If I'm not mistaken even sunscreen is carcinogenic

Living has a 100% mortality rate.

You are mistaken. Certain kinds of sunscreen used in the past were carcinogenic, they've been banned.

You are right, my information was old

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Aminobenzoic_acid

According to the always wonderful reporting at the Daily Mail, sunscreen is responsible for causing and avoiding cancer :) http://kill-or-cure.herokuapp.com/a-z/s#term262

It's a shame you trivialise the risk. :-/

Skin cancer is very common, and kills many people. People absolutely should be careful about the amount of sunlight they expose themselves to.

Sunscreen is also carcinogenic. Vitamin D deficiency is also harmful. And staying indoors with little exercise leads to a whole host of other conditions.

Not all sunscreens are carcinogenic. Just the externally pleasant ones that leach into your skin.

I understand that you find yourself on the side of smokers, trying to justify your habits. But this new report is still very significant to people having long, energetic and less painful lives.

I don't mean to trivialize the risk; merely to point out that there are things which, while carcinogens, should not be avoided absolutely. The key is risk management, not risk avoidance; just as avoiding sunlight entirely would tend to greatly increase the risk of obesity and related metabolic conditions, someone who eats bacon is likely to be at lower risk than someone who eschews bacon but instead eats lots of carbohydrates.

And alcoholic beverages! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinoge...

And sure enough, the formally-respectable tabloid known as Ars takes the bait: http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/10/its-official-bacon-ho...

You've misunderstand the submission.

The quality of the evidence is very good - now we are sure that eating red meat and processed meat increases the risk of cancer, although that risk is still very small. We are now as sure of that as we are that smoking causes cancer, although the risks from smoking are very much greater.

The Ars head line is accurate. The second and third paragraphs are clear and easy to understand and accurate.

> Today, in a sizzling announcement, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) officially marked processed meat, such as bacon, hot dogs, and sausages, as “carcinogenic to humans,” a “group 1” designation. The agency, an arm of the World Health Organization, also classified red meat, such as beef, pork, and lamb, as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” a “group 2A” grade.

> (The group designations refer to the confidence health experts have in the link between the meats and cancer; it does not refer to the potency of the meats’ cancer-causing abilities.)

I understand now, thank you.

What do you mean by "takes the bait"? The headline is accurate - nothing there about "as bad as cigarettes" or any other hyperbole.