131
submitted 3 days ago by Valuy@lemmy.zip to c/world@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Footer1998@crazypeople.online 21 points 3 days ago

Without doxing myself, I have expertise in this topic. It's not a matter of my world view, it's a matter of science and communication.

It is very unlikely that human adiposity leads to increased cancer risk directly. It is correlational, not causational. Human adiposity itself, isolated from compounding factors, has a complex relationship with health outcomes, and not at all the linear correlation where more fat = more bad that the mainstream likes to pretend.

We know that certain foods, particularly animal products, especially cheaper animal products, lead to cancers, heart disease, etc. This is most likely explanation for the results in this study. But yet again we have yet another study uselessly pointing out a correlation which is unhelpful for actually solving public health issues and continues to encourage the passing of the blame to those in society who have the least responsibility for their situation.

[-] zergtoshi@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago

Does visceral fat not produce inflammatory substances, which might be a cause for some problems - potentially including a higher risk for cancer?
Maybe I've read misleding articles. I hope you have some info about that.

[-] pennomi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Plus more biomass = more chances of something getting cancer in there somewhere.

[-] Photonic@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago

That’s way too simplistic. Cancers rarely develop in the actual subcutaneous or intra-abdominal fat tissue which is what obese people have too much of.

Sarcomas comprise a heterogeneous group of rare neoplasms that develop from bone and soft tissue. With an incidence of ~7 per 100,000 people, they account for 1% of adult cancer diagnoses […] Liposarcomas (LSs) are rare mesenchymal soft-tissue sarcomas that are thought to arise from cells in the lipocyte lineages in soft tissues. LSs account for ~13–20% of all soft-tissue sarcomas.

Their organs aren’t any bigger, except for maybe the steatotic liver, so no it is definitively not a case of more tissue to develop cancer in.

[-] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

Their organs aren’t any bigger, except for maybe the steatotic liver

And the skin

[-] Photonic@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Yes, but the big difference isn’t in skin cancer either

[-] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

We know that certain foods, particularly animal products, especially cheaper animal products, lead to cancers, heart disease, etc.

It's very very difficult to get obese on a well balanced healthy diet composed of mostly vegetables.

But yet again we have yet another study uselessly pointing out a correlation which is unhelpful for actually solving public health issues

What do you mean? This is very helpful. It says that if you want to reduce cancer incidence, you should work to decrease obesity. If we only did science that produced direct results that require zero political action to be effective, no science would get done.

Besides, its not as if it's a giant mystery what causes the obesity epidemic, it's just that undoing that would mean some massive regulation in the food industry, changes to zoning, increases in public funding and a dozen other areas, and other things that aren't a mystery, but are very politically unpopular.

continues to encourage the passing of the blame to those in society who have the least responsibility for their situation.

The paper absolutely does not say "Don't want cancer? Don't be a fatty!". The article does do, but that's not the fault of the researchers.

this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
131 points (100.0% liked)

World News

56104 readers
1828 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS