Wait, Who Says Meat Causes Cancer?

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
October 27, 2015

Wait, who?
Wait, who?

Dr. WHO, The World Health Organization, has come out and claimed that processed meat does cause cancer and that all red meat “probably” causes cancer.

Don't believe the hype.
Don’t believe the hype.

They have classified bacon as a “category 1” carcinogen, the same categorization as tobacco.

Washington Post:

In an announcement that has alarmed bacon lovers and sent the beef industry into a furor, the World Health Organization’s cancer research arm on Monday declared processed meat a carcinogen, like tobacco, and said red meat is probably one, too.

Here’s what experts have to say about what this new warning means for your diet:

What meats are they talking about exactly?

The International Agency for Research on Cancer’s definitions of processed meat and red meat are very wide. Processed meats encompass any meats that have been “transformed through salting, curing, fermentation, smoking, or other processes to enhance flavor or improve preservation.” This would include sausages, corned beef, hot dogs, beef jerky, canned meat, meat-based preparations and sauces, turkey and chicken cold cuts, as well as bacon.

Red meat refers to “all types of mammalian muscle meat,” such as beef, veal, pork, lamb, mutton, horse — even goat.

What kind of cancers did the scientists look at?

For processed meat, the carcinogen label was given based on studies about colorectal cancer. They also found an association between processed meat and stomach cancer. For red meat, the data pointed to associations with colorectal, pancreatic and prostate cancers.

Why do they think these are dangerous to our health?

Scientists think that something bad happens to meat during the process of salting, curing or other treatment that causes the build up of carcinogenic chemicals such as N-nitroso-compounds (NOC) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in the food. In red meat, cooking can also produce suspected carcinogens — in this case heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAA) and PAH. The IARC’s report, published in Lancet Oncology, notes that “high-temperature cooking by pan-frying, grilling or barbecuing generally produces the highest amounts of these chemicals.”

What’s the distinction between the classification that the IARC gave to processed meat vs. red meat?

The group put processed meat products into its highest risk category meaning that they believe there’s pretty strong evidence to back up this link. It’s the same designation that has been given to really serious cancer-causing agents, such as air pollution and different types of radiation.

Red meat was put into the second highest category of being a “probable” carcinogen meaning that there’s limited evidence of the link in humans but a lot of evidence in experimental animals.

This is political propaganda.

We have eaten meat for hundreds of thousands of years, and all the sudden it’s a problem?

In actual fact, the global government system is in the process of attempting to seriously cut down on meat consumption because of the rate at which non-Whites (particularly Black Africans) are breeding.

They have been saying this for a long time. And it isn't untrue.
They have been saying this for a long time. And it isn’t untrue.

Earlier this year, the US government came out and told people to become vegans.

Production of meat is more expensive than the production of soy and corn and so on. In order to produce meat, you first have to grow grains to feed to the animal over the course of its life. Mass produced meat (factory farming) is also a serious environmental hazard, and this method of farming has become necessary to feed meat to the billions of brown people.

The idea here seems to be to bully Whites into becoming vegetarians through threats of cancer, then let them teach the brown people to eat soy.

This Cancer

The research isn’t completely faked, I would assume, it is just cherry-picked, done in a certain way to produce a certain politically beneficial result.

Firstly, all processed foods are dangerous and may cause various types of cancer. All chemicals are dangerous, you don’t even have to eat them. We breath in dangerous chemicals, we absorb them through our skin. It is part of modern capitalist-consumerist living.

So I can believe that certain types of bacon and sausage, filled with preservatives and artificial fillers, produced with chemical ridden meat from chemical ridden pigs that were eating chemical ridden grains, can increase the risk of cancer.

Anything that comes sealed in plastic is not good to eat.

This I wouldn't eat.
This I wouldn’t eat.
This is significantly less likely to be problematic.
This is significantly less likely to be problematic.

So I can believe that they were able to draw a connection between cancer and certain type of processed foods (even thought they confuse the definition of “processed foods”). However, to tack on “well, also all red meat is probably bad too somehow” is clear nonsense.

Certain types of red meat are bad, but it again has to do with denaturalization of the food. There is nothing healthier than fresh beef or lamb. Pork is generally less healthy, but not as bad as chicken, certainly not as bad as the soy/corn poison prolefeed they want you to eat.

I recommend the paleo diet. If you haven’t done so yet, take my paleo challenge, and see how you feel.

Whatever you do, don’t become a vegetarian. There is nothing less healthy. It will lower your testosterone levels, kill your energy, remove your muscle mass (note that this is in the long term, of course, certain people may wish to do temporary vegetarian diets for specific health reasons, and that is not necessarily an issue).

Michelle Obama has done a media campaign promoting vegetarianism, but I guarantee she didn't get leg muscles like that eating beans.
Michelle Obama has done a media campaign promoting vegetarianism, but I guarantee she didn’t get leg muscles like that eating beans.

Solution to the Food Crisis

We are in a food crisis. Some of it is just the corporate food industry maximizing profits to the detriment of the consumer, but part of it is a real life population crisis, which forces super-efficiency in food production, which leads to very low quality food.

We need population reduction in the third world. I am not sure how this needs to be done, but it needs to be done somehow. We simply cannot allow these people to continue breeding like this. They are destroying the planet, they are depleting nonrenewable resources.

They are not going to voluntarily stop breeding like rats. Someone has to do something.
They are not going to voluntarily stop breeding like rats. Someone has to do something.

Besides all of the social and economic problems these infinity brown people are causing, they are absolutely wrecking the planet.

We need to either stop feeding them completely, close the borders and let their populations return to sustainable levels, or we need to make a deal with them that we will keep feeding them if they agree to mass sterilization of a majority of their population.

In real life, there is no other option. We cannot simply allow these Blacks (and others, but mostly Blacks) to destroy the earth.