What is up you guys? Welcome to another edition of Controversial Thoughts. In this very special episode, I had my good friend, my dear friend, I have our comments on to talk about if meat causes cancer, a red meat and organs bad for you.

So we are going to crush that topic. There's lots of good information here. I get asked this question all the time. And so it was good to put a lot of these thoughts in the same place. Check us out at heart and soil.co if you need more notes of talent,

and talent, nutrition in your life, heart and soil.co. We got B forgans, we got fire starter, we got heart of the warrior is our new products, which just released and immunomilk our grass fed grass finished colostrum is coming next week.

Stay radical you guys love you all. Thank you for being a part of the remembering. Enjoy this episode with I work comings and use it to argue with all of your friends or disabuse them of their incorrect notions when they spew

and you falsehoods like red meat causes cancer, doesn't it? All right, enjoy here. Yeah. And we were talking at our last viral discussion, a couple of weeks back about your appearance and Joe Rogan, which is a big one.

And it was really fun to go on Joe's podcast. He's a real fan of animal baits diets, which is something that we're going to talk about today. And I know he's benefited from it enormously in his own life. And I mean, there's it's just such a big platform that my hope is that that episode, which is now exclusively on Spotify will influence a lot of people.

And in a positive way and incidentally, he texted me a few weeks later, after he interviewed John Mackey, who is the guy who founded Whole Foods here in the United States.

And John Mackey, I think sold it to Amazon, but as a vegan and for whatever reason, Whole Foods has become kind of plant based in their ideology.

And the podcast with Joe Rogan and John Mackey was mostly about John Mackey's thoughts on capitalism and economies, but toward the end of the podcast, John Mackey started trying to talk about the benefits of a plant based diet.

And Joe in his wisdom, I think having learned from me and you and other people was able to say, oh, no, John, those are all false claims you're making. And so it was amazing that that he was able to put a plant based advocate in his place on his podcast and really dispel some of the myths.

And so many myths that we can talk about today about me, there are myths about benefits of plant based diets and there are myths about potential harm of animal food. So that was really cool to see Joe defending this ancestral diet of humans.

Yeah, I think Joe and fairness to him as well, he knows this long term, but then if he has people like you on and goes through the detail, he benefits from all of the science and the backup and then he can be even more assured when he has someone like that on, but yet there's so many myths and I mean the most cliched one, the most absurd one was a couple of years ago, the WHO and we have, we have other challenges now with that body at the moment, obviously.

But the WHO came out basically saying that me kind of is a carcinogen mostly process meat, but also kind of sneering at real ancestral red meats and it was based on lots of studies, but when you go through them, there are junk studies associations with like a 1.08 hazard ratio and anything less than two is meaningless, but they were happy to come out based on junk science.

And state that they actually spent the time, so what's wrong with them.

It was such a crazy thing, I've worked so that happened in 2015, it was the IARC reports of the International Association for Research on Cancer Report, and then there was they made the decision and they published it in 2015 and then in 2018, the real details of how they came to that decision came out.

So who knows why it took them three years to actually show their work quote unquote, but the 2015 decision, as you're saying, I believe was saying that process meat was a class 2 a carcinogen and non process red meat was a class 2 B or the recommendation was class 2 a versus class 2 B, which just has to do with the strength of the evidence, but when you, which is absurd, because when you look at how they arrived at that decision.

And David Klerfield, who has been who was on that committee has written about this, I can maybe pull up something that he's written in the screen share in a moment, but he talked about how it all went down and a lot of the committee was actually vegetarians who didn't disclose their their biases.

And they had, I believe, over 400 studies that might give some indication of connections between meat, both processed and unprocessed and cancer, well, we don't really care about process red meat and cancer studies because no humans should be eating process red meat, let's talk about fresh meat with the process red meat stuff aside, like why are you eating process red meat.

But if you just look at the non process red meat studies, there were hundreds and they whittled it down to 14 studies, I believe it was either 14 or 15 studies, so they excluded probably over 200 or 300 studies for whatever reason and the studies they looked at were entirely observational.

There were no interventional studies that they actually considered to make this decision about the connection between red meat and cancer, and there are many animal studies and there are interventional studies in humans that suggests that red meat is not inflammatory, there's really no mechanistic basis by which red meat would cause cancer in the intestines.

And so they just excluded all that, that's not valuable, we don't need to think about that, let's just look at observational studies, and so with 14 considered for their decision, you might think that the majority of those studies would show an association between red meat and cancer, but they didn't.

I think now I'm going to get this number slightly wrong, I think it was 14 studies and I believe eight of the 14 showed no association between red meat and cancer, and of the six that were remaining five, the association between red meat and cancer was not statistically significant, that is either the p value was too high, the confidence interval cross one.

...