequent cured meat consumption was associated independently with an obstructive pattern of lung function and increased odds of COPD

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27999171/
                >Higher cured meat intake was associated with worsening asthma symptoms over time

                >https://www.cancer.org/cancer/colon-rectal-cancer/causes-risks-prevention/risk-factors.html
                >A diet that's high in red meats (such as beef, pork, lamb, or liver) and processed meats (like hot dogs and some luncheon meats) raises your colorectal cancer risk.

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23011480/
                >It could be concluded that processed meat intake could be a powerful multiorgan carcinogen.

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24148709/
                >high consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, may increase all-cause mortality.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23497300/
                >The results of our analysis support a moderate positive association between processed meat consumption and mortality, in particular due to cardiovascular diseases, but also to cancer.

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19307518/
                >Red and processed meat intakes were associated with modest increases in total mortality, cancer mortality, and cardiovascular disease mortality.

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24148709/
                >These results indicate that high consumption of red meat, especially processed meat, may increase all-cause mortality.

                >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23011480/
                >It could be concluded that processed meat intake could be a powerful multiorgan carcinogen.

                >https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2121650/
                >In summary, red and processed meat intake appears to be positively associated with risk of cancer of the colon and rectum, esophagus, liver, lung, and pancreas in a new, large US cohort study of 500,000 men and women.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                all this "science" and not a single clinical trial or human experiment in sight. amazing really

                >cohort studies
                >associated
                >could be
                >may be
                >associates with

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Welcome to scientific language where almost nothing is ever stated with certainty. Just because tiktok keto shills say meat is superfood with absolute certainty and confidence doesn't make it so you full moron simpleton

              • 1 month ago
                SwedishBrorsan

                HAHAHA SCIENTIFIC LANGUAGE
                what youre citing is completely fricking illiterate jibberish that holds no meaningful substance
                certain or uncertain in science is not at the 12 year old social skills phrasing stupid shit like
                "probably not brah or possibly or maybe not"

                vegan tards dont evne read their own sources, imagine my fricking shock

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                all this "science" and not a single clinical trial or human experiment in sight. amazing really

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Can you post a study of any kind showing that bacon is healthy? No. Because such evidence doesn't exist.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Where is the proof that bacon is healthy, ketoBlack person? Where is it?

                Stop trying to move the goalposts

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I asked a direct question for you to prove that bacon is healthy. That was my first goalpost ITT and a very simple request.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Literally nowhere in the post chain did you ask that

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You're confusing with other anons. Show the evidence that bacon is healthy now.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No I'm not. Show me where you asked that.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Here

                Where is the proof that bacon is healthy, ketoBlack person? Where is it?

                and here

                Can you post a study of any kind showing that bacon is healthy? No. Because such evidence doesn't exist.

                Now show the evidence that bacon is healthy.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, you posted that in response to the fact that you got disproven, that it was unhealthy. Now you're grasping at straws, trying to prove the inverse. Let it go

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No, you must show evidence that bacon is healthy.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                no i dont. i said the best evidence shows its not related to cancer which it does

                [...]
                [...]
                the best evidence shows no cancer risk from red or processed meats. WHO ignored this evidence as for why they did that thats a different issue
                >Most importantly for the IARC report, two major dietary intervention studies that should have contributed to the assessment of the claimed relationship of red meat and cancer were not considered. The first was a study of colon polyps, the precancerous growths that greatly increase the likelihood of developing colon cancer. Almost 1,900 subjects with a recent history of having a polyp removed were divided into a control group that ate their usual diet and a group following a diet characterized by significant decreases in total fat, red, and processed meat along with increases in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes (Schatzkin et al., 2000). Participants were followed for 3 years and at the end of that time, the recurrence of colon polyps was identical in both diet groups. It is possible that the precancerous stage may not have been the proper time for dietary intervention. The Women’s Health Initiative, therefore, studied a low-fat diet, achieved in large part by reducing red- and processed-meat consumption, among almost 49,000 women (Beresford et al., 2006); about 30,000 followed their normal diets and almost 20,000 were assigned to low-fat diets. After 9 years, the rate of colon cancer was almost identical in the low-fat and control-diet groups. These studies strongly suggest that the observational studies are not supported by dietary intervention studies at either the precancerous or malignant tumor stages of colon cancer.
                https://academic.oup.com/af/article/8/3/5/5048762

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >you must do as I say reeeee!!!!
                estrogenic post

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I rest my case which was

                Yes because there is zero evidence that is healthy. Ketolards ITT screech all science bad as always because it doesn't support their moronic belief that it is.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's literally the OP, you fricking moron. Look at the tab in your browser bar (you're not a fricking phoneposter, right?)
                The absolute insane stupidity of children on the internet.
                >I don't want something to be true, I can't prove my version of it, so I'll just scream and shit myself endlessly

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                0 evidence posted.

