Hate these studies. They're always just based on correlations, and ignores the elephant in the room: class. How wealthy you are, how wealthy the area you live in, those factors have the highest impact on health outcomes, but the mainstream media (which is owned by the ruling class) will never be honest about that. So they just find correlations that let them blame poor people for having shitty diets.
You hate these studies because they don't specifically endorse your world view?
Most of the time, these studies are looking for the mechanical causes of the problem, not the socio-economic conditions that led to those mechanisms being present. So if smoking or getting fat increases cancer risk, that will be true regardless of what's in your bank account.
Also, these are cancer researchers. Dealing with the structural poverty that leads to the adverse health outcomes is way outside their expertise.
Without doxing myself, I have expertise in this topic. It's not a matter of my world view, it's a matter of science and communication.
It is very unlikely that human adiposity leads to increased cancer risk directly. It is correlational, not causational. Human adiposity itself, isolated from compounding factors, has a complex relationship with health outcomes, and not at all the linear correlation where more fat = more bad that the mainstream likes to pretend.
We know that certain foods, particularly animal products, especially cheaper animal products, lead to cancers, heart disease, etc. This is most likely explanation for the results in this study. But yet again we have yet another study uselessly pointing out a correlation which is unhelpful for actually solving public health issues and continues to encourage the passing of the blame to those in society who have the least responsibility for their situation.
Jokes on cancer. Im already fat. No weight gain likely.
None ๐ of this ๐ shit matters ๐ if food ๐is unaffordable๐ and healthcare ๐ bankrupts your ๐ household.
Eating less ๐ always costs ๐ less than ๐ eating more.
Does this make the point more clearly? I think it looks pretty dumb, but you do you.
The organic food industry has done great damage to Western society by making people think you need to buy fresh organic food to eat healthy, when canned/jarred/frozen conventional food is absolutely fine as well, for a fraction of the cost.
Yes, you will need to spend some time preparing it, unlike fastfood. But it's MUCH cheaper, less calorie dense and contains more micronutrients.
I was making a reference to inflation and overall food prices as a result of the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, not the cost of organic vs canned foods.
We're way past that, at this point.
If everything in my nearest grocery store costs $5, and fuel costs $5 a gallon, and the cost of everything else is going up, then I really don't have much of a choice of where I get my calories.
Making ends meet is extremely difficult right now for a lot of people. I don't think it's helpful to have a response like, "but have the poors tried eating less?"
In the context of the article, I can only assume your point was "healthy food is expensive, that's why people are obese".
I don't think it's helpful to have a response like, "but have the poors tried eating less?"
No, my response was that obese people eating less will leave them with more money and less health issues. Eating canned/frozen vegetables is both less expensive and healthier than premade foods, and lasts longer so you can take fewer trips, saving more money.
Btw, kudos for deleting that other post! I'm glad you decided to actually read my post.
I just want fruit with actual flavor that makes me want to eat it than the tasteless shit we get now in the US
then go to farmers markets.
Those are more expensive in a lot of places.
They just buy the stuff the grocery stores don't want. That's been common for a while. That's why you can buy tons of it cheap but it goes bad fast.
lol what.
i grew up on that food dude. it's nasty and bad for you. what are you smoking. most of it is loaded with sodium preservatives, and other chemicals. is it better than not eating vegetables at all? sure, but it has lots of nasty shit in it.
fresh food is superior for you in every way. other than it's convenience and cost.
i was SHOCKED in college when I found out vegetables can taste good, instead of being disgusting mushy nastiness.
it's nasty and bad for you.
Example number one. I agree it's not as tasty as fresh, but often times the canned and frozen veggies have MORE vitamins and minerals than fresh, simply because the fresh one has had more time to break down.
most of it is loaded with sodium preservatives
You can just look at the labels and see that isn't true. Hell, you don't even need to get up, just check out Walmart brand canned or veggies online and look at the label.
and other chemicals.
Everything is a chemical. This is a meaningless propaganda phrase from the organic food playbook. You are literally proving my point.
is it better than not eating vegetables at all? sure
Uhhh yeah, if you can't afford fresh vegetables, or its not available near you, eating frozen/jarred/canned is absolutely fine. It's not bad for you in any way, and far superior to premade crap.
i was SHOCKED in college when I found out vegetables can taste good, instead of being disgusting mushy nastiness.
It's nice to hear that you have the option of fresh fruits and veggies. I also take that for granted, but its important to remember many people don't have that option. And they are just as susceptible to propaganda as you, so they don't buy frozen or canned vegetables because it's vaguely "bad for you" somehow in some undefined way. And they end up getting obese because they eat stuff that's much worse.
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. โIronicโ prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the articleโs mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link