Why bacon is the most important food that has ever existed...

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I may have had a good win today.

Went to a new supermarket in Hervey Bay and bought some bacon. One kilogram (2.2 of those other things called lbs but pronounced pounds) in just five rashers. The down side is it is Chinese bacon that has been injected with not less than 15% Australian water (which is why the label says Made in Australia not Product of Australia.

Hopefully will try it tomorrow. Down side HB is 200 km away


I have to laugh at the serving size


If they think anyone is going to call 1/8 of a rasher a serving they are out of their little pea brains.
This could be seen up north (UK & parts of Europe) as a cut of gammon or gammon steak though the gammon I have seen is usually larger. Karl would know the answer. :thumbright: :D
My doctor told me diet is secondary to genetics. I was whining about a high cholesterol count. I had been eating lawn clippings and unsweetened gravel to get the cholesterol count down.
I do not have a cholesterol problem but found what this doctor had to say about cholesterol interesting - especially the readings some of his very old patients have.

Your local library may have a copy or you might find it on bookfinder.com

I eat lots of that stuff, have lots of salt and my cholesterol and blood pressure are both low. All my blood tests show me at the good end of every measured range.

One size fits all medicine is a fallacy
Interesting comment considering the original "laboratory" findings about cholesterol and red meat.

The red meat causing bowel and other cancers came from rats being fed meat. Fair enough on the surface
but info since has shown that rats are used for a lot of tests as there are two chemicals they can be injected
with that cause them to grow cancer cells. This is handy when testing cancer medicines etc. However, the rats
that were fed the meat were also injected and of course, then grew cancer cells. None of the rats developed
bowel or further cancers from the injections but the "study" inferred they did and it has since become "fact".

The cholesterol findings are even more ludicrous. Meat and fat was ground up into food for the animals as well
as pure liquid cholesterol being added to the drinking water. The result was an increase in cholesterol which was
then linked via the study to all sorts of problems. That study is still referred to today but ten years after it was
carried out one of the people who worked on it showed that rats were not used (oops). To that stage it was assumed they
were. No. In fact, the animals used for the cholesterol study were rabbits. I'm pretty sure rabbits don't generally
eat a lot of food containing cholesterol so I would find such a study to be ridiculously skewed towards a desired result.

Apparently the study was done by someone who was decidedly against people eating meat, eggs, etc. That
couldn't happen though, could it ?

Users who are viewing this thread