                [...]
                >cohort studies
                >associated
                >could be
                >may be
                >associates with

                0 evidence posted.

                Never ceases to amaze me how dumb children on the internet are.

          • 1 month ago
            sage

            >Are you saying information is useless if its not 100% certain?

            all this "science" and not a single clinical trial or human experiment in sight. amazing really

            >"science"
            "Could be, might, maybe" means it's 100% useful, right??? That's not ironic considering your own exaggerated convolutions! Or are you seizing and having convulsions, instead?
            ANSWER THE QUESTION BY TELLING ME I'M RIGHT OR YOU'RE WASTING MY TIME

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Welcome to scientific language where almost nothing is ever stated with certainty. Just because tiktok keto shills say meat is superfood with absolute certainty and confidence doesn't make it so you full moron simpleton

              Yes because there is zero evidence that is healthy. Ketolards ITT screech all science bad as always because it doesn't support their moronic belief that it is.

              the best evidence shows no cancer risk from red or processed meats. WHO ignored this evidence as for why they did that thats a different issue
              >Most importantly for the IARC report, two major dietary intervention studies that should have contributed to the assessment of the claimed relationship of red meat and cancer were not considered. The first was a study of colon polyps, the precancerous growths that greatly increase the likelihood of developing colon cancer. Almost 1,900 subjects with a recent history of having a polyp removed were divided into a control group that ate their usual diet and a group following a diet characterized by significant decreases in total fat, red, and processed meat along with increases in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes (Schatzkin et al., 2000). Participants were followed for 3 years and at the end of that time, the recurrence of colon polyps was identical in both diet groups. It is possible that the precancerous stage may not have been the proper time for dietary intervention. The Women’s Health Initiative, therefore, studied a low-fat diet, achieved in large part by reducing red- and processed-meat consumption, among almost 49,000 women (Beresford et al., 2006); about 30,000 followed their normal diets and almost 20,000 were assigned to low-fat diets. After 9 years, the rate of colon cancer was almost identical in the low-fat and control-diet groups. These studies strongly suggest that the observational studies are not supported by dietary intervention studies at either the precancerous or malignant tumor stages of colon cancer.
              https://academic.oup.com/af/article/8/3/5/5048762

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Where is the proof that bacon is healthy, ketoBlack person? Where is it?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I'm not that anon. I'm merely saying if you dont have direct evidence and you have correlations its reasonable to err on the side of caution. Idk why you are so incensed

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >If you cannot prove me wrong, then I'm right
                >If you cannot prove yourself right, then I'm right
                >"Proof" is 1% accuracy when it supports my beliefs, I'm omniscient
                >"Proof" is 100% accuracy if it supports yours, if you're wrong about anything then you're wrong about everything
                Merely saying, huh.

                The only "science" being discussed in this is practically religious in nature: "only what is immaculate can be associated with, otherwise you are destined to death." If a SINGLE ATOM were to be flawed or disparaging in any way when in the same universe as a human, then that human is crashing towards Hellish death and sinful.

                Sorry, Anons, but you are not God. You are not omnipotent, you are not immortal, you will erode and die. Like all of nature. To claim "bacon causes cancer" is the same as claiming "the Sun causes cancer," and no less accurate than "breathing causes lung degradation." As true as this may be, the life decisions you make with that information (and/or advice you give) is what defines lifestyle and platform for judgment.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Not reading your blogpost sorry

          • 1 month ago
            SwedishBrorsan

            > probably
            > maybe
            > possibly
            > probably not
            VEGANS AND SCIENCE HAHAHA

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Together we will eat ze bugs
        How the frick are they classifying something humans have been ingesting in vast quantities since the dawn of time as "probably causes cancer" with a straight face?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The same "how" they invest in telling everyone
          >the things you eat form you
          >the things that what you eat eats form them
          >the things that what you eat eat eats form them
          >the things that what you eat eat eat eats...
          >If "BAD" is found ANY WHERE in this chain, YOU WILL DIE
          >You must only eat what is pure! Immortal! Holy!
          As if there is something on planet Earth that is both omnipotent and immaculate which humans have unlimited access to and ingest freely.

