Being obese causes cancer but...

Heresy and worship of the chaos pantheon also increases chance of mutation, but this should be embraced in certain situations, brothers.
 
Tuppy_Glossop said:
immune system stops it before it multiplies or spreads.
Click to expand...

Aside from the modern city world factors attributing to cancer growth such as pollution in the air and processed foods (in moderation which is fine but if someone is living off crap food then it's not going to end well in the long run...), the immune system can be affected by psychological factors like anxiety and stress. Like they say, just because someone appears to be healthy on the outside, if they're not mentally healthy then that's going to lead to problems.

We live in a world where chemicals and pills are prescribed to rule our lives, these things used too much break down other areas of the mind and body. Ok for some treatments they are a must like anti-organ rejection medication etc and that's unfortunate beacuse thos epeople are stuck with it for life.

Aside from disease and infections or serious injury, the majority of other things can be fixed in the mind. And I know there are orgs and people out there trying their best to help improve the psychology of health in the mind, but it's not enough.

A healthy mind attributes so much to physical health at a cellular level it's insane but it's also an area that doesn't get the attention from professionals it deserves. Pharmas aren't helping matters, they are a business ,so they need to make money.... by putting a monetary figure to human life :/
 
Last edited:
I have just had my prostate removed (week last Tuesday) and tomorrow the clips come out and the catheter too. I am far from obese, 10st and 5' 10" but an ex. smoker. I cycle regularly and walk and I am now retired. I have had a healthy relationship to the idea of this cancer and decided to remove the organ rather than radiotherapy or just monitoring progress. At nearly 67, 10-15 years is my average life expectancy and that is all the prognosis they would give anyway.

I am lucky, happy, active and quite healthy for my age.:)
 
Angilion said:
As far as I know, food calorie values are based on their actual energy content. Specifically, 1 food calorie is the energy required to raise the temperature of 1Kg of water by 1C. The figures were originally obtained by literally burning a sample of the food and measuring the heat generated. Nowadays, it's done by analysing the broad nutritional content of the food (e.g. how much fat, how much protein, etc) and using standard values for each. There's some debate about how accurate this simplified approximation is.

On a personal basis, the figure I've seen mentioned for the variation in efficiency of digestion from person to person is 10% (outside of a medical disorder affecting digestion). Probably also an estimate - how can it be accurately measured?
Click to expand...
"Atwater system"

I've googled it to check my memory. It does indeed take into account loss through the human digestive process. For food ratings on packaging (and standardised ingredient ratings) - obviously you can't derive more calories from a foodstuff than the absolute calorie value, but you probably can get more than the amount listed on the packet, if you happen to have a digestive system that is more efficient (?) than the norm.
 
cheesyboy said:
"Atwater system"

I've googled it to check my memory. It does indeed take into account loss through the human digestive process. For food ratings on packaging (and standardised ingredient ratings) - obviously you can't derive more calories from a foodstuff than the absolute calorie value, but you probably can get more than the amount listed on the packet, if you happen to have a digestive system that is more efficient (?) than the norm.
Click to expand...

Depends what it is, for example if you eat 1000 calories of protein, it's very expensive to metabolise so whilst you put 1000 calories worth of food in your mouth, it actually requires up around 20% more energy and heat to metabolise than say, carbohydrates. So eating protein is actually a workout for your digestive system.

Another one is gut bacteria, depending on what you're actually eating - a larger or smaller proportion of those calories actually end up being metabolised by your gut bacteria not you, depending on what you eat.

This is another reason why calories from junk food can be far worse than the same number from normal food, because there's a growing body of evidence that shows how the emulsifiers used in processed food can harm gut bacteria.
 
Screeeech said:
Depends what it is, for example if you eat 1000 calories of protein, it's very expensive to metabolise so whilst you put 1000 calories worth of food in your mouth, it actually requires up around 20% more energy and heat to metabolise than say, carbohydrates. So eating protein is actually a workout for your digestive system.

