Mollyycolllinss's Categories

Mollyycolllinss's Authors

Latest Saves

"Hinduism was one of the world's most easy-going faith traditions, famed for it's non-persecutory history."

I can assure you, it is NOT.

It is neither easy-going, nor non-persecutory. In fact it is the very opposite.


Modern Hinduism is a British colonial concept, created in concert with Brahmins, who are at the "apex" of the caste system. The word "Hindoo" in fact, is of Persian origin, meaning a person who lives in the Indus valley.

Colonialists who attempted to study Indian religion in the 18th century (NOT, at the time, Hinduism) were baffled by it. Strata of people living distinctly (the caste system) with overlapping gods didn't fit into their Judeo-Christian understanding of religion.

Which has an ecclesiastical authority, a holy book etc., which Indian religions lacked. In studying "The Hindoo", colonialists prioritized textual sources of knowledge, which is where Brahmins, the priestly caste with a monopoly over education/text come in.

Brahminism was a distinct "religion" (although i don't really want to use the term in this way) that was frankly terrorized of other castes. In fact, the very basis of Brahminism is oppression. Brahmins had scholars who recorded *Brahminical* canon textually.
I applaud the #EUCancerPlan *BUT* caution: putting #meat 🥩 (a nourishing, evolutionary food) in the same box as 🚬 to solve a contemporary health challenge, would be basing policy on assumptions rather than robust data.

#FollowTheScience yes, but not just part of it!

1/ Granted, some studies have pointed to ASSOCIATIONS of HIGH intake of red & processed meats with (slightly!) increased colorectal cancer incidence. Also, @WHO/IARC is often mentioned in support (usually hyperbolically so).

But, let’s have a closer look at all this! 🔍

2/ First, meat being “associated” with cancer is very different from stating that meat CAUSES cancer.

Unwarranted use of causal language is widespread in nutritional sciences, posing a systemic problem & undermining credibility.

3/ That’s because observational data are CONFOUNDED (even after statistical adjustment).

Healthy user bias is a major problem. Healthy middle classes are TOLD to eat less red meat (due to historical rather than rational reasons, cf link). So, they

4/ What’s captured here is sociology, not physiology.

Health-focused Westerners eat less red meat, whereas those who don’t adhere to dietary advice tend to have unhealthier lifestyles.

That tells us very little about meat AS SUCH being responsible for disease.