Big study links red meat diet to cancer

  • Thread starter Thread starter romano
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

romano

Guest
"International scientists yesterday delivered a long-awaited verdict on red meat, concluding in a definitive study of the eating habits of half a million people that beef, lamb, pork, veal and their processed varieties such as ham and bacon, increase the risk of bowel cancer. . . . " :bigyikes:

See the full article at:

society.guardian.co.uk/cancer/story/0,8150,1506801,00.html
 
Those who eat two portions a day - equivalent to a bacon sandwich and a fillet steak - increase their risk of bowel cancer by 35% over those who eat just one portion a week, the study found.
Click to expand...
The article points out that it is not the red meat itself that is the problem, but rather the amount. That is rather alot of red meat. Moderation in all things…

Scott
 
studies and statistics come and go. has any body noticed that
findings keep getting reversed. hmmm. first eggs are bad, then they are ok.
como se dice, everything in moderation

my mother always said put butter on burns, then in the 60’s they said use ice (drives the burn deeper) then back to butter…
i suspect that for burns, mud might be even better.
mud is a great healer.of wounds.
 
I am really concerned about revelations of that articles findings…

I am going to ponder their findings while I am eating a thick juicy STEAK.
 
40.png
jjwilkman:
studies and statistics come and go. has any body noticed that
findings keep getting reversed. hmmm. first eggs are bad, then they are ok.
como se dice, everything in moderation

my mother always said put butter on burns, then in the 60’s they said use ice (drives the burn deeper) then back to butter…
i suspect that for burns, mud might be even better.
mud is a great healer.of wounds.
Click to expand...
Very true. Stats can be pushed in any direction. The reversals are common and very public. Wait long enough and the experts will contradict themselves again.
 
romano said:
"International scientists yesterday delivered a long-awaited verdict on red meat,

Whenever I see this kind of stuff nowadays, I remember two important things:
  1. Too much of anything will do you grievous harm
  2. White mice die of anything.
Click to expand...
 
I am going to ponder their findings while I am eating a thick juicy STEAK.
Click to expand...
Right…that I grilled on the carcinogenic barbeque in the backyard.👍
 
Scott Waddell:
The article points out that it is not the red meat itself that is the problem, but rather the amount. That is rather alot of red meat. Moderation in all things…

Scott
Click to expand...
Scott,

Two portions a day is not a lot of red meat, especially when you consider the actual measurement of a portion. USDA food pyramid lists meat as “2-3 ounces of cooked lean meat”. Hello? Ever had a 2-3 ounce steak? That would only be available at a really high end California Cuisine restaurant like Wolfgang Puck’s.

On a typical day, I eat meat at lunch and dinner, which is at least two portions. One portion (2-3 ounces! :bigyikes: ) per week would be a huge adjustment to my diet…

Robert
 
deb1 said:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10763906&dopt=Abstract

Here’s a study that links the consumption of tofu to brain atrophy. I just thought that I would post it for balance. We are all going to die from something eventually.
Click to expand...

Oh no! I drink a soy drink every day too! I’m done.

What happened to the good news that I heard in the last year, like a beer a day is good for you, coffee helps prevent parkinsons… I thought things were starting to move in the right direction, and I was hoping scotch and cigars was next…

Darn researchers! 🤓 🤓 🤓
 
romano said:
"International scientists yesterday delivered a long-awaited verdict on red meat, concluding in a definitive study of the eating habits of half a million people that beef, lamb, pork, veal and their processed varieties such as ham and bacon, increase the risk of bowel cancer. . . . " :bigyikes:

See the full article at:

society.guardian.co.uk/cancer/story/0,8150,1506801,00.html
Click to expand...

Maybe it will increase the risk of colon cancer, maybe not. Why take a chance? Its not fun getting your colon re-sected. Whats more reducing or eliminating meat from your diet will help reduce the pain and suffering that animals have to endure so you can have filet mignon on your plate. Take a look at this site and see what’s really going on…www.slaughterhousecam.com.
 
40.png
rlg94086:
Oh no! I drink a soy drink every day too! I’m done.

What happened to the good news that I heard in the last year, like a beer a day is good for you, coffee helps prevent parkinsons… I thought things were starting to move in the right direction, and I was hoping scotch and cigars was next…
Click to expand...
And don’t forget dark chocolate for the heart…and red wine for the digestion.
 
40.png
jlw:
Right…that I grilled on the carcinogenic barbeque in the backyard.👍
Click to expand...
I dont think these “experts” met my 80 & 90 year old relatives who smoked cigars and ate red meat all their lives…

Its NOT in the food

It IS in 2 things however:
  1. Moderation
  2. Genetics
Oh, and those carcinogenic grills…

Those have the BEST flavor! 👍

…and my family has been putting stuffing DIRECTLY into the UNCOOKED Turkey for DECADES…no problems yet

I also dont buy into the raw eggs are bad you…( as long as they are pastureized), I have used them to make Uncooked Egg Nog and have NEVER had problems.
 
