Are canned meats okay to eat every day?

[RedRusty]

And on that day, BB.com'ers fought over canned meat.

[AdamWW]

And on that day, BB.com'ers fought over canned meat.

No fighting from me... im just curious to know the risks so I can make good choices.

[AdamWW]

I haven't seen those yet. Do you know how they prepared it?

Well the only ingredient is 'roasted turkey', but that's all it says.

This is the brand i've bought... they have an Organic, no-salt + no-sugar turkey in a package: https://diestelturkey.com/natural-no...d-deli-turkey/

[Mrpb]

I went over this already. Thoroughly.

But you haven't refuted it obviously. At the end of the day this definition of WHO includes canned roasted chicken.

Now this doesn't prove it's necessarily unhealthy of course.

Thanks, I found some interesting tid-bits:

[i]"At low temperatures (around 100 °C), steaming, boiling, or stewing generate much lower levels of these carcinogenic compounds. For baking and roasting, temperatures are higher (up to 200 °C), but as there is limited direct contact with a hot surface, the formation of these carcinogenic compounds is also low (Rohrmann et al., 2002). Barbecuing, grilling, and pan-frying expose meat products to high temperatures, and to a hot surface or to direct flame, and thus can produce an appreciable level of these carcinogenic compounds[/b]

Yeah that's the part I just quoted in post #24.

Now the relevant questions as far as the carcinogenic compounds are: how high was the temperature used by that company, was there contact with the can, for how long did they roast it. Obviously we don't know any of that at this point in time. And yes like I mentioned before browning causes more of the compounds to form, but roasting without browning still causes them to form, just less. Boiling probably even less.

But here's the far more important thing: the scientists do not yet know exactly why processed meat increases colorectal cancer risk. It's possible that those compounds play a role but it's only a theory.

So even IF this specific type of chicken was indeed roasted on a low temperature (which we do not know) and even IF the can didn't cause harmful compounds to form (which we do not know) and even IF this chicken has a low amount of these carcinogenic compounds (which we do not know) it may still increase risk for colorectal cancer.

Now the good thing about freshly prepared chicken is that it has not been associated with an increased risk for cancer.

[Mrpb]

Well the only ingredient is 'roasted turkey', but that's all it says.

This is the brand i've bought... they have an Organic, no-salt + no-sugar turkey in a package: https://diestelturkey.com/natural-no...d-deli-turkey/

I'd still consider that processed meat, just like that canned chicken.

But as I've been mentioning before: it's possible that this kind of turkey doesn't have the same adverse effects as the typical processed meat. No one really knows. It makes sense that it would be healthier than say bacon with nitrates etc.

Personally I'd try to limit my consumption of all those type of processed meats but I understand people that find it convenient.

[x-ray vision]

But you haven't refuted it obviously.

It's not obvious at all. I believe I refuted the hell out of it.

At the end of the day this definition of WHO includes canned roasted chicken.

At the end of the day, you did some horrendous extrapolation making almost anything cooked seem dangerous.

Now the relevant questions as far as the carcinogenic compounds are: how high was the temperature used by that company, was there contact with the can, for how long did they roast it. Obviously we don't know any of that at this point in time. And yes like I mentioned before browning causes more of the compounds to form, but roasting without browning still causes them to form, just less. Boiling probably even less.

And I went over this too. We don't know how high the temp is on most pre-cooked foods, do we? But the pdf did mention cooking techniques, didn't it?

But here's the far more important thing: the scientists do not yet know exactly why processed meat increases colorectal cancer risk. It's possible that those compounds play a role but it's only a theory.

And I went over that.

Yeah that's the part I just quoted in post #24.

Yes, and I quoted more from the paper, didn't I? You wanted to point out to me the pdf regarding what it said about roasting and I posted some parts.

Now the relevant questions as far as the carcinogenic compounds are: how high was the temperature used by that company, was there contact with the can, for how long did they roast it.

Do you remember this exchange?:

How high a temperature did they "roast" this product at?

You don't know, I don't know. Does it matter? not really because roasting is enough to know.

