Meat causes cancer

garyrc70

Junior
Aug 1, 2001
2,409
265
83
The promoters of vegetarianism and other heath conscious advocates have been saying this for decades. The WHO has little credibility except on tropical diseases in poor countries. Beef raised organically and range fed eaten in moderation just cant be bad for you. Now processed foods with nitrates puts up a red flag for me. I avoid them..
 

Abro1975

Heisman
Nov 21, 2009
24,499
12,979
0
I asked my gastro, Robert Bleicher, North Jersey Gastro, this same question last year when I had my 4th colonoscopy in the past 15 years or so, and he said NO, red meats do not increase the chance of colon cancer. I do not have colon cancer, but they seem to always find a polyp or 2 so I'm cautious and go every 3 years. I did not ask him about 'processed' meats however, but I'd imagine he would have mentioned it if he though processed meats do increase the chances. He is always listed as a top Gastro (for whatever that's worth) in the NJ magazines.
I do not know what to make of this current report, which seems to be on the news and online all day long.
 

theRU

All-American
Dec 17, 2008
11,135
5,798
0
in other news, breathing air causes cancer.

Scare tactics, that is all this is.
 

Source

All-American
Aug 1, 2001
11,228
6,261
0
George Carlin said it's caused by drinking small amounts of water over long periods of time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ron313

brgossRU90

Senior
Oct 9, 2007
1,103
709
0
Everything in moderation. Small amounts of red meat are probably ok but large amounts not so much. The regions of the world with the healthiest people who live the longest are not known for chowing down on gigantic pieces of red meat on a daily basis.
 

BOGDANOVICH

All-American
Nov 11, 2005
3,334
6,124
0
I asked my gastro, Robert Bleicher, North Jersey Gastro, this same question last year when I had my 4th colonoscopy in the past 15 years or so, and he said NO, red meats do not increase the chance of colon cancer. I do not have colon cancer, but they seem to always find a polyp or 2 so I'm cautious and go every 3 years. I did not ask him about 'processed' meats however, but I'd imagine he would have mentioned it if he though processed meats do increase the chances. He is always listed as a top Gastro (for whatever that's worth) in the NJ magazines.
I do not know what to make of this current report, which seems to be on the news and online all day long.
These are not studies demonstrating causation. They show correlation which now might lead to some double blind randomized studies that can test hypotheses about casuation, but setting up such a study for food consumption could prove very challenging if not impossible.
 
Last edited:

brgossRU90

Senior
Oct 9, 2007
1,103
709
0
It is always hard to study the health effects of one specific food with longitudinal studies because you cannot strictly control what people eat and other foods they eat might have an effect on the food you are trying to study. A person who eats tons of red meat alongside lots of vegetables might get a very different result from someone who always eats cheetos or fries with red meat. This is why I think the most valid studies on food are those that look at the healthiest people around the world and just give general guidelines on how to eat.
 

SkilletHead2

All-American
Sep 30, 2005
24,442
9,245
113
When you cannot do a randomised study to investigate something (randomisation almost completely eliminates alternative hypotheses to the one being studied), you have to rely on proxies. One would be correlational or observational studies, such as the ones used here. Another is animal studies. Then, you need to understand the mechanisms which produce the effects that you are observing.

In this case, what has been found is that eating a lot of red meat will make your colon cancer chances go from about 5 in 100 to about 6 in 100. There are a couple of competing hypotheses on what is causing this, but they are both within the bounds of reason. Neither has to do with where you get your meat from. Free range, yoga-practicing cows are no better than chain smoking cows.

So yes, best evidence suggests that there is a linkage, but the increased level of danger is relatively small (depending on what you consider to be small).
 

Scarlet_Scourge

Heisman
May 25, 2012
26,524
13,604
0
The trick to being healthy is that there isn't a trick.

There are countries that eat a TON of red meat like Argentina, I mean way more than the US and they don't seem to have anymore cancer than anyone else.

Quick tips: Moderation is your friend and become more physically active.

Beef raised organically and range fed eaten in moderation just cant be bad for you. Now processed foods with nitrates puts up a red flag for me. I avoid them..

I would hope that people are smart enough to know that grass fed free range beef is healthier than meat in a can.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theRU

RU1977

All-Conference
Nov 15, 2006
7,185
2,550
113
I think breathing the air in NJ, and just standing around and getting radiated all the time (lots of RF in the environment nowadays) will do it eventually.
 

RUaMoose_rivals

All-American
Oct 31, 2004
17,237
7,058
0
Like others have said, moderation. I eat steak maybe once a week and fish twice. Pork once a week and the rest of the time poultry.
 

Scarlet16e2

All-Conference
Nov 22, 2005
8,982
4,047
113
Why avoid nitrates?
They have been used for 1000's of years in the curing and preservation of meats, which has helped people survive to this day.
 

Phi_1055

All-Conference
Feb 27, 2006
3,189
3,864
0
The trick to being healthy is that there isn't a trick.

There are countries that eat a TON of red meat like Argentina, I mean way more than the US and they don't seem to have anymore cancer than anyone else.
.

Well, sure, Argentina doesn't seem to have any more cancer than anyone else. Unless you look at the statistics that show it to have one of the highest colon cancer rates in the world.
 

beaced_rivals

Heisman
Jul 18, 2004
32,005
10,319
0
Why avoid nitrates?
They have been used for 1000's of years in the curing and preservation of meats, which has helped people survive to this day.
Theoretically nitrates turn into nitrosomines in the presence of amino acids(meats) and can become carcinogenic.Pop a Vit. C tablet when you indulge in the processed meats. Should straighten things out.
 
