When I say rhythm is a dancer...

Seriously, what is it about cancer?

Women who regularly eat junk food increase their risk of cancer by ten per cent - even if they are SLIM

Screeches the Mirror

Women who eat junk food but are not overweight are still increasing their risk of cancer, a study has found.
Previous research suggested the risk of cancer increased because processed foods such as burgers and pizza made people overweight.
But this latest study found that such high energy-low nutrient foods contributed to a 10% higher risk of developing cancer in women even if they were of normal weight.

'Public Health' isn't about health, it's about lifestyle control. And it's about making a whole heap of money off the back of the taxpayer. In order to keep us controlled and keep the cash rolling in, the best approach is to scare us. Frightened people tend to listen to the sages and the doomsayers a lot more than those who don't really give a crap

And cancer is a good old scary thing. I've seen people die of it, as I'm sure most of us have. It's a very nasty way to go

Which makes it the perfect tool for 'Public Health' manipulation. Tell people they are going to get cancer and they will be scared. Offer them a way out and they'll beg you to tell them what to do. So you tell fat people they are going to die from cancer and they might just start to follow the 'Public Health' doctrine, allowing you to prove those Government grants are being put to good use

But what happens when people who aren't fat, still purchase food you don't approve of, from businesses you despise? Tell them they're also going to get cancer. Folk will believe owt these days

Just make sure you word the message in the correct way. A ten percent higher risk. Most people would read that as being a ten percent risk of getting cancer and a ninety percent risk of not doing. That's bunkum

It's actually an increase of ten percent on the risk you have without the fatty foods. It might for example, be an increase of 10% on an existing risk of 2%. So your risk is now 2.2%. I can't be bothered working out the exact figures, but that's the general idea. When 'Public Health' talk about risks in percentages, it's generally a percentage increase that is so small, it can safely be ignored

But as long as they keep pushing it, more people will believe it

How that nightly tipple could lead to skin cancer: Just one alcoholic drink a day can raise risk of one type by 11%

This time the Daily Mail

Drinking just one glass of beer or wine a day could give you skin cancer, scientists have warned - and it isn’t to do with spending time in pub beer gardens or lying in the sun.

Drinkers too. You are so unapproved of. You will get cancer too. A 11% increased risk of skin cancer from having one beer a day. I don't know off the top of my head what the risk of skin cancer is to a non-drinker, but it's small. Small enough that an 11% risk can be ignored, as it's probably just down to inconsistencies in the study or cherry picking

It's been proved time and time again that moderate drinking is good for you, but that doesn't fit the narrative. Someone somewhere has to 'prove' that moderate drinking is going to give you a horrible death from cancer. Keep it scary, keep the taxpayer cash rolling in

Many people though, are well aware that 'Public Health' can be safely ignored and choose to do so. So what happens when your target audience just aren't scared of you and your cancer anymore and choose to buy and eat what they want? You target the places they buy from and make it harder to buy the things you disapprove of

Cancer charity calls for action on junk food multi-buys

Squeals the BBC

Cancer Research UK said stores frequently promoted items high in sugar, salt or fat, and said obesity was linked to 13 different cancers

.

Not just one, but 13 cancers. THIRTEEN! Oh the humanity.

Polling for the charity suggested 71% of parents believe too much junk food is on promotion in supermarkets, with 89% of parents believing that promotions influence what they buy.

And whose fucking fault is that? So just because a few people have zero self control and thirteen cancers, the rest of us should be forced to pay more for our food?

It said action on unhealthy food could make it easier for people to make healthier choices.

And there's another way they lovingly manipulate the English language. If you take away the things you disapprove of and only leave the things you think are ok, you're not helping people make choices, you're taking choice away; you're dictating what people are allowed to buy and eat

And people will happily cheer you along as you take away their freedom to choose how they live their lives. Just as long as you keep scaring them with the big C, they'll let you get away with anything. And they'll pay you to do it out of their own taxes

And ours...