What Is Really in Hot Dogs?

Dr. Michael Greger · 4 septiembre 08 · Volumen 2

4.8/5 - (20 votes)

What percentage of a hot dog is actually muscle tissue?

Comenta

Transcripción

Actually, there was a forensic study on hot dogs published earlier this year in the Annals of Diagnostic Pathology to answer the age-old question: what is really in them? It was like a CSI episode! They found…bone, blood vessels, nerves, cartilage, skin. But the kicker was that the amount of actual meat in a hot dog was less than ten percent.

Let’s look at hot dogs. Same serving size, but Bessie’s over here has almost five times more calories, 150 times more fat, infinitely more saturated fat, and cholesterol.

How did the meat industry respond to this devastating new cancer report? Well, the beef industry spin was that the report was “bad advice,” and that “another scientific study found no link between meat and cancer.” A study that was, in their words, “independent,” “comprehensive.” “How the WCRF research report could come to a different conclusion is perplexing,” they wrote. Well, I found the “independent, comprehensive study” to which the beef industry is referring, and wasn’t perplexed anymore!

I was on to this study like brown on rice. Here are the so-called “facts.” Let’s compare: the WCRF report looked at 7,000 studies; theirs looked at 500. This report has 537 pages; this one has four. This report was written by nine independent teams of scientists, hundreds of peer reviewers, and 21 of the top cancer researchers in the world. This one was written by these two guys. You can’t see, but the picture cuts off their cowboy hats.

Time spent to produce: this one took more than five years; this one just says “last summer.” And finally, the report that found a link between meat and cancer was overseen by the World Health Organization, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and funded by a leading cancer charity. This other one was overseen by a scientists-for-hire, for-profit firm, which has come out with similar reports downplaying the risk of pesticides, asbestos, and, of course, cigarette smoke. This “independent” study? Bought and paid for by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

But if you think that takes gall, wait until you see what the pork industry did. Smithfield, the largest pork producer in the world, launched the “Deli for the Cure” campaign, donating five cents to early detection for every pound sold of exactly the type of meat the WCRF report says causes the most cancer. I guess it’s the least they can do. If they’re going to give us cancer early, might as well help detect it early for us, too.

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Dianne Moore.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Fuentes

Reconocimientos

Temas

Actually, there was a forensic study on hot dogs published earlier this year in the Annals of Diagnostic Pathology to answer the age-old question: what is really in them? It was like a CSI episode! They found…bone, blood vessels, nerves, cartilage, skin. But the kicker was that the amount of actual meat in a hot dog was less than ten percent.

Let’s look at hot dogs. Same serving size, but Bessie’s over here has almost five times more calories, 150 times more fat, infinitely more saturated fat, and cholesterol.

How did the meat industry respond to this devastating new cancer report? Well, the beef industry spin was that the report was “bad advice,” and that “another scientific study found no link between meat and cancer.” A study that was, in their words, “independent,” “comprehensive.” “How the WCRF research report could come to a different conclusion is perplexing,” they wrote. Well, I found the “independent, comprehensive study” to which the beef industry is referring, and wasn’t perplexed anymore!

I was on to this study like brown on rice. Here are the so-called “facts.” Let’s compare: the WCRF report looked at 7,000 studies; theirs looked at 500. This report has 537 pages; this one has four. This report was written by nine independent teams of scientists, hundreds of peer reviewers, and 21 of the top cancer researchers in the world. This one was written by these two guys. You can’t see, but the picture cuts off their cowboy hats.

Time spent to produce: this one took more than five years; this one just says “last summer.” And finally, the report that found a link between meat and cancer was overseen by the World Health Organization, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and funded by a leading cancer charity. This other one was overseen by a scientists-for-hire, for-profit firm, which has come out with similar reports downplaying the risk of pesticides, asbestos, and, of course, cigarette smoke. This “independent” study? Bought and paid for by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

But if you think that takes gall, wait until you see what the pork industry did. Smithfield, the largest pork producer in the world, launched the “Deli for the Cure” campaign, donating five cents to early detection for every pound sold of exactly the type of meat the WCRF report says causes the most cancer. I guess it’s the least they can do. If they’re going to give us cancer early, might as well help detect it early for us, too.

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Dianne Moore.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Nota del Doctor

More on the link between cancer and processed meats:

Telomeres: Cap It All Off with Diet
Artificial Food Colors and ADHD
From Table to Able: Combating Disabling Diseases with Food
Prevention Is Better Than Cured Meat

For further context, see my associated blog post: Breast Cancer and Diet.

Échale un vistazo a la página de información sobre los recursos traducidos.

Pin It en Pinterest

Share This