why I won't buy a k3 (Warning: Satire Thread)

normhead · 10-26-2015, 06:08 PM

The numbers were pretty small, like an increase of 8% in a cancer that affects 16% of the population. .08 x .16 that's a 1.28 % of getting that cancer. So you can reduce you odds from 16% to 15%, but you have to give up bacon and hotdogs, and that's only if you eat them quite often. It's probably blasphemy to say it on this thread but I probably don't eat bacon of hotdogs 10 times a year. I think I'm safe.

The most relevant part was probably directed at those who pack processed meats in their kid school lunches every day, or their own. I was a bagels and cream cheese guy, so, not really affected.

JibbaJab · 10-26-2015, 06:11 PM - **1 Like**

Racer X 69 · 10-27-2015, 12:52 AM

Originally posted by tim60

So that means bacon lovers will have to remove colons from their typing?

I suppose: but I love bacon: and I'm not giving it up: nothing beats the tasty delight of a BLT sammich!

:nothing:

Racer X 69 · 10-27-2015, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by savoche

This is a snack I made today involving real cheese and enough bacon to give the heart some exercise.

Looks tasty!

MarkJerling · 10-27-2015, 01:26 AM - **2 Likes**

It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now.

**savoche** · 10-27-2015, 02:14 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by tim60

The Beeb said, tonight, that bacon, at 50g per day, increases the risk of colon cancer by 20%. So that means bacon lovers will have to remove colons from their typing?

Ah, reminds me...

Dilbert Comic Strip on 1994-06-08 | Dilbert by Scott Adams

Jean Poitiers · 10-27-2015, 04:34 AM

Originally posted by MarkJerling

It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now.

Merci ... and as an added note, there's a few "substitutes" out there on the market.

Jean Poitiers · 10-27-2015, 04:38 AM

I don't get it ...

Parallax · 10-27-2015, 05:00 AM

Originally posted by MarkJerling

It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now.

To determine how much credence to give the study we would also have to know what result the person(s) conducting the study wanted/expected. In any studies of this type there are almost never any surprises. They yeild the answer wanted by whomever is funding/directing them.

JibbaJab · 10-27-2015, 05:55 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

To determine how much credence to give the study we would also have to know what result the person(s) conducting the study wanted/expected. In any studies of this type there are almost never any surprises. They yeild the answer wanted by whomever is funding/directing them.

Are you suggesting there's some sort of anti-bacon special interest group funding this research? I wonder if they're the same group who tried to take down eggs back in the Nineties with the claims about increasing the risk of heart disease.

Parallax · 10-27-2015, 06:04 AM

Originally posted by JibbaJab

Are you suggesting there's some sort of anti-bacon special interest group funding this research? I wonder if they're the same group who tried to take down eggs back in the Nineties with the claims about increasing the risk of heart disease

There are a number of groups who would have us all on the Jack LaLane diet. Years ago, in an interview, he was asked what his advice on diet was.
His answer: "If it tastes good, spit it out."

**savoche** · 10-27-2015, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

There are a number of groups who would have us all on the Jack LaLane diet. Years ago, in an interview, he was asked what his advice on diet was.
His answer: "If it tastes good, spit it out."

Sound advice. If you actually do that, life would suck, but it will help you lose weight.

robtcorl · 10-27-2015, 06:38 AM

I've cured and smoked bacon since around 1980,
I belong to a bbq/grilling forum, and in 2011 I posted a thread "Bacon Made Easy" showing how easy it is to make.
Many members have tried it, rave about it, and swear off store bought bacon.
The thread was made a sticky, and has over 79,000 views.
Should I feel bad?
Is it suicide if you make and eat your own bacon?
Too profound for me to decide this morning, I think I'll fry up a few rashers think about it.

normhead · 10-27-2015, 06:43 AM

My first ex was a lab tech in the cancer research community. The struggle for grants is always intense. I swear the most common phrase in research like this is, "This needs further study." And if the powers agree to that the next line is "We just happen to have a lab suited to this kind of study." I'm not saying good and useful work doesn't get done, but lot of studies suggest there might be something, without really even trying to figure out what that might be. Labs have to do research to exist... but that doesn't mean the people who run the labs have useful insight into what they should be studying.

The type of statistical analysis study you see here is by far the most dangerous. Years ago, everyone got on the anti fat bandwagon. We all had grandparents who totally pigged out on fat whenever they could get it, and lived to be 90, but hey fat is bad. Turns out most of the fatty foods they used in their studies also had sugar in them. Now 30 years later, they re saying, "we don't know if it's the fat or the sugar" or maybe even the combination of both. This type of study is very little better than straight up ignorance. What is amazing to me, is that this type of study even gets reported, even though they are the basis for the trials for almost every modern drug. They have proven to be the source of mis-information over and over again. They should be locked away from the public, until real research can be completed, More harm has been done by people mis-representing this type of study, than any good that will ever come from them.

And honestly, anyone recommending lifestyle changes based on a study like this, that probably has 200 identified factors and thousands of unidentified factors, is a quack.

**savoche** · 10-27-2015, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by Jean Poitiers

I don't get it ...

I'm not sure I want to...

