To not have known that deli chicken is a level 1 carcinogen

That’s because cancer is perceived as ‘The Emperor of Maladies’, to borrow the title of a very good book.

Any old charlatan or chancer who wants to offer quack advice - particularly about food or pseudo-medicines like health foods and supplements, or other everyday things we can choose for ourselves - will reach for cancer as the most alarming thing they can supposedly help others avoid because it’s the most powerfully scary word.

Not according to Cancer Research UK. White meat and fish are fine, apparently.

In fairness, the subject of this thread was whether sliced chicken is carcinogenic hence the focus on cancer.

However, I would say that cancer is something that is very much on the radar for most people. Some cancers are curable, some aren’t. And many, many people will have known someone with cancer, and that includes many bereavements. Cancer is one of the top killer diseases but because there are some types with a better prognosis if caught early, there’s a lot of focus on having appropriate cancer checks - mammograms, smears, prostate checks etc.

Also, like cardiovascular disease, there are some steps you can take to minimise your risk of cancer - other than not smoking, the same can’t be said for many other diseases. Some do seem to be more pot luck. Feeling as if they are taking positive action often helps people to feel more in control of their future health.

I don’t think it’s wrong to do whatever you can to reduce the risk of cancer - but with the volume of contradicting or unclear information, it’s important to retain a sense of perspective and balance.

I think that’s my beef when people choose to cherry pick information to suit their agenda.

We’re farmers, which are far as the beeb are concerned, are as evil and far right as they come.

We use glyphosate on our UK grown crops which is as carcinogenic as fairy liquid and aren’t we just poisoning the nation?

But lips and arsehole imported meats, reared unsustainably to welfare standards not permitted in this country are absolutely fine cos “cost of living” and also apparently were so virtuous we now only care about the carbon footprint of green old England.

I think people not educating themselves on what they are putting in their family is a fundamental flaw in this country.

All animal protein increases cancer risk doesn't it?

One other thing that intrigues me with this thread is that people talk solely about avoiding cancer. And i am curious why when a lot of cancers are very treatable these days and there are plenty of other scary or life treating conditions. What is it about cancer than means it seems to generate this sense that it is somehow "apart" ?

I'm not saying it isn't fact @Sweetteaplease; I'm saying it's been known about for ages and calling it UPF is a repackaging.

Where is your evidence that each generation gets sicker than the one before ? That's certainly not true; we have far better health care outcomes, preventative vaccines and treatment and knowledge that previous generations and they are advancing all the time. To say otherwise really is scaremongering!

I occasionally buy ‘sliced roast chicken slices’ from M and s or Tesco. Who knows how dangerous that list of ingredients is 🤷🏼‍♀️

I just did a bit of research to see what the latest data says.

To start with, no one seems able to agree how much of a problem deli chicken is because all the studies include red processed meat - salami, bacon, hotdogs etc. We know that red processed meat shouldn’t be eaten too often.

Some bodies seem to be suggesting that white sliced meat isn’t an issue - such as Cancer Research UK.

Also, just because chicken is packaged and sliced doesn’t mean it’s preserved.

On a couple of the sites it suggests looking at the expiry date. If your sliced chicken only has a few days, then it’s unlikely to be preserved. If it’s ok for a few weeks, then it’s more likely to contain nitrates.

Celery powder/celery and salt are two natural preservatives. If your chicken contains none of these and just a bit of brown sugar for flavouring, then it’s not “processed meat”.

Also worth bearing in mind that veggies contain natural nitrates but no one is suggesting we avoid those.

Anyway - the point I’m making is that no one seems to have any evidence that white processed meat is actually a risk, they’re erring on the side of caution. But even if that’s the case, not ALL sliced and packaged white meat contains preservative anyway.

As I said earlier, just pick carefully and you’ll be fine. Not all sliced chicken is “processed”.

The point of my post was that the “something else” that you would have eaten probably contains a similar risk.

What would you have had instead?

The point was this is a tiny risk providing you’re choosing high quality sliced chicken, and this post is blowing it up out of proportion while simultaneously ignoring the similar risks in the alternatives.

Your comment about wishing you could “press the reset” button so you’d never eaten/served up deli chicken is what I mean about hyperbole and data being taken out of context.

I’m genuinely not trying to be aggro, honestly. But I think - as the saying goes - “a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing”. People are viewing this “fact” in isolation without actually understanding the degree of risk it presents or how it compares to alternatives. The headline is sensationalist when taken in isolation but it needs to be read within a wider context, and that’s not happening here.

