LOL, c'mon man that's so weak. Patients needs to eat so let's give them food they have no nutritional requirement for and will contribute to their cancer and ultimately cost us more money. People like to hear good things about their bad habits. If the NHS was giving people cigs, I think you might say that's pretty shit stop that right now, not something like 'one cig won't harm, people need to relax'. Because you enjoy the odd sausage you'll try and convince yourself it's ok and that despite the fact it's proven to increase risk of cancer, because you do it then maybe it's not so bad that the NHS serve it to people. If anyone needs more processed red meat, it's definitely people in hospital uh?
Oh so now it's a cost thing. Ham is cheaper than lentils? rly? And as I said in my OP, apparently 'lifestyle choices cost the NHS 11 billion a year' http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/lifestyle-illness-cost-nhs-11-billion-a-year_uk_57e8df98e4b0db20a6e9814d so if it's a cost thing it doesn't make much sense to give people food that causes more health problems and ends up costing you more money.
And you're right they were other food options. Like I said, fried pork balls, cheese and ham pasty, beef sandwich, ice cream, jacket spud with cheese…. there was probably a solitary banana on there as well, all 90 calories of it. If the menu was unsatisfactory we had a choice of sweets, fizzy drinks, chocolate and crisps from the dozens of vending machines scattered around. I have 2 packets of skittles and a bag of salt and vinegar crisps for my lunch.
People who eat low meat diets have approx a 5.6% chance of developing bowel cancer, this rises to 6.6% for those who have a diet high in processed meat
That's another very vague weak point you're trying to make isn't it? What's considered a 'low meat diet', 2 slices of bacon a day vs 6 slices??? I mentioned a specific report by the World Health Organisation but you probably don't want to quote it exactly because 18% increased risk doesn't quite give you the 1% chance figure you're looking. (see below)
LOL, I'd put CancerResearch on a par with the Daily Mail. I'd rather set fire to my money than give a penny to fraudsters like cancer research. You may as well give your money to your local crack dealer and get your information from iraqi information minister. Anyways, here is the WHO report, the only report I mentioned so you’re DM reference falls on deaf ears.:
From the WHO website: http://www.who.int/features/qa/cancer-red-meat/en/
"An analysis of data from 10 studies estimated that every 50 gram portion of processed meat eaten daily increases the risk of colorectal cancer by about 18%"
It’s a relative increase and it’s based on only one form of cancer. If you want to play the numbers game and compare diets why are you comparing meat diets to meat diets? Just so the numbers are lower? http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/vegetarian-diet-linked-to-lower-colon-cancer-risk-201503117785 …. 22%, 43% We can play the numbers/google game but we’d be here all day.
1 in every 2 people will now get cancer in their lifetime. It wasn’t so long ago it was 1 in 3. http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v112/n5/full/bjc2014606a.html repeated here (only linking this because you think it’s a respected source of information) http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-us/cancer-news/press-release/2015-02-04-1-in-2-people-in-the-uk-will-get-cancer
Where going off on tangents but that’s your fault. My point is a simply one, not sure why you’re so set on arguing against it, do you work on a pig farm? Processed red meats like bacon and ham, which are proven carcinogens to humans should not be served in hospitals. End of story. There’s no logical argument for it and you’ve definitely not provided one. Given people already have a 50% chance of getting cancer in their lifetime, hospitals should be serving food that fights cancer, not fucking giving them more of it. And that’s before we talk about the cholesterol and saturated fat.