If that red meat-cancer-claim is not just aniother unfoudned hypthesis grounded on unseirous statistical data manipulaiton and ocnducted for ideolgicla rewaosns to un leanr people to enioy eating, living, meat in general. Its a abd thing that today health aerugmnents get brought uzp to defend ecological claims and that ecological claims get brought up to make people complying with wnated eating regimes. This mixing of two different thigns nowadays makes me aghgressive.
Must be some Protestant-Calvinist self-flagellation thing. To drive the enjoyment out of people and make them all feel guilty for the planet, the other peoples, the foreign nobler people courted by the leftists... Feel like a sinner when you enjoy tasteful food. Feel like a criminal if you dont save energy when frying not at reduced heat. Fear detah and hellfire if you eat meat form killed animals. In your knees with you nunworthy nothing if you do not submit yourself to the superior living style and moral of vegetarians and vegans.
Almost all ecotrophological studies done are - corrrelation studies - which then gets interpreted as if these correlations were causal cause-effect links. There are hundreds of thousands of ecotrophological studies. And almost all of them are correlation studies. Almost all of them.
And how could it be different when considering ethical and moral limits in conducting studies on eating...
Train your German, Markus, this is true - and entertaining.
The man is quite known in Germany, I have two books myself by him. Sometimes he is more polemic than right, sometimes he is simply wrong, but often he is right on target. Either they hate him or they love him. But entertaining he certainly is.
https://www.zeit.de/lebensart/essen-...omplettansicht