Obviously we don't know any of that at this point in time. And yes like I mentioned before browning causes more of the compounds to form, but roasting without browning still causes them to form, just less. Boiling probably even less.

As I predicted, it's about getting the last word in, even if it means continually repeating points I addressed. If you fully address all of my points in post 25, I'll get around to posting again.

[hardyboysare]

And on that day, BB.com'ers fought over canned meat.

Interesting to know though, always thought my chicken curry in a can was evil but for 240 calories and 24g of protein of goodness I will carry on eating it whilst reading how it plans to kill me.

[danielg733]

Jfc this has escalated. Thanks for the input everyone, I genuinely had no idea about any of what's been posted. Might have to do some further reading and/or cut down on the cans a bit.

So the question is, how does someone go about getting their lean protein in for meals where a fridge isn't available, without canned meat?

[MSKFAHIM]

I have always had people tell me to not have the canned Sardines or Mackerels that I love and to get them raw and prepare them. Overall, they always helped me more than they harmed me. It has often been a matter of convenience for me.

Also, your thread reminds me of this:



Needless to say that that's one of the most unappetising canned food I've ever seen.

[Mrpb]

I believe I refuted the hell out of it.

Yeah what you believe and what actually happened are different things though. Take a break and read back post #9 and #10 where it started. I asked someone to show me unprocessed meat in can (knowing very well that it doesn't exist). He then shows me roasted meat in can. In the definition of WHO ANY meat that has undergone a process that improves preservation is considered processed meat. And as you know by now they also specifically mention canned meat. So there's no getting around that. You can keep trying but it won't get you anywhere.

I think you realise this by now because if you didn't, why would you make any effort discussing the WHO results? If it doesn't even apply to your beloved chicken, why even discuss the results?

In a prospective study conducted by the Norwegian National Health Screening Service (143 cases of colon cancer) among Norwegian men and women aged 20–54 years between 1977 and 1983 (Gaard et al., 1996), consumption of meatballs, meat stews, and fried or roasted meats was unrelated to colon cancer risk.

Roasted meat in this study applies to freshly prepared meat, not canned meats. So it's irrelevant to the canned meat that you love so much.

(Navarro et al., 2004) (296 cases, 597 controls) reported that a higher intake of darkly browned red meat was associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer, particularly for barbecued, iron pan–cooked, and fried red meat, but not roasted red meat."[/i]

Roasted meat in this study applies to freshly prepared meat, not canned meats. So it's irrelevant to the canned meat that you love so much.

At the end of the day, you did some horrendous extrapolation making almost anything cooked seem dangerous.

Nah. That's not what I'm doing. The only thing I'm doing is recommending against processed meats including canned meats. But this is only meant for people that want to keep their risk for colorectal cancer as low as possible.

As I predicted, it's about getting the last word in, even if it means continually repeating points I addressed. If you fully address all of my points in post 25, I'll get around to posting again.

There's no point in responding to every irrelevant comment that you make because none of it even remotely refutes my position.

You've already said that you wouldn't come back, so why keep coming back all the time?

[Heisman2]

Jfc this has escalated. Thanks for the input everyone, I genuinely had no idea about any of what's been posted. Might have to do some further reading and/or cut down on the cans a bit.

So the question is, how does someone go about getting their lean protein in for meals where a fridge isn't available, without canned meat?

You can watch the canned tuna for sure due to mercury; canned salmon should not be a concern from a mercury standpoint.

If you have a freezer available (or can purchase one) you can bake chicken breasts, divide them in portions, and freeze them.

If you don't have any method of storing, you can use protein powder. It's not that hard to get 0.8 g of protein per pound of lean body mass daily without meat.

[Mrpb]

I have always had people tell me to not have the canned Sardines or Mackerels...

Maybe good to mention: In this thread when I was referring to canned meat I was always talking about canned red meat and poultry, not fish.

I haven't seen compelling data against canned fish. The WHO paper is also not about canned fish.

[Mrpb]

So the question is, how does someone go about getting their lean protein in for meals where a fridge isn't available, without canned meat?

Heisman gave some good advice. If you really need more protein bringing some dairy like Greek yogurt could be an option. It stays ok outside a fridge for quite some time in my experience.