10-27-2015, 05:00 AM	#20454
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by MarkJerling It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now. To determine how much credence to give the study we would also have to know what result the person(s) conducting the study wanted/expected. In any studies of this type there are almost never any surprises. They yeild the answer wanted by whomever is funding/directing them. Last edited by Parallax; 10-27-2015 at 05:06 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
why I will buy a K3	chicagojohn	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	80	09-18-2016 08:42 AM
Suggestion Neutralize the 'why I won't buy a k-3' thread	crewl1	Site Suggestions and Help	61	10-04-2014 05:08 PM
Why I Won't Be Buying A K5IIs	Racer X 69	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	40	02-03-2014 08:12 PM
Why I don't buy Pentax lenses	keyser	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	44	12-20-2012 01:58 AM
I feel so old: 8 things the facebook gen won't buy	Nesster	General Talk	27	04-22-2012 11:01 AM

10-26-2015, 06:08 PM	#20446
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The numbers were pretty small, like an increase of 8% in a cancer that affects 16% of the population. .08 x .16 that's a 1.28 % of getting that cancer. So you can reduce you odds from 16% to 15%, but you have to give up bacon and hotdogs, and that's only if you eat them quite often. It's probably blasphemy to say it on this thread but I probably don't eat bacon of hotdogs 10 times a year. I think I'm safe. The most relevant part was probably directed at those who pack processed meats in their kid school lunches every day, or their own. I was a bagels and cream cheese guy, so, not really affected.

10-26-2015, 06:11 PM - 1 Like	#20447
JibbaJab Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Southern California Posts: 362

10-27-2015, 12:52 AM	#20448
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by tim60 So that means bacon lovers will have to remove colons from their typing? I suppose: but I love bacon: and I'm not giving it up: nothing beats the tasty delight of a BLT sammich! :nothing:

10-27-2015, 12:53 AM	#20449
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,068	Originally posted by savoche This is a snack I made today involving *real* cheese and enough bacon to give the heart some exercise. Looks tasty!

10-27-2015, 01:26 AM - 2 Likes	#20450
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,406	It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now.

10-27-2015, 02:14 AM - 1 Like	#20451
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	Originally posted by tim60 The Beeb said, tonight, that bacon, at 50g per day, increases the risk of colon cancer by 20%. So that means bacon lovers will have to remove colons from their typing? Ah, reminds me... Dilbert Comic Strip on 1994-06-08 \| Dilbert by Scott Adams

10-27-2015, 04:34 AM	#20452
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	Originally posted by MarkJerling It's important tp remember that these "tests" are highly subjective. To know how accurate this data on the chances of bacon killing anyone is, we would need to know how the test was conducted, on which test subjects. Was there a control group - the size of the sample population. If this is based upon animal testing, then it's very probably quite inaccurate. I just hope that you all stop eating bacon as result of the risk. That will bring the price of bacon down and I'll have to sacrifice myself to save you lot, by eating all the bacon. You can thank me now. *Merci* ... and as an added note, there's a few "substitutes" out there on the market.

10-27-2015, 04:38 AM	#20453
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	I don't get it ...

10-27-2015, 05:55 AM	#20455
JibbaJab Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Southern California Posts: 362	Originally posted by Parallax To determine how much credence to give the study we would also have to know what result the person(s) conducting the study wanted/expected. In any studies of this type there are almost never any surprises. They yeild the answer wanted by whomever is funding/directing them. Are you suggesting there's some sort of anti-bacon special interest group funding this research? I wonder if they're the same group who tried to take down eggs back in the Nineties with the claims about increasing the risk of heart disease.

10-27-2015, 06:04 AM	#20456
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by JibbaJab Are you suggesting there's some sort of anti-bacon special interest group funding this research? I wonder if they're the same group who tried to take down eggs back in the Nineties with the claims about increasing the risk of heart disease There are a number of groups who would have us all on the Jack LaLane diet. Years ago, in an interview, he was asked what his advice on diet was. His answer: "If it tastes good, spit it out."

10-27-2015, 06:37 AM	#20457
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	Originally posted by Parallax There are a number of groups who would have us all on the Jack LaLane diet. Years ago, in an interview, he was asked what his advice on diet was. His answer: "If it tastes good, spit it out." Sound advice. If you actually do that, life would suck, but it will help you lose weight.

10-27-2015, 06:38 AM	#20458
robtcorl Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: St Louis, MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,606	I've cured and smoked bacon since around 1980, I belong to a bbq/grilling forum, and in 2011 I posted a thread "Bacon Made Easy" showing how easy it is to make. Many members have tried it, rave about it, and swear off store bought bacon. The thread was made a sticky, and has over 79,000 views. Should I feel bad? Is it suicide if you make and eat your own bacon? Too profound for me to decide this morning, I think I'll fry up a few rashers think about it.

10-27-2015, 06:43 AM	#20459
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	My first ex was a lab tech in the cancer research community. The struggle for grants is always intense. I swear the most common phrase in research like this is, "This needs further study." And if the powers agree to that the next line is "We just happen to have a lab suited to this kind of study." I'm not saying good and useful work doesn't get done, but lot of studies suggest there might be something, without really even trying to figure out what that might be. Labs have to do research to exist... but that doesn't mean the people who run the labs have useful insight into what they should be studying. The type of statistical analysis study you see here is by far the most dangerous. Years ago, everyone got on the anti fat bandwagon. We all had grandparents who totally pigged out on fat whenever they could get it, and lived to be 90, but hey fat is bad. Turns out most of the fatty foods they used in their studies also had sugar in them. Now 30 years later, they re saying, "we don't know if it's the fat or the sugar" or maybe even the combination of both. This type of study is very little better than straight up ignorance. What is amazing to me, is that this type of study even gets reported, even though they are the basis for the trials for almost every modern drug. They have proven to be the source of mis-information over and over again. They should be locked away from the public, until real research can be completed, More harm has been done by people mis-representing this type of study, than any good that will ever come from them. And honestly, anyone recommending lifestyle changes based on a study like this, that probably has 200 identified factors and thousands of unidentified factors, is a quack.

10-27-2015, 06:46 AM	#20460
savoche Master of the obvious Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Lowlands of Norway Posts: 18,311	Originally posted by Jean Poitiers I don't get it ... I'm not sure I want to...