Re: Bread Intake Can Double Kidney Cancer Risk


tvksi wrote:
For years I have suspected the media news talk a lot about nothing just
to hear their heads rattle as they have to come up with something as
shocking as possible or a different slant on the non-shocking
catagories.

That is how they make their money. What they prattle on about has
nothing to do with anything, as long as their prattling gets attention
and keeps the ratings up. And that limits their prattling to the
shocking categories of prattling.

I have also suspected the same of some scientists have to
have something to research in order to have something on which to
report in order to get their grants.

Their jobs aren't to find answers. Finding actual answers means their
job is done and they now actually have to get a real job. Finding more
questions, on the other hand, guarantees them more work.

There are so many conflicting
"studies" that seem to prove nothing that it is indeed confusing. I

Two reasons for this.

1) they want more work and confusing findings leads to more work.

2) 70% of all research is funded by industry, and industry is not
looking for the right answer, they are looking for the answer that
benefits them the most. And they are only asking certain questions that
will give them the acceptable answers. For instance, no cereal
manufacturer will ever ask how a cereal breakfast compares to a bacon
and eggs breakfast. They do not want to know that answer.

I also am noticing that any time that someone with a study contradicts
the mainstream bull*** about fats being evil or bread being a miracle
food or calories being useful measurements, all hell breaks loose and
the various food industries commission and kick out a dozens more
studies to re-iterate their anti-fat, pro-bread, or pro-calories
garbage mantras. So a study comes out questioning the evilness of fats
and a dozen more quickly spring up to defend the "fats is evil" thing,
etc.


guess it has to be that way though or nothing would be learned. Do
think that when a research is done that all facets of the subject
should be taken in consideration before presenting the report.....like
for instance what was in those sandwiches<G>
love..lee

What was in the sandwiches were taken into consideration. They were
asked what they ate in general, including amounts of processed meats.
If something in the sandwich showed a trend, it probably would have
been caught. But the trend that really stood out was the bread to
kidney disease connection, not the sandwich filling to kidney disease
trend.

TC


TC wrote:
lilcheemo@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
TC wrote:


And it isn't unusual for a scientists to find one thing and say all
they can in the study to minimize the impact or the certainty. And they
almost always suggest more studies, hey, that's is how they bring in
the bacon.

I would love to see more studies this.

TC

.

Quantcast