I found it reassuring. My dad died of cancer and there's quite a lot of cancer in my family so I had reservations about studying it, but learning about the various processes involved in DNA replication, and how easily mistakes can be made during this process, helped me to understand that cancer in itself is not the inherently evil thing it's often portrayed to be. Our bodies aren't 'turning against us', they're doing the absolute best they can and there are incredibly sophisticated systems in place to catch these errors before they have a chance to proliferate. I am personally comforted by that, even if it doesn't change how devastating the disease is.

I ultimately opted to focus on environmental toxicology which was less reassuring.

I don't think humans will adapt because modern medicine reduces our ability to evolve in that sense. But there are some very promising treatments currently being researched and developed, and I think genomic medicine will help a great deal.

We have cut down processed meat to almost zero due to the cancer risk. Only properly twigged a year or so ago though.

Exactly. It's easy to point the finger at food because people believe it's within their control.

Food has never been more tightly regulated than it is today.

Levels of air pollution, plastic pollution, heavy metal pollution, persistent organic pollutants, PFOAs, endocrine disrupting chemicals, pesticides etc have never been as high, however.

People are working longer days than they did in previous decades. Stress and anxiety levels are very high. Women are having their first child later in life. Jobs are much more sedentary. People aren't outdoors nearly as much as they used to be.

I studied cancer biology as part of my degree. There are myriad factors involved in the development of cancers. Personally, food additives tightly regulated by the EU and cured meats way down on my list of concerns.

I appreciate this thread had good intentions but lots of the information here is very misleading.

We all know that avoiding low-quality processed food is a good idea. But a small amount of processed chicken in the odd sandwich here and there is going to make an imperceptible difference. Unless you’re switching it to an alternative that is vegetarian and/or organic, you’re just switching one minor factor for another. The risk will be the same.

That “home cooked chicken” - what do you know about the farming methods? Its diet? What about any oil you’re using? Is the pan you’re using non-stick? Are you using cling film or silver foil?

The risk of potential hazards is endless. You’d need very deep pockets and lots of time and energy to be able to avoid absolutely everything that could possibly present a tiny risk.

And figures look scary when presented but let’s say the risk is 1% - a 15% increase doesn’t mean that the risk is suddenly 16%. It means that the risk is now 1.15%. Still tiny. Virtually no difference.

And bear in mind that 15% would be a big jump anyway, plus you’d have to be eating quite a considerable amount to even increase your risk by the maximum they say (15% in this example).

Plus, as PP have said, in many cases the category of risk refers to the strength of the evidence, not the degree of risk.

There is absolutely no need for all this hand-wringing. I get it - if you have DC, you want them to eat as healthily as possible. And that’s right. But all you need to do is eat fresh food whenever possible, try to avoid food that has a label full of additives/preservatives, provide a balanced diet, and get as much veg/fruit down their necks as you can.

A couple of slices of M&S packet chicken that literally contains chicken and sugar is not going to give your child cancer.

I love the people who think food was all wholesome and lovely once upon a time. It's like you have never read a history book or been to a museum.

Adulterated food was a massive issue. Once you start to reading about it it is eye opening.
And then there is the fact that the pipes were made of lead, and green dye used for dresses and books was poisonous and water was so filthy people drank beer instead....

It isn't just UPF that is a factor in illness now, or in the rise in cancers

Firstly 80% Of people with my condition just died within months, now we can have a full (if somewhat sickly lifespan, albeit at risk of cancer as a side effect from the drugs)

Then is vast amounts of air pollution

Make up and beauty products a deodorants that people use every day

Water pollution, micro plastics, pesticides, fertilisers, industrial chemical spillages

Nuclear weapons, nuclear testing, nuclear accidents

Air travel (air crew are at higher risks of certain cancers)

Yes eating healthily is a good idea but it's hugely reductive to think it's a panacea.

I'm with your DM @Webbymeister.
I'd much rather shuffle off this mortal coil via an overdose of mini magnums (or any size of magnum TBH) than one chicken sandwich too many.

Modern medicine would account for some of the reason why, along with better housing etc.

I would personally take Yuka with a pinch of salt (or nitrite, if you prefer). They have only one scientist on their team which is problematic for all sorts of reasons, it doesn't take into account the quality of the studies it bases its ratings on and as far as I can tell, it doesn't take into account the quantity of additive in the product. All in all it seems to be based on bad science, which they won't care as long as the app makes them money. Effectively you're putting all your trust in a product's safety in one scientist's interpretation of research.

That app can be a bit misleading if you just look at the traffic lights.

I just checked organic tahini on that app and it's poor because it's fatty/calorific when assessed by weight. It doesn't allow for the fact that for a homemade hummus you are using a very small quantity for flavour in proportion to the amount of (home cooked, unsalted) chickpeas used.

oddly, it recognised the bar code for M&S Extra Mature Cheddar but didn't have any nutritional data.

Life's a killer. None of us are getting out of here unscathed.