          Turns out; life ends.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >noooOOOO THAT IMAGE ISN'T RIGHT!!!! BECAUSE I DON'T WANT IT TO BE!!! --anonymous 20 year old on the internet with no background in medical science or ability to articulate himself

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >The source?
          >Me, myself, and I, of course

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Here's that founder of modern veganism that died at 66 of a heart attack that I was telling you about

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Bacon is often cured which might use carcinogens in the curing.

      https://i.imgur.com/1gAEqlS.png

      The evidence unprocessed red meat being carcinogenic is very weak at best. The likelihood is that you won't have problems eating it if you have a healthy diet and aren't genetically predisposed to the associated forms of cancer.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >The evidence unprocessed red meat being carcinogenic is very weak at best.
        what about if you char the frick out of it every time you cook it

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      group 1 carcinogens are things that have been scientifically proven to cause cancer. It has nothing to do with how likely it is to cause cancer, just that in some cases, it definitely causes cancer

      The sun in type 1 carcinogen fwiw

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Vegan lobby pushing the saturated fat is bad lie

      https://i.imgur.com/as2x9Kc.jpg

      is it unhealthy? the who considers it a group 1 carcinogen (same tier as cigs??) isnt it just pork meat and salt?

      Even the biased study that “showed” bacon caused increased risk for cancer had a statistically insignificant result. But in the study that showed ciggies cause cancer the increased risk was like 2000% or something. Yet they are classified as the same type of carcinogen.
      So, why would this be the case when it is obviously bullshit?
      Because big money paid for this classification and you should never trust the nutritional advice of the government or a medical board because those papers are sponsored content, not scientific papers.

      • 1 month ago
        SwedishBrorsan

        not even protein drinks is safe from the sneed oils anymore ?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >vid
          Explain

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            chinks using gutter oil for cooking

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Where do you think whey comes from

            • 1 month ago
              SwedishBrorsan

              cheese

          • 1 month ago
            SwedishBrorsan

            you wouldnt be able to tell the difference from seed oil or gutter oil since its ultra processed through 3 heating processes well above the heat resistance temperatures of seed oils
            then your gutter oil will be bleached and filtered to be able to smell as little as possible to be accepted by your sense of smell & visuals for human cattle (goy) consumption

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > they still haven't managed to figure out the mechanism causing cancer
      Yes they have

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        and what might that be

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          > and what might that be
          Nitrates

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            nitrates are not a mechanism and theres more in many vegetables. In fact many bacon use celery powder

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    it's the sodium nitrate. you can buy uncured bacon but it doesn't taste as good

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If you can find Farmer John uncured bacon it is delicious. However, some people still say uncured is dangerous in the same way because it is the curing process itself that is the problem and the method used is irrelevant. I'm not sure what to believe.
      FYI: In the USA the "uncured" designation usually just means it was cured by something other than sodium nitrate (like celery powder).
      If you check the labels in the super market you can usually find nitrate free versions of all the different kinds of processed meats such as hot dogs, salami, lunch meat and bacon.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This still has nitrates
        >the label says
        Read the Ingredients

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The labels says something like "no nitrates (except those naturally found in celery powder)"

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It's incredibly fricked up to me that it's legal to sell cured bacon as uncured bacon. Curing bacon in celery powder does not make it uncured.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              I believe that in the US the FDA requires that if you don't use literal sodium nitrate then you must label the product "uncured"

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, and that's fricked because it's still cured and it's still loaded with nitrates.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, that's cured bacon

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pork is unhealthy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      why

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Toxic fat. Get beef bacon.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Toxic fat.
          doesnt explain anything , why is it toxic?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Pigs are mono gastric not ruminant. Factory pigs are fed trash that stores in their fat. Ruminants like cows filter the toxins and have healthier fat.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      shut it, abrahamite.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Islam bows down to a rock and to a trans false prophet. That's not Abrahamic (neither is Judaism according to Jesus and John the Baptist, meaning that being anti-pork is anti-Abraham).

        https://i.imgur.com/as2x9Kc.jpg

        is it unhealthy? the who considers it a group 1 carcinogen (same tier as cigs??) isnt it just pork meat and salt?

        The WHO isn't even run by a medical professional (Tedros has a PhD in some "community organizing" or some other gay shit). Don't be moronic.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >my religion, my mythos and my entire moral system stems from judaism, an abrahamist religion
          >i'm not an abrahamite though

          brown or moronic, call it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It is not. Pork is especially vulnerable to the "you are what you eat", thus it is "bad" because they get fed rapeseed and other cancerous garbage instead of normal food like back in the day while getting lots of sunlight.
      Okinawans ate lots of lard and quite a bit of pork, they fed all the sweet potatoes to the pigs. And they were very healthy and lived long, and then it got mixed up and propagandized into the "le okinawan diet is nothing but salads" meme.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The WHO considers
    Into the trash it goes

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >WHO israelites say it is bad
    Then it must be good. Always do the opposite of what israelites say, anon. This is basic shit

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why would I care what some shitty boomer rock band thinks is a carcinogen

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bacon is smoked and cured. That's the difference. Go watch videos on how it's done if it's so mysterious to you why it's not healthy.

