An outbreak of listeria has U.S. health officials advising people who are pregnant, elderly or have compromised immune systems to avoid eating sliced deli meat.
I stopped at your second sentence. You’re condemning me for my sources and then making declarations based on nothing as if they were fact.
For processed meat, Cantonese-style salted fish and foods preserved by salting, the evidence shows that, in general, the more people consume, the higher the risk of some cancers.
Besides cardiovascular disease, a high salt intake causes other adverse health effects, i.e., gastric and some other cancers, obesity (risk factor for many cancer sites), Meniere’s disease, worsening of renal disease, triggering an asthma attack, osteoporosis, exacerbation of fluid retention, renal calculi, etc. Diets containing high amounts of food preserved by salting and pickling are associated with an increased risk of cancers of the stomach, nose and throat. Because gastric cancer is still the most common cancer in some countries (especially in Japan), its prevention is one of the most important aspects of cancer control strategy. Observations among Japanese immigrants in the U.S.A. and Brazil based on the geographic differences, the trend in cancer incidence with time, and change in the incidence patterns indicate that gastric cancer is closely associated with dietary factors such as the intake of salt and salted food.
My arguments have been good faith, have directly addressed not only your rebuttals but also your initial assertion.
I don’t think you’ve read through your links too well. (There will be some edits since I’m on my phone and can’t compose this at once)
Number 1:
A global recommendation about consumption of Cantonese-style salted fish has not been made, as this type of fish is consumed only in specific parts of the world. Nevertheless, the Panel advises that it’s best not to consume Cantonese-style salted fish.
A global recommendation about consumption of foods preserved by salting has not been made as these types of food are mostly consumed only in Asia. Nevertheless, the Panel advises that it’s best not to consume foods preserved by salting.
There is also other evidence on preservation and processing of foods that is limited (either in amount or by methodological flaws), but is suggestive of an increased risk of some cancers. Further research is required, and the Panel has not used this evidence to make recommendations.
Numba 2, if you follow their cancer link, it leads to this:
Causes of stomach cancer
Some factors that can increase your risk of stomach cancer include:
smoking tobacco
being over 60
infection with the bacteria Helicobacter pylori
a diet high in smoked, pickled and salted foods and low in fresh fruit and vegetables
…
Notice how the ‘low fruits and veggies’ is left out of the initial claim
Your last source is the most interesting and compelling and should have been your first go-to since it’s the strongest, but even they say
A high-salt intake strips the lining of the stomach and may make infection with H. pylori more likely or may exacerbate the infection. Salting, pickling and smoking are traditionally popular ways of preparing food in Japan and some parts of Asia. In addition to salt intake, cigarette smoking and low consumption of fruit and vegetables increase the risk of stomach cancer. However, it is not known whether it is specifically the salt in these foods or a combination of salt and other chemicals that can cause cancer.
I stopped at your second sentence. You’re condemning me for my sources and then making declarations based on nothing as if they were fact.
https://www.wcrf.org/diet-activity-and-cancer/risk-factors/preservation-and-processing-of-foods-and-cancer-risk/
https://www.cancer.org.au/cancer-information/causes-and-prevention/diet-and-exercise/food-and-nutrition/salt-and-sugar
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20649083/
You are not here in good faith and, furthermore, you’ve been very rude. So I think we’re done.
My arguments have been good faith, have directly addressed not only your rebuttals but also your initial assertion.
I don’t think you’ve read through your links too well. (There will be some edits since I’m on my phone and can’t compose this at once)
Number 1:
Numba 2, if you follow their cancer link, it leads to this:
Notice how the ‘low fruits and veggies’ is left out of the initial claim
Your last source is the most interesting and compelling and should have been your first go-to since it’s the strongest, but even they say