Last edited:

brgossRU90

Senior
Oct 9, 2007
1,103
709
0
Refrigeration eliminates the need for nitrates unless you want your meat to be able to last longer than your car...stomach cancer rates dropped significantly after refrigerators were invented because of a drop in eating nitrate laden or salted meat.
 

krup

Heisman
Feb 5, 2003
70,133
10,066
0
The release sure seems designed to sensationalize when you see that they lumped eating processed meats with smoking and asbestos (and of course our idiot press came through with the unthinking way they trumpeted the headlines).

This release says eating processed meat causes a 17% increase in the chance of someone getting colon cancer. A lifelong smoker is 25 TIMES more likely to get lung cancer than a non-smoker.

17% and 2500%. Those things deserve to lumped in the same harmful category, right?
 

wheezer

Heisman
Jun 3, 2001
169,062
24,678
113
I have been eating a steak about once every seven days, with very little meats in between..... I could cut it back to every 2 weeks, just wondering if the once a week sees a rise in cancer rates that would make me cut back further
 

brgossRU90

Senior
Oct 9, 2007
1,103
709
0
If they're both deemed carcinogenic than they do deserve to be put in the same category. It's just that one substance is far more carcinogenic than the other. In the end it's always about quantity. A high salt diet increases the chances of stomach cancer--therefore salt could be considered carcinogenic. Japan suffers high rates from a seafood filled diet. But most people don't eat nearly enough salt for it to be an isdue
 

Wild_Knight

Redshirt
Aug 4, 2015
108
43
0
My layperson understanding isn't that fresh red meat is carcinogenic, it's that people who eat a lot of it are therefore not eating enough health promoting foods instead, as here:

Indigestible compounds common to veggie roughage facilitate more rapid gut lining cell Turnova and replenishment with new cells. Red meat tends to bind you, if you know what I mean, such that lining cells don't sluff off as frequently and the cell turnover cycle is slower allowing cancerous cells to eventually take hold somewhere in the colon.

Maybe a doc out there could refute.,
 
Last edited:

Scarlet_Scourge

Heisman
May 25, 2012
26,524
13,604
0
My layperson understanding isn't that fresh red meat isn't carcinogenic, it's that people who eat a lot of it are therefore not eating enough health promoting foods instead, as here:

Indigestible compounds common to veggie roughage facilitate more rapid gut lining cell Turnova and replenishment with new cells. Red meat tends to bind you, if you know what I mean, such that lining cells don't sluff off as frequently and the cell turnover cycle is slower allowing cancerous cells to eventually take hold somewhere in the colon.

Maybe a doc out there could refute.,

I am no doctor but you are pretty close to the truth there. Studies have shown that people who ate meat but also ate a lot of fiber from veggies didn't have the same cancer rates. So in other words, make your steak smaller and your salad a lot bigger and you should be fine. Also eat more chicken :)

People too much meat and not enough veggies which is the real problem.
 

rurichdog

Heisman
Sep 30, 2006
116,807
14,389
0
Good. Maybe the price of beef will start to come back down to Earth. Enjoy your skinless boneless hormone-filled Perdue chicken breast tenders.
 

RUnTeX

All-Conference
Dec 21, 2001
7,091
4,251
113
Theoretically nitrates turn into nitrites in the presence of amino acids(meats) and can become carcinogenic.Pop a Vit. C tablet when you indulge in the processed meats. Should straighten things out.

Not sure how true it is but besides processed or salted/cures meats, nitrates are also increased in smoked meats. Sucks if you like BBQ like I do, but I get around to eating brisket only once every 2-3 months anyway.
 

saran

Senior
May 17, 2011
1,395
597
0
Anything cooked or processed can be sketchy since new compounds are made in process and body isn't always prepared to handle them.
This hysteria is still a PC thing though. NPR backed off equating meat with tobacco. Lots of things much more dangerous and they are kept quiet.
I fell guilty when I char sausage and peppers on the grill. Now I'm even more concerned reading peppers can cause chlamydia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rurichdog

PhDKnight

Junior
Dec 6, 2013
776
276
0
When you cannot do a randomised study to investigate something (randomisation almost completely eliminates alternative hypotheses to the one being studied), you have to rely on proxies. One would be correlational or observational studies, such as the ones used here. Another is animal studies. Then, you need to understand the mechanisms which produce the effects that you are observing.

In this case, what has been found is that eating a lot of red meat will make your colon cancer chances go from about 5 in 100 to about 6 in 100. There are a couple of competing hypotheses on what is causing this, but they are both within the bounds of reason. Neither has to do with where you get your meat from. Free range, yoga-practicing cows are no better than chain smoking cows.

So yes, best evidence suggests that there is a linkage, but the increased level of danger is relatively small (depending on what you consider to be small).

Do you have a link that the 17% increase means the numbers go from approximately 5/100 to 6/100 in absolute terms?
 

SirPerceval

All-Conference
Jul 27, 2001
6,125
2,942
78
Well, sure, Argentina doesn't seem to have any more cancer than anyone else. Unless you look at the statistics that show it to have one of the highest colon cancer rates in the world.
That's because the tango causes colon cancer.