[aszantu]

You can basically dump all mouse studies, since the standard kibble was something high sugary/starchy. Add fat -> cancer; add more sugar -> cancer...; add more protein -> cancer Epidemiological stuff is flawed as well. Unless the people are kept in a closed ward and every meal is kept under close observation, it's probably not "clean" data.

There is hope though... annecdotal evidence seems to point towards unprocessed food as a good tool to fight cancer. Even better when it's low carb.

http://www.diagnosisdiet.com/meat-and-cancer/ source for the mouse model studies

http://meatheals.com/category/cancer/ anecdotal evidence, you'll prolly find some vegans as well if you go looking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tteYZfMat4 some interesting talk about the efficiency of treatment in some cancers. Might help to make a better informed decision if it ever hits you.

[brians]

This is similar to a problem with exercise studies: they under-dose in intensity and volume, and are then surprised that nothing much helps.

[sridca]

I'm surprised to see your comment in good health. Everytime I link to Georgia Ede or meatheals I get downvoted to oblivion lol, just as this comment too will (as if there is a vegan bot on HN targeting my comments?).

[aszantu]

don't go down the path of conspiracy theory xD that's unhealthy, but I don't care much about upvotes here

[sridca]

Ask the mods. They have flagged my account so that new comments in some threads begin with 0 points.

Agree on the upvotes thing; it is a health sign of skepticism.

[dang]

HN software has no such flagging mechanism.