Warning: Grilled Chicken Linked to Carcinogen PhIP - PCRM Lawsuit

[Math Is Hard]

well, maybe... I dunno. But the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine is out to save you from (or at least warn you about) PhIP through their lawsuit:

WASHINGTON—Every sample of grilled chicken products from seven national restaurant chains tested positive for a dangerous carcinogenic compound called PhIP, prompting the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) to file suit under California’s Proposition 65 to compel the restaurants to warn unsuspecting consumers. PCRM is suing McDonald’s, Burger King, Chick-fil-A, Chili’s, Applebee’s, Outback Steakhouse, and TGI Friday’s in The Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles.

http://www.pcrm.org/news/release060928.html

Any biologists want to weigh in before I bite down on my next grilled chicken salad from Mickey D's?

Bear in mind that PCRM traditionally has very close ties to PETA. I actually have had high respect for PCRM in the past because they claim to be physicians who support seeking alternatives to animal research and who are concerned about animal welfare, but I can't help but wonder if this is just exploitation of California's http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/background/p65plain.html" bolstered by a limited number of studies in order to push a PETA agenda (a vegan diet).

 

[JamesU]

w007 I can still eat at Chili's and be safe

 

[Math Is Hard]

w007 I can still eat at Chili's and be safe

Chili's is named in the suit, so in the future you may see warning labels for some of their menu items depending on how the lawsuit goes.

 

[Moonbear]

I think living in California causes cancer...everything there seems to be labeled as carcinogenic.

They actually have a line at the end saying grilled chicken is just as bad for you as fried chicken...in that case, go for the fried chicken then.

If you look at their archived articles, you'll have a quick answer...they have a clear agenda to promote a vegan diet, which to me is a pretty IRresponsible thing for a physician to do.

 

[JamesU]

Chili's is named in the suit, so in the future you may see warning labels for some of their menu items depending on how the lawsuit goes.

:grumpy:

 

[Rach3]

Sunlight causes cancer, big time.

 

[Astronuc]

Just in case one has not hear of PhIP -

2-AMINO-1-METHYL-6-PHENYLIMIDAZO[4,5-b]PYRIDINE

http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol56/08-phip.html

I can't stand articles that mention acronyms or jargon without explaining them. What do these people think - only oncologists would read the article? I was reminded that the convention in writing is to spell/write out the meaning of an acronym when it is first used. I figured it had to be a pyridine or pyrimidine based on the comment about being a heterocyclic amine.

YES - nice avatar, yomamma!

 

[Moonbear]

Thanks Astronuc. Of course, if they spelled it out, that wouldn't sound as scary as an acronym nobody's ever heard of.

 

[jim mcnamara]

I think they left PhIP unexpanded/unexplained because it's a four letter word. Or more probably because most folks in the US do not know methyl from pyridine.

Stephen Hawking in an interview was supposed to have said that having one math formula in his book [the new one he was discussing in an interview] cuts readership by 50% - or so he was told.

I guess that means the folks writing about PhIP challenge by PCRM decided to lose the chemical name to assure greater readership. :)

 

[NoTime]

With all the stuff that's supposed to be bad for you...

I figure that it's not possible for me to still be alive :grumpy:
None of it seems much to worry about.
Errr yea, worrying will kill you too

 

[Math Is Hard]

I think they left PhIP unexpanded/unexplained because it's a four letter word. Or more probably because most folks in the US do not know methyl from pyridine.

Stephen Hawking in an interview was supposed to have said that having one math formula in his book [the new one he was discussing in an interview] cuts readership by 50% - or so he was told.

I guess that means the folks writing about PhIP challenge by PCRM decided to lose the chemical name to assure greater readership. :)

There was a PCRM representative being interviewed on the radio last night and the interviewer specifically asked him what PhIP stood for. He answered that it was a very long chemical name that he couldn't remember off the top of his head. This was very odd to me because this is the cause he is fighting for!

Anyway, I am interested to see how far they can get with this lawsuit. Will we end up with warning labels on everything? Betcha the PCRM won't go after peanut butter, even though there are naturally occurring carcinogens in that, too.

I think living in California causes cancer...everything there seems to be labeled as carcinogenic.

Maybe we should have signs at the border. "Welcome to California. Everything you do here could potentially kill you. You have been warned. Enjoy your stay."

 

[Monique]

Just in case one has not hear of PhIP -

2-AMINO-1-METHYL-6-PHENYLIMIDAZO[4,5-b]PYRIDINE

http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol56/08-phip.html

I can't stand articles that mention acronyms or jargon without explaining them. What do these people think - only oncologists would read the article? I was reminded that the convention in writing is to spell/write out the meaning of an acronym when it is first used. I figured it had to be a pyridine or pyrimidine based on the comment about being a heterocyclic amine.

YES - nice avatar, yomamma!

Oh, common, it's called PhIP for a reason. The oncologists probably only know it by that name. Anytime someone uses glycerol they should write (or explain that it is) 1,2,3-Propanetriol instead?

