06/22/2001 - Updated 05:18
PM ET
LYON, France (June 23) - Eating lots of preserved meats such as salami, bacon, cured ham and hot dogs could increase the risk of bowel cancer by 50 percent, early results of a major new study have suggested.
However, when it came to fresh red meat - beef, lamb, pork and veal - there seemed to be no link.
Previous studies have linked high meat intake to colorectal cancer, but almost all the studies grouped fresh and processed meats together.
The latest findings come from an ongoing study experts say is the most reliable research into the influence of diet on cancer to date - an investigation involving almost half a million people, from southern Greece to northern Norway. However, that does not mean red meat has been cleared of suspicion, said Dr. Arthur Schatzkin, chief of nutritional epidemiology at the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
``These results are very preliminary,'' said Schatzkin, who was not involved in the study. ``There's more narrowing down that has to be done before we can draw any conclusions.''
The study, presented Friday in Lyon at the European Conference on Nutrition and Cancer, is being coordinated by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer.
Experts say the findings show the issue is more complex than previously thought, and that it's not as simple as meat being either cancer-promoting or not. Scientists are learning that factors such as cooking methods and duration, and cuts of meat must also be considered.
Some research has suggested that frying or barbecuing may add cancer-promoting chemicals to meat and that a crispy lamb chop or a well-done steak may contain undesirable compounds.
``This points us in the direction we need to go. The only firm conclusion is that lumping fresh and processed meat together is inappropriate,'' said Martin Wiseman, a professor at the Institute of Human Nutrition in Southampton, England, who was not involved with the research.
``But now, what about hamburgers? Are they processed or fresh meat? And meatballs? Where do they fit in? We are just starting to disentangle all this,'' Wiseman said.
The study's coordinator, Dr. Elio Riboli, chief of the nutrition division at the International Agency for Research on Cancer, told scientists no link was seen when all red meat was examined as one group.
But when the processed meat, which is usually red meat, was investigated alone, those who ate an average of 2 ounces per day - the equivalent of a thick slice or two of smoked ham, four slivers of Parma ham or one giant hot dog - had a 50 percent greater chance of developing cancer of the colon or rectum than those who ate no preserved meat.
``However, we could not, so far, take into account cooking methods in our analysis,'' Riboli said. ``So we could not, for the time being, separate red meat consumption depending on whether it was consumed well done or rare. Therefore, these are just intermediate results.''
Study Links Processed Meat to Cancer
Researchers Pull off the "Red
Meat Causes Cancer" Scam Again in 2005
The "red meat causes
cancer" scam goes like this. Researchers have known for years that
processed meat such as smoked ham, bologna, hot dogs and other deli meats increase the risk
of cancer. A review of the nutritional label will show why. These meats are
loaded with sugar, bad hydrogenated vegetable fats and bulked up with soy
protein. The nitrites and/or nitrates have also been independently implicated. Nitrates
are reduced to nitrites by bacteria found in the meat. Nitrites
in turn become nitric oxide, which cures the meat.
Researchers simply design the study
to include both fresh red meat and processed meats in the same category knowing
perfectly well that the process meats will implicate the entire group as
increasing the risk of colon cancer.
Next, the researchers emphasize red
meat in the reports and say very little about the processed meats. Many
reporters cleverly delete the reference to processed meats and make the
statement about red meat only. The same fraudulent study is repeated year after
year at tax payer's expenses. This is simply an animal rights agenda supported
by ignorant news reporters.
JunkScience.com
exposes these "Cancer Meatheads"
The truth is that vegetarians have a
very high incidence of inflammatory bowel disease and colon cancer because the
real cause of colon cancer is the high consumption of carbohydrates and fiber.
Read the fraudulent research story about red meat below.
Meat
Consumption and Risk of Colorectal Cancer
Ann Chao,
PhD; Michael J. Thun, MD, MS; Cari J. Connell, MPH;
Marjorie L. McCullough, ScD; Eric J. Jacobs, PhD; W.
Dana Flanders, MD, ScD; Carmen Rodriguez, MD, MPH; Rashmi
Sinha, PhD; Eugenia E. Calle, PhD.
JAMA. 2005;293:172-182.
Context
Consumption of red and processed meat has been associated with
colorectal cancer in many but not all epidemiological studies; few
studies have examined risk in relation to long-term meat intake or
the association of meat with rectal cancer.
Objective To examine the relationship between recent and long-term
meat consumption and the risk of incident colon and rectal cancer.
Design, Setting, and Participants A cohort of 148 610 adults
aged 50 to 74 years (median, 63 years), residing in 21 states with
population-based cancer registries, who provided information on meat
consumption in 1982 and again in 1992/1993 when enrolled in the
Cancer Prevention Study II (CPS II) Nutrition Cohort. Follow-up from
time of enrollment in 1992/1993 through August 31, 2001, identified
1667 incident colorectal cancers. Participants contributed
person-years at risk until death or a diagnosis of colon or rectal
cancer.
Main Outcome Measure Incidence rate ratio (RR) of colon and
rectal cancer.
Results High intake of red and processed meat reported in
1992/1993 was associated with higher risk of colon cancer after
adjusting for age and energy intake but not after further adjustment
for body mass index, cigarette smoking, and other covariates. When
long-term consumption was considered, persons in the highest tertile
of consumption in both 1982 and 1992/1993 had higher risk of distal
colon cancer associated with processed meat (RR, 1.50; 95% confidence
interval [CI], 1.04-2.17), and ratio of red meat to poultry and fish
(RR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.08-2.18) relative to those persons in the lowest
tertile at both time points. Long-term consumption of poultry and
fish was inversely associated with risk of both proximal and distal
colon cancer. High consumption of red meat reported in 1992/1993 was
associated with higher risk of rectal cancer (RR, 1.71; 95% CI,
1.15-2.52; P = .007 for trend), as was high
consumption reported in both 1982 and 1992/1993 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI,
1.00-2.05).
Conclusions Our results demonstrate the potential value of
examining long-term meat consumption in assessing cancer risk and
strengthen the evidence that prolonged high consumption of red and
processed meat may increase the risk of cancer in the distal portion
of the large intestine.
Author
Affiliations: Epidemiology and Surveillance Research, American Cancer
Society (Drs Chao, Thun, McCullough, Jacobs, Flanders, Rodriguez, and Calle, and
Ms Connell), and Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health,
Emory University (Dr Flanders), Atlanta, Ga; and Division of Cancer Epidemiology
and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, Md (Dr Sinha).
Drugs
and Doctors May be the Third Leading Cause of Death in U.S.
Why
Most Published Research Findings Are False.