  8. 1 month ago
    AnavarGuy

    Its just pork belly the carcinogen is the high salt content from its curing process and the fact americans overcook the frick out of it.
    t. Eat a lot of foods like Kakuni and Adobo

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The best evidence shows its red or processed meat is not carcinogenic. The WHO reached that class 1 carcinogen conclusion by ignoring most of the good evidence

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bacon is what the narwhal does at midnight iykyk

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why should I care about what some literal who thinks?

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >"Processed meat, and meat in general, is bad for you!"
    >Every single test subject also drinks, smokes, never exercise etc
    What do you think?

    Just source your meat from a proper butcher, and you'll be miles ahead of those who eat meat from frankenfarms.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >just get it from a butcher
      Where do you think butchers get meat from. They get it from factory farms just like everyone else. And it's not like small farms don't chock the feed full of antibiotics and hormones and shit also. If you don't know the farmer and you haven't met the cow you don't have any fricking clue what you are putting into your body.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah, I should have been more clear about that: Get it from a butcher with their own farm.
        That's where I get my meat. No better feeling than petting Buttercup in the spring as a calf, knowing you'll devour her delicious steaks a year later.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Every single test subject also drinks, smokes, never exercise etc
      It's not just that, though that is a big problem. Epidemiological studies on nutrition are just absolute trash at every level.

      >self-reported surveys with zero accountability, measurement, or real control to speak of
      These studies usually just involve asking people questions and trusting that they're telling the truth and aren't mistaken in any way, there's no way to even verify the validity of the answers.

      >ask people how many servings of different foods they've eaten over the course of the past several weeks or even months
      Most people can barely remember exactly what they had for breakfast, let alone how many ounces of cheese or fruit or whatever they've eaten over the past 6 months.

      >results are easily manipulated through bad categorization practices
      You had a serving of pepperoni pizza? That's a serving of red meat, or maybe it's dairy, or maybe it's bread. Depends on what we're trying to prove, really. So many prepared foods fall into multiple categories like that you can simply decide to move things into whatever category makes the results turn in favor of the expectations of whoever is funding the study.

      All these kinds of studies are bogus, it's all bullshit.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yes. Unless you keep people in a controlled environment from birth, or study people who live in a somewhat culinary limited environment, we'll never be able to truly know what factors in.
        Just take those of the Masai who lives traditionally. Nothing but meat and drinking blood and milk, and they barely have any of the lifestyle problems we have in the west.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Unless you keep people in a controlled environment from birth, or study people who live in a somewhat culinary limited environment, we'll never be able to truly know what factors in.
          That's moronic because it stops being applicable to a real population. We already know that if you introduce some foods to certain populations they don't react well because their gut biome is completely different.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >"drinking smoking and not excercising is bad for you"
      >Every single test subject also eats processed meat

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Exactly. It's completely useless to base such findings on that kind of evidence.
        Also, checked.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >"Processed meat, and meat in general, is bad for you!"
      >Every single test subject also drinks, smokes, never exercise etc
      So then they should all be in the same boat.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        single test subject also drinks, smokes, never exercise
        The people who eat the most red and processed meat also tend to have other unhealthy behaviors more than others. Probably because we've told people red and processed meats are unhealthy so when you look at the people who eat these foods with abandon you're selecting people with a lot of unhealthy behaviors

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Those people are reflective of the greater population. They're the best examples to study to try and draw a correlation from their health habits. You're never going to get a sizeable sample size of enough people who have never had any sort of negative health lifestyle. So it makes sense to get enough people that represent the people you are studying.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's the nitrates that cause cancer. Just get uncured bacon. And I mean really uncured. If you go to the store and it says uncured, they just use celery juice instead of synthetic nitrates, which have the same effect. You have to go to some other place like Whole Foods to get bacon that's really just pork and salt.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I get uncured bacon from an Amish farm.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I didnt ask

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How does some celery juice turn something into a cancer causing product. Should humans be consuming celery juice? That was a trend wasn't it

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I literally just explained how

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    high pufa.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the who
    opinion disregarded

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >the who
    Literally who?

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Tier 1 means "all things in this tier are equally cancerniferous!!"
    >"And Teir 1 is like DRINKING POISON!"
    The Sun is cancer caus-
    >STFU TOUCH GRASS

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Humans seem AMAZED, since people are able to age nearly 60+ years among the common masses, that there's all kinds of bio-mechanical failures in the old human body that are measurable.
    That death is evil.
    Therefore death MUST be caused by something and blame MUST be allotted to something that is moral!

