@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore well clearly the FDA and sister agencies in developed countries agree with me. If they believed it was a meaningful risk to most consumers they would have baned the sale. Their exist a reason why everything else on your list is heavily restricted in its sale.

With that said I do avoid nitrate salt when I buy food and prefer alternatives without. But I don't think it's helpful to warn consumers about minor risks.

@ekg @Herbivore Ah, yes, the impartial FDA, USDA and similar, where half of the people are appointed by the industries.

IARC publishes World Cancer Report, it's an overview of all of the scientific research on cancer, try reading it.

@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore I did, admittedly a few years ago. And if I don't remember wrong the does respons was well over 50g a day. Meaning to get a measurable risk increase you would have to eat a heavy bacon breakfast everyday, or equivalent.

And I want to be clear a measurable increase risk for some cancers isn't a meaningful risk for negative health outcomes.

You could imagine a less rich diet having other negative outcomes.

@ekg @Herbivore Well, everything has a dose response. You could take arsenic in small amounts, but why would you?

And 50 grams is not a "large" breakfast, 50 grams is about half the size of cigarette pack.

@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore if 50g a day is not a heavy breakfast for you, I understand your concerns more. Personally I would only eat that large a portion of processed/red meat on occasionally.

Most food products come with health risks, many more sever then cancer. If I don't remember wrong processed/red meat primarily increases the risk for bowl cancer, which is very treatable.

@ekg @Herbivore One slice of bacon, uncooked, is around 30 grams. Most people I know, including myself when I was still eating meat, eat more than two slices for breakfast.

And most people don't eat processed meat only on breakfast.

@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore I would consider any bacon breakfast a heavy one.

And I am awere that people eat more then breakfast. However I do believe that their exist far greater concerns then health, which the cancer risk is only a small part, with heavy meat consumption.

Which I would define as more then two servings a week.

@ekg @Herbivore Perhaps it's different in Sweden, but here in the Balkans omnivores seldomly skip having some sort of meat in their meals. If it's not meat, then it's eggs and dairy.

However, judging by this Sweden has higher meat consumption than Serbia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_meat_consumption

@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore most consumers are heavy meat consumers. Attitudes in Sweden are changing fast, and it's mostly the older generation that regard food without animals as less

Meat free days has been tried, and many schools has committed to always have a meat free alternative. It's rear to find restaurants without a clearly marked vegan alternative, often more than one

The real problem is the large minority that refuse to eat anything marked as vegan

@doctor_zoidberg @Herbivore I wanna be clear were I am coming from

The meat industry in Sweden recommend that swedes should eat on average 40kg a year, a bit over 50g a day, of all meats. Swedes eat about twice that on average

Americans eat about four times that number

This recommendation is based on what they can produce sustainably, and Swedish condition is well suited for meat production

The concern about health is overshadowed by environmental concerns