This is slightly off topic but is about health. It isn’t a statement just a question. When I was a kid in the seventies-*before the invention of dirt:D *- we learned about four food groups, milk, protein, fruits and vegtables and bread(Learned this a lo…ong time ago) Anyway, Everything that I heard at that point on America’s health was positive. We supposedly had good health care. The fact that children grew taller then their parents and that we had such a long life expectancy was touted as proof of America’s good nurtrition.

Along came the food pyramid. SUddenly, we are now all fat, unhealthy slobs who are all going to die of some sort of cancer. What changed? Were teachers just overly positive in the 70’s?
 
ATTENTION, Breaking News, Breathing causes death.

Every person, every living thing, that has ever taken a breath has died.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
ATTENTION, Breaking News, Breathing causes death.

Every person, every living thing, that has ever taken a breath has died.
Click to expand...
OH MY!! Why wasn’t this on the news!! Are scientist working to solve this problem? You mean if I give up everything that causes me joy, I will still…DIE? Ehgads.😃 I thnk that I will go eat a BIg Mac now.
 
40.png
Veronica1952:
Maybe it will increase the risk of colon cancer, maybe not. Why take a chance? Its not fun getting your colon re-sected. Whats more reducing or eliminating meat from your diet will help reduce the pain and suffering that animals have to endure so you can have filet mignon on your plate. Take a look at this site and see what’s really going on…www.slaughterhousecam.com.
Click to expand...
lol

If God didn’t want us to eat animals then He wouldn’t have made them out of meat.
 
Eating red meat will kill you.

I’m going to die. So long, folks, it’s been nice knowing all of you. 😉

Medical studies. Pfah.

I still remember back when they said eating oat bran would prevent cancer, which was shortly after they said drinking coffee would give you cancer. That was 25 years ago; I was drinking coffee then, and I’m still drinking coffee now (I have a cup in front of me as we speak) and I never eat oat bran, and I still don’t have cancer.

“The Surgeon General has determined that if swallowed in minute amounts over a period of years, saliva will cause stomach cancer.”

You’ve been warned.
 
As a physician and someone who has just spent the past 8 months working on carcinogenesis and toxicology, I’d like to add my :twocents:
  1. It is difficult to draw conclusions from a study until you know its methodology. I looked up the website for the study. This study involved a huge number of patients (approx. 500,000) across several different countries in Europe in a cohort-style study. So far, so good. But then we get into the nitty-gritty. How was food intake assessed? - by self-report questionnaire! Another method involved asking people what was their average frequency of eating foods for the past 12 months! Now, I don’t know about you, but I’m not sure I could give you an average frequency for last week! Self-reports of dietary intake are notoriously unreliable and patients have been known to under-report caloric intake by as much as 50%. Some study centers in the study used food diaries, but only for 7-day periods. This, by itself nearly causes the study to be worthless.
  2. What was the statistically significance? I have yet to track this down. The report states that it is an excess of 30% risk. Yet, from an epidemiological standpoint, it’s hard to say that anything below an excess of 50% (Risk Ratio 1.5 for you stats gurus) is truly significant or that it simply reflects other confounding variables. And this study has a huge number of confounding variables. It is a cohort study, which means that you take a bunch of people, measure them at baseline, then follow them and remeasure after a certain period of time to see what has changed. Do you think there might be certain other things that differ among European nations besides diet that might explain differences? Maybe somebody from Italy might be more likely to spend time outside swimming and cycling compared to someone from, say, Norway? And we know that exercise and obesity definitely have a relation to cancer risk. Maybe one country has a lower colon cancer risk because everyone collapses from lung cancer first from all the cigarettes they are inhaling.
  3. Many of you have complained about the on-again off-again nature of the results of all these medical studies. May I suggest that you follow them a little LESS closely. Any single study is seldom definitive, although large ones are generally more important. What you look for is the weight of the evidence of several studies and the quality of the studies in question. Poorly designed studies DO make it into the medical literature, even in respectable journals. The lay press often breathlessly reports poorly designed studies. Sometimes they just read the abstract and don’t look into the body of the paper, which may contradict the abstract! (I’ve actually seen this in one paper)
  4. As for cancer prevention, here’s what I recommend (and my field is cancer, BTW):
    A. Don’t smoke
    B. Eat plenty of fruits and vegetables
    C. Watch your calories and don’t overeat. The whole carb-craze is just another fad diet. It is more important that you watch total calories than of what type.
    D. Doing B will help you with C
    E. Get regular exercise.
    F. Use sunscreen when outside for any extended period. Your skin doesn’t actually tan until you have created DNA damage.
    G. Don’t ever get old, or have bad genes. You will die of cancer if you don’t die of something else first.
    H. Odds are 1/3 of you reading this will get some sort of cancer (excluding the common skin cancers) and 1/4 of you reading this will die of cancer. Don’t look for that ratio to change. See letter G.
    I. Keep you eyes peeled for new diagnostic techniques and tests for early detection. Your best hope to survive cancer is to catch it early. That being said, see letter G.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top