    Purity is never dying!

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bacon was, is and will always be a reddit food

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Yes because there is zero evidence that is healthy. Ketolards ITT screech all science bad as always because it doesn't support their moronic belief that it is.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >The WHO
    ~~**~~
    Umm... anon...

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The two guys who lied to Americans that bacon is good for you were both israelites. Edward Bearnays and Robert Atkins.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >So who said bacon is bad?
    >Exactly

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you're in a country/state that allows for garbage feeding then it's probably not healthy. Since they literally don't remove the plastic from all the packaging before they grind it all down and then feed it to the pigs as it's to expensive to remove individual packaging from for example a loaf of "bread".

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just smoke your own instead of buying the shit at the grocery store, and then there's no need to cure it.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why won't ketolards who claim bacon is healthy simply post proof showing that bacon is healthy? Why do they do everything possible to avoid providing direct evidence? Why is it always like that with those homosexuals? Almost as if they intentionally lied. They'd be better off dead.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Get over yourself. You post this in every keto thread and it's annoying as hell. Nobody cares.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's true tho and people should care and kill you all for that.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Get over yourself. You post this in every keto thread and it's annoying as hell. Nobody cares.

    • 1 month ago
      SwedishBrorsan

      just buy normal fricking pork you schizo moron
      you have the entire god damn nordics descending from a +4000 year old lineage worshipping an immortal pig

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Do you have any evidence normal pork is healthy either? No, believing fairy tales is not evidence.

        • 1 month ago
          SwedishBrorsan

          you just deflected my entire fricking post.
          you have the nordics presented to you as the strongest men on the planet and has won all the esm competitions up to date,
          we are healthier than most other countries in the world.

          theres your fricking evidence, dont eat processed shit made to appease vegan morons and youll be fine

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            That's not evidence and I spot at least two lies in that particular post som svensk mig själv du jävla negerknullare homse. Post evidence that pork is healthy and then post evidence bacon is healthy. Thanks 😀

            • 1 month ago
              SwedishBrorsan

              how is health compared from country to country based on consumption not evidence ?
              its literally living, breathing evidence you cant refute unless you cause a mass genocide on countries that dont follow your narratives.

              you dont have to like it, try to begin refuting it
              using broken swedish that looks worse than most muslims writing after 14 years of komvux & sfi isnt helping you look smart.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                And from your posting we once again get back to asking ourselves
                >Why won't ketolards who claim bacon is healthy simply post proof showing that bacon is healthy? Why do they do everything possible to avoid providing direct evidence? Why is it always like that with those homosexuals? Almost as if they intentionally lied. They'd be better off dead.
                and from which we can once again deduce the obvious solution
                >It's true tho and people should care and kill you all for tha

              • 1 month ago
                SwedishBrorsan

                all you did here is walking your own self in a circle back to your innitial question that i have answered.
                Asking the same question all over again doesnt render the same question unanswered.

                You were given the answer and you have the evidence right in front of you, all there is left for you to refute it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You literally argue bacon is healthy because vikings believed in immortal pig while ignoring all the actual evidence that it is not. Then lie that nordics are healthiest (we're not) and strongest (we're not, throw in a bunch of polish and anglos for strongman winners). The only solution is to kill you. There is no other way. Argument is one thing but you don't even have that much so there is nothing to argue about. Death is the only response for your kind.

              • 1 month ago
                SwedishBrorsan

                nordics/slavic has wont every single WSM to date

                the germanic tribes consisted of just these.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >It's true tho and people should care and kill you all for tha
                Oh, so you're just a dishonest vegan rejecting the health of meat on moral grounds.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Can you finally post that evidence that bacon is healthy then as nobody else implying so ITT has done it 123 messages and 51 posters in? Every time you gays fail to do so more and more people understand killing you all is the answer. Go ahead.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                50% of the fat in bacon is monounsaturated fat in the form of oleic acid, which is the fatty acid in olive oil that makes it considered heart-healthy as seen here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23278117/
                Eating bacon is like eating olive oil, therefore it is healthy in moderation, just like olive oil is healthy in moderation, plus it has more protein and vitamins than olive oil so it's a more complete food.

  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >is it unhealthy?
    nah
    >the who considers it a group 1 carcinogen (same tier as cigs??)
    the whothefrickcares?
    >isnt it just pork meat and salt?
    yeah, should be

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      sadly posting
      >nah
      isn't scientific evidence and doesn't prove anything. try again,

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *