/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>18279698
How much is high fish consumption because I doubt we eat anywhere close to that

>>18279698
But do we know if coffee is good for you yet?

>>18279698
> Skin cancer

easily ignored and completely worthless study

>scientists say

>>18279698

Not all fish are created equal. Deenz are king. 2 cans per week = POWER

you can google anything and some faggot will say its bad for you

>is eggs good for you?
yes it has a lot of protein and is good for you

>is eggs bad for you
yes it has a lot of cholestrol and is bad for you

>is fruit good for you
yes it contains antioxidants and minerals is good for you

>is fruit bad for you
yes it has too much sugar and its bad for you

>is bread good for you
bread has vitamins and is good for you

>is bread bad for you
yes it has too much carbs and is bad for you

who cares fuck these faggots imma eat real food and be real happy doing it

What's going to(and already causing it now) cause cancer on a mass scale is the fact that the covid vaccine is shutting down people's immune systems as well as their T cell response and anyone who was fucking dumb enough to take the shot is going to be riddled with cancer but without the immune strength to create autophagic responses to it. You're all as good as dead in 5 years, I'm not even memeing right now. Enjoy the time you've got left with the people you care about.

>>18280809

>>18280791
>is eggs
maybe you should google "basic English grammar"

>>18279698
>why, yes, I read the headlines of studies I wouldn't understand even if I did read in full and then go smugly repeat what I think I read on 4chan

>>18280816
Cool meme but you'll need something a bit more substantial then that when you're facing God and answering for all of your sin throughout your wretched globalist life

>>18279698
everything gives you cancer eventually, so pick your poison and enjoy

>>18279725
You leave little girl alone you dirty kikes!

>>18279835
>cans
Enjoy your anal cancer

>>18279698
I eat salmon once a week, how bad is it?

Yeah my diet of some smoked fish everyday isn't healthy but I just love it too much

>>18279698
oh my god are fish going to go extinct?
do they contribute to greenhouse gasses?
how hard did you have to cope to find a reason to convince people not to eat fish

>>18279698
>linking clearly fake uncredible clickbait sites and accepting the fact.

You are the reason why other cultures think we are dumb you know.

>Everything grown under the sun has a small chance to give you cancer

Wow, Magic

>>18279698
what the fuck deenz sisters!!!

>>18279698
>the heckin science says
Not buying it, this is because it's been decided that the slaves won't eat meat.

>>18279698
Fish is theoretically good for you
But whitey has dumped mountains of trash and poison in the ocean and fish eat that up so now the fish are poisonous

You know what? why don't we just invent cures for cancer?

>>18279698
>They also did not account for some risk factors for melanoma, such as...history of severe sunburn, and sun-related behaviors
That seems like a huge flaw when looking at skin cancer risks. This could easily mean people who eat more fish spend more time near/on the water and are exposed to more sun.

>>18279698
people who live by the sea would be dead now

>>18279698
fish is dairy troles

>>18280818
you should look up your mom on pornhub

>>18279698
P

>>18281551
suppressed

>>18280809
screencapping this

see you in 5 years. Or not if you're right

>>18281551
they exist, they're called antiparasitics

>>18281547
damn those white people

>>18279698
i don't eat fish other than canned tuna simply because it's fooking expensive in ohio

>>18279698
(((Science)))

>>18279698
it's almost like... PUFA BAD

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/articlepdf/770019/ioi70171_2461_2468.pdf
>study mentioned in article based on population data from linked study
>data was gathered from a questionnaire
Every time

>>18279698
Faggot, took a look for two seconds and it said correlation that should be studied. By any chance are you a journalist? get a proper degree

>>18281567
TMDWU

>>18279719
>SCIENCE BAD….JUST….BECAUSE! WHERES THE CURVE!!!??!!???

>>18279698
>fish eating people are more likely to go outside and get melanoma than basement-dwelling trannies posting shit like >>18282730
wow

>>18282754
>YOU DONT DISBELIEVE EVERYTHING SCIENTISTS SAY AND UNDERSTAND THAT STUDIES ARENT LAW???!!! TRANNY COMMIE JOO!!!!!

>>18280809
>first everyone was going to die from the vax in 2 weeks
>then 2 months
>then 2 years
>now 5 years

>>18279698
I've always detested the taste of fish that're not battered & fried and it's load off my heart to hear that they're not exclusively super healthy and good for you. Because I'd rather go hungry than have grilled fish for dinner.

>>18280899
Dumb larping esl poster

>>18279698
DEENZ IS THE ANSWER

>>18280791
>>is fruit bad for you
>yes it has too much sugar and its bad for you
Negligible if you replace dessert with fruits.

You know what a cocktail is?
Originally, it meant a basket of fruits typically eaten in the afternoon between lunch and dinner.

>>18282754
People who die of old age (because they ate a lot of fish to begin with) are far more likely to die of cancer.

>>18279698
>>18279719
The positive associations were consistent across several demographic and lifestyle factors. There were also positive associations between tuna intake and non-fried fish intake, and risk of malignant melanoma and melanoma in situ. However, fried fish intake was inversely associated with risk of malignant melanoma, but not melanoma in situ.
from their study

so basically canned tuna is giving you cancer, probably because of the fact that its a long lived carnivorous fish mercury bioaccumulation, also canned food might be associated BUT as it says FRIED FEESH = LESS MELENOMA

~~~~~SCIENCE~~~~~~
so is it canning? or tuna? or bad study? or what because thats some retarded association

Conclusions
We found that higher total fish intake, tuna intake, and non-fried fish intake were positively associated with risk of both malignant melanoma and melanoma in situ. Future studies are needed to investigate the potential biological mechanisms underlying these associations.

fried fishu goodu for ur skinu!

pointing more fingers at this being sloppy science is the rates of melanoma in america compared to japan, japan being one of the highest fish consumption countries on earth

tldr; statistical science is low tier brainlet trash

>>18282730
>science [x]
read the study moron

>>18285656
>tldr; statistical science is low tier brainlet trash
Statistical science is actually high-tier, but there's a catch: you have to account for ALL statistically-significant variables, and there's usually a ton of them. If you don't (see here: >>18281557), the results are worse than useless, they're misleading.
Unfortunately, science has a massive problem with sloppiness nowadays, due to the double pressures to a) come up with something new every time; b) get stuff out quickly, so the people doing the study can keep advancing along their academic track at a steady pace.