On Fri, 29 May 2009 13:58, Lynnet Bannion wrote:

>Actually, some of us have a larger battle on our hands, than 
>whether cooked meat or raw meat is healthier/deadlier.  
>There is a HUGE amount of propaganda out there that
>eating meat in any form is a high risk factor for cancer, 
>especially breast cancer. This test, with over 120,000 
>subjects, may help people who are confused or on the 
>fence on the subject.  

When you get down through the health of the organism to
the health of the cell's metabolism, you find that there are
many influences, most of them interacting - some even
counter-acting the others. Diet is just one of these environmental
influences (and remember to include in diet the effects of
any 'supplements' and pharmaceuticals), but there are others 
that may be equally as significant for overall health: [1] the 
intensity, frequency and comprehensiveness of physical activity 
[2] adequate restful, rejuvenating sleep [3] mental stress levels 
and our ratio of stressors to meliors - the quality of our 
relationships to other people is also important in this respect 
[4] air quality (outdoor air in temperate rainforest environments
contains bacteria, fungal spores and volatile organic compounds 
most conducive to human health - and its health promoting effects 
are possibly the most neglected in our increasingly prosthetic
world) [5] existing illnesses/conditions/predispositions/genetic
inheritance and our sex and age [6] exposure to pollution of all 
kinds (including our exposure to plastics, esp phthalates, 
electromagnetic radiation and synthetic clothing/furnishings/
building materials).

Google "allergic to the twentieth century" for more about this,
but retain a critical perspective, wary of over-simplification.

Each of these may have direct effects or epigenetic effects. 
You may prefer to dismiss some of them and the extent of 
their impact will vary between individuals. Each of them have
been shown to be critical for some people. Isn't being a good
Homo sapiens fun :-)

Keith