 

[Moonbear]

Maybe we should have signs at the border. "Welcome to California. Everything you do here could potentially kill you. You have been warned. Enjoy your stay."

:rofl: That should do it, and cheaper than dealing with all these lawsuits and having to label everything individually. Maybe they should stamp it on the license plates too, just in case someone misses the sign at the border.

 

[Yonoz]

California - the cancer state.

 

[zoobyshoe]

I think there's more behind the headline "Grilled Chicken Kills" than is being reported here. Last week I glanced into an alley as I passed and saw what looked like a dozen or so grilled chickens attacking an older obese lady like the little dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park sequel. I thought I must be hallucinating, but now I'm not so sure.

 

[Astronuc]

California - we recycle everything - even the air and water.

 

[Yonoz]

I think there's more behind the headline "Grilled Chicken Kills" than is being reported here. Last week I glanced into an alley as I passed and saw what looked like a dozen or so grilled chickens attacking an older obese lady like the little dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park sequel. I thought I must be hallucinating, but now I'm not so sure.

Is there any way to stop them? I mean, they've already got a stake through their hearts.
EDIT: I mean the grilled chickens, not Californians.

 

[NoTime]

Maybe we should have signs at the border. "Welcome to California. Everything you do here could potentially kill you. You have been warned. Enjoy your stay."

:rofl: Why limit this to CA.

Welcome to the Universe.
Something will kill you.
You have been warned.
Enjoy your stay.

 

[Skyhunter]

PCRM will probably win their suit.

Although there are no human studies to date. Here is a summary of data.

Overall evaluation
PhIP (2-Amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine) is possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).

Of course if one eats a nutrient dense, whole food, plant based diet, the likelyhood of carcinogens and cancerous cells overcoming ones immune system are greatly reduced.

 

[Evo]

What an assinine lawsuit. Cooking meat at high heat causes carcinogens, that's been known for quite awhile. I guess we should just boil all meat over low heat?

Here's an article about grilling and barbecuing.

http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/feature_ent.html?id=c373e904a807b3938f6a17245d830100

 

[Math Is Hard]

:rofl: Why limit this to CA.

Welcome to the Universe.
Something will kill you.
You have been warned.
Enjoy your stay.

I think this will be my next bumper sticker.

 

[Artman]

I guess that means the folks writing about PhIP challenge by PCRM decided to lose the chemical name to assure greater readership. :)

IMHO, PCRM in connection with PETA decided ASAP to keep the meaning of PhIP on the QT in CA. :yuck:

 

[Skyhunter]

Anyway, I am interested to see how far they can get with this lawsuit. Will we end up with warning labels on everything? Betcha the PCRM won't go after peanut butter, even though there are naturally occurring carcinogens in that, too.

After WWII, there was a strong commitment from the U.S. to feed the worlds children. The protein of choice was derived from peanuts, ie peanut butter. In the Philippines children started developing liver cancer. The best peanuts were sold as snacks in the affluent countries, while the seconds and sometimes rotten peanuts were made into peanut butter, and fed to starving children.

T. Colin Campbell tells the story in his book "The China Study". He is a member of the http://www.pcrm.org/about/ advisory board.

There are essentially three major factions, each representing one of three major perspectives, that are promoting a vegan diet. There is an overlap, and most of the vegans I have met state all three issues to varying degrees as determining factors in their decision to go vegan. These reasons are health, animal welfare, and the environment.

First is health. PCRM promotes a vegan diet, because research has shown that the healthiest human diet is plant based. They advocate not a "vegan diet", but a diet of nutrient dense whole foods. The most nutrient dense foods are plant based. Our bodies are designed to take nourishment from plants much more efficiently than from animals, and without the negative side effects, ie coronary heart disease. There is nothing irresponsible about recommending that people change their diet and lifestyle in order to live a healthier life. In fact if you look at the record of Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., M.D. of the Cleveland clinic, you will find that he has been 100% successful in arresting heart disease with a plant based diet.

Then there is the animal suffering perspective. This is where the unhealthy vegans come from. They see the suffering, empathize, and stop eating and wearing animal products, yet they have no idea of what constitutes good nutrition. Because they were already eating a highly processed calorie dense, as opposed to nutrient dense diet, they don't know where to go or how to prepare vegan meals. Instead they eat vegan junk food and develop many of the same health problems that are associated with a meat based diet.

PETA responsibly tries to educate these people, by providing lots of dietary information, however the best thing PETA has done is work cooperatively with PCRM so that their members can have access to good and up to date nutritional information and advice.

Last there are the environmentalist perspective, unfortunately most of the people in the environmental movement are not vegan, or even vegetarians. Most will agree that their diet is a problem, but like smokers who can't quit, they cannot stop eating the flesh of another being.

As for PCRM, they are doctors fulfilling their hippocratic oath, to prevent disease.

If we could give every individual the right amount of nourishment and exercise, not too little and not too much, we would have found the safest way to health.

He believed that the goal of medicine should be to build the patient's strength through appropriate diet and hygienic measures, resorting to more drastic treatment only when the symptoms showed this to be necessary.

http://www.answers.com/topic/hippocrates