Another one is gut bacteria, depending on what you're actually eating - a larger or smaller proportion of those calories actually end up being metabolised by your gut bacteria not you, depending on what you eat.

This is another reason why calories from junk food can be far worse than the same number from normal food, because there's a growing body of evidence that shows how the emulsifiers used in processed food can harm gut bacteria.
Click to expand...

Protein doesn't require 20% more energy to digest, where did you even read this? 1g of Protein is worth 4 calories, 1g of Carbohydrate is worth 4 calories. There's no such thing as a "work out for your digestive system" lmao. You've honestly just typed a complete load of rubbish. Why do people believe such crazy myths around specifically nutrition? It must be the subject with the most people talking the most uninformed rubbish out of any other subject.
 
BowdonUK said:
I'm afraid only you think its a conspiracy. Because that IS what all the health experts were saying back in the day, that it was down to smoking. Why do you think you hardly see any tv series or movies with actors smoking these days? Because TV was blamed for glamorising smoking and causing cancer.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously arguing with me that smoking doesnt cause cancer?
 
Roar87 said:
Protein doesn't require 20% more energy to digest, where did you even read this?
Click to expand...

Err...a quick google later

Protein takes the most energy to digest (20-30% of total calories in protein eaten go to digesting it). Next is carbohydrates (5-10%) and then fats (0-3%).
Click to expand...

https://www.precisionnutrition.com/digesting-whole-vs-processed-foods

Calories are not created equal. First, some foods (in particular, proteins) take more energy to chew, digest, metabolize, and store than others. Others (such as fats and carbohydrates) require fewer calories to digest and store.
Click to expand...

https://www.rd.com/health/fitness/5-fitness-myths-you-need-to-forget/

Different types of food require different amounts of energy to process, according to WorldFitnessNetwork.com. Fats have a thermic effect of about 3 percent. If you consume 100 fat calories, only 3 calories will be spent digesting the fat. Fibrous vegetables and fruit have a thermic effect of about 20 percent, while proteins have a thermic effect of about 30 percent. If you eat 300 protein calories, you'll burn off 90 calories digesting the protein.
Click to expand...

https://www.livestrong.com/article/320370-how-many-calories-does-digestion-use-up/

Both dietary carbohydrate and protein provide the same amount of available energy, 4 kilocalories per gram, but it takes about 25% more of that energy to process protein.
Click to expand...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...three-reasons-dieters-should-eat-more-protein

So where do you get your information from that protein doesn't take more energy to digest than carbohydrates?

Why do people believe such crazy myths around specifically nutrition? It must be the subject with the most people talking the most uninformed rubbish out of any other subject.
Click to expand...

You seem to be falling in to that category, yes
 
Roar87 said:
Protein doesn't require 20% more energy to digest, where did you even read this? 1g of Protein is worth 4 calories, 1g of Carbohydrate is worth 4 calories. There's no such thing as a "work out for your digestive system" lmao. You've honestly just typed a complete load of rubbish. Why do people believe such crazy myths around specifically nutrition? It must be the subject with the most people talking the most uninformed rubbish out of any other subject.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's called the thermic effect, or "Specific Dynamic Action" which related to the amount of energy required to actually metabolise certain types of food.

For example, protein requires between 20-30%, so if you eat 1000 calories of protein, around 200-300 of those calories are actually used by the body to metabolise it, we all know this because when we eat lots of meat - the body raises it's internal temperature to help with the digestion, otherwise known as 'meat sweats'

The thermic effect of food is the energy required for digestion, absorption, and disposal of ingested nutrients. Its magnitude depends on the composition of the food consumed:

  • Carbohydrates: 5 to 15% of the energy consumed[7]
  • Protein: 20 to 35%[7]
  • Fats: at most 5 to 15%[8]
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_dynamic_action

https://www.livestrong.com/article/320370-how-many-calories-does-digestion-use-up/

https://www.healthline.com/health/meat-sweats#2

lol beaten by @Freakbro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom