Internet "doctors will never eat 5 kinds of food" really can not eat?

Original title: Net-a-Go "5 Foods Doctors Never Eat" Really Can't Eat?
doctors have more knowledge about health than the common man. As a result, many rumors also like to play the "doctor said" banner. For example, an article on the Internet said: doctors will never eat "captive salmon, artificially cooked milk, canned ketchup, non-organic potatoes, corn-bred beef." Does the doctor really not eat these five foods? Let's parse them one by one."Feeding them feed, broken soybeans, and poultry droppings causes large amounts of toxins to accumulate in the salmon, which is equivalent to eating them when they are eaten," the
declared in the
At the same time, the nutritional value of captive salmon is generally worse than that of wild ones, and studies have found that regular captive salmon increase the risk of cancer. In
, if the feed is fed with a lot of toxins, the first effect is on the growth of the fish, and the loss to the farmers is greater. Processed poultry droppings can be used as feed to feed fish and even livestock to provide nutrition. Some nutritional indicators of farmed fish will be less than in the wild, and there will be more indicators than in the wild, and in general, there will be no conclusion that "nutritional value is generally worse than in the wild". As for the "significant increase in the prevalence of cancer from regular eating of captive salmon", it is purely a message.
the biggest difference between farmed and wild fish is that antibiotics may be used in the breeding process and, if used irregularly, antibiotic residues may exceed the standard;
non-organic potatoes
says the reason they can't be eaten is that "potatoes grow by absorbing herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides from the soil." "
in agricultural cultivation, the standardized use of herbicides, pesticides and fungicides is sufficient to have a corresponding effect, and their residues are not harmful to health." There are already a large number of testing data showing that there is no substantial difference in safety and nutrition between organic and conventional products.
canned ketchup
the reason not to eat it is that "the resin in the jar lining contains BPA."
A is an additive to the production of epoxy resins, which are the linings of many metal containers. In theory, BPA can be migrated to food, but so far, none of the safety bottle evaluation experiments have shown that BPA migrating in this way can reach health-hazardous levels. In its July 2014 update of BPA information, the FDA expressed their current attitude toward BPA in food exposure: BPA doses currently present in foods are safe.
of course, BPA has the potential to be "health hazardous" after all, and technically there are alternatives that don't apply to it. "No need to use" and "minimize use" are prudent and conservative measures, but do not mean that food in BPA packaging cans is harmful to health.
corn-fed beef
the article says, "Cows are born herbivores, but in order to grow faster, farmers feed on corn or soybeans." This leads to lower nutritional value of beef and increased fat content, making the body more susceptible to cardiovascular disease. "
"cows are born to eat grass" because wild cattle do not have nutritious feed to eat. Cattle, like other livestock, grow faster when they are more nutritious. Corn and soybean-based feed ensures the full nutrition needed for cattle to grow and only makes beef "more nutritious".
so-called "increased fat content in cattle, leading to the human body more susceptible to cardiovascular disease", is a very rogue accusation. As far as beef is concerned, the higher the fat content, the better the flavor and the more popular it is with consumers. Too much fat intake is not conducive to cardiovascular health, because people are not enough to control. We can say that such beef should be "unhealthy", but it is too unreasonable to dump "cardiovascular disease" to "corn-bred beef".
artificially cooked milk
the so-called "artificially cooked milk", is actually the use of bovine growth hormone in the breeding process to promote milk production. As for "this hormone causes an infection in the cow's breast", it is not the hormone that causes the infection, but the injection process can lead to an infection, just as any injection increases the chance of infection.
article states that "growth hormone causes an insulin-like product to be produced in milk, and long-term drinking of milk with high insulin-like similars increases the risk of cancer", which is actually IGF-1. Milk already contains IGF-1, and the content of different milks is high and low. The FDA conducted a comprehensive assessment of the use of growth hormone for milking, concluding that the average content of IGF-1 in milk using growth hormone was slightly higher, although this "slight" range was within the normal range of IGF-1 fluctuations and had no effect on human health.
, China did not approve the use of growth hormone to increase milk production.
(The author is Ph.D. in Biological and Food Engineering, PurdyUk University, USA)