Processed meats rank alongside smoking as cancer causes – WHO
wabmester
Posts: 2,748 Member
I'm surprised this hasn't been discussed yet. It's hitting all the media outlets.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/26/bacon-ham-sausages-processed-meats-cancer-risk-smoking-says-who
Bacon, ham and sausages rank alongside cigarettes as a major cause of cancer, the World Health Organisation has said, placing cured and processed meats in the same category as asbestos, alcohol, arsenic and tobacco.
The report from the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer said there was enough evidence to rank processed meats as group 1 carcinogens because of a causal link with bowel cancer.
It places red meat in group 2A, as “probably carcinogenic to humans”. Eating red meat is also linked to pancreatic and prostate cancer, the IARC says.
The IARC’s experts concluded that each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%.
The IARC has a FAQ here:
http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Monographs-Q&A_Vol114.pdf
Basically, class 1 doesn't mean that processed meats are as hazardous as cigarettes -- just that the scientific linkage to cancer is as strong.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/oct/26/bacon-ham-sausages-processed-meats-cancer-risk-smoking-says-who
Bacon, ham and sausages rank alongside cigarettes as a major cause of cancer, the World Health Organisation has said, placing cured and processed meats in the same category as asbestos, alcohol, arsenic and tobacco.
The report from the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer said there was enough evidence to rank processed meats as group 1 carcinogens because of a causal link with bowel cancer.
It places red meat in group 2A, as “probably carcinogenic to humans”. Eating red meat is also linked to pancreatic and prostate cancer, the IARC says.
The IARC’s experts concluded that each 50-gram (1.8-ounce) portion of processed meat eaten daily increased the risk of colorectal cancer by 18%.
The IARC has a FAQ here:
http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/iarcnews/pdf/Monographs-Q&A_Vol114.pdf
Basically, class 1 doesn't mean that processed meats are as hazardous as cigarettes -- just that the scientific linkage to cancer is as strong.
0
Replies
-
Everything is going to kill us of cancer according to the WHO. Blueberries are good for you one day then the next day they'll cause cancer cells to grow. How do we know what to believe when it changes every day.
We eat a lot of elk and deer meat and won't stop. I don't believe red meat causes cancer. I think its more so all of the hormones and antibiotics added to non organic meats. We eat cured meats such as bacon and ham but try to avoid nitrates.0 -
I don't get too excited about stuff like this until they understand the mechanisms, and they don't seem to yet. They think it could be nitrates, iron, high-temperature cooking, or even salt.
Risk increases 18% with 50g/d of processed meat. So I guess that means your risk goes from 42 in 100,000 to 49 in 100,000.0 -
It's been beaten to death on r/keto. Multiple times.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
As others have said, everything now causes Cancer...until they decide it doesn't any longer. As for me, if I can lose some of my now less than 300LBS by eating a LCHF diet, then I'm pretty sure the net effect is a positive one; regardless if it involves some additional red meat. Heck, at least I'm not eating McDs, or whatever any longer.0
-
We also don't know if this applies to people eating low-carb diets. These studies look at people eating the diets typical for their region, which is rarely low-carb. Those eating lots of processed meats and red meat are very likely eating them in combination with other foods which may increase their risk. For example, there is a strong relationship between the amount of pepperoni people consume and their consumption of white flour (either as pizza crust or sandwich bread). But, we'll assume it's the processed meats, right?
In short, these observational studies are interesting for discovering new things to design actual studies around. The problem is, we draw conclusions from these, instead of saying, "that's interesting, I wonder if I can prove it."0 -
They'll have to pry the bacon out of my cold dead fingers ~ before I give it up!
0 -
This also doesn't exactly say that it causes cancer, just that it is now more likely according to their research, or a higher risk is associated with higher consumption of those meats. And no mention of other diet or lifestyle factors...but of course people will just say they cause cancer0
-
I think we didn't talk about it here cause it's largely irrelevant and totally incomplete info0
-
It was just news releases today, but they're supposed to release the full report on the IARC website. They looked at 800 epidemiological studies and a few mechanistic studies.0
-
This is a good response to it: http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2015/10/world-health-organisation-meat-cancer/0
-
The Washington Post wrote what seems to be a more balanced take. Either way, it looks like I really need to stop smoking!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/26/hot-dogs-bacon-and-other-processed-meats-cause-cancer-world-health-organization-declares/0 -
I saw it on the news, but didn't get too worried. I limit my intake of nitrates however, and mostly eat fresh meat, and homemade sausages made with no chemicals. I will never give up my red meat and bacon though, still I bet I only eat 6 pieces of bacon per week. I just don't do processed food at all and that includes lunch meat. I'd rather make a roast then slice it up as my lunch meat.0
-
I don't even care about things like this anymore. Most of these are just researchers looking to make a name for themselves. They don't care how factual they are or how tiny the sample size is or other compounding factors. It's all nonsense, one day it's good for you the next it's not, truth is they have no friggin idea, or they are highly funded by someone who wants a certain outcome. Show me a meat eater who died from cancer and I'll show you a vegetarian who died from cancer. Life's too short as it is to be concerned with every possible thing that could ever go wrong.
Pretty sure the one true leading cause of death, is life, so we might as well enjoy living it.0 -
Here's is Dietitian Cassie's response on her Fbook feed (boldface is my emphasis):
What do I think about the "news" about processed meat being bad for us? I'm glad you asked. Here ya go:
This is not a real study. It was an observational conclusion of various compiled studies— not an actual specific study (randomized controlled trials are the best kind of study—this was not even close to that). They ask people questions about what they ate over the years—our clients have a hard time remembering what they ate for breakfast, so to me, this is practically worthless.
Quality is not addressed. There always has been and always will be a massive difference in conventional meat vs. organic, grass fed. Quality MATTERS. And there was hardly a distinction here.
What about the rest of the person's lifestyle? We know that disease isn't JUST about the food we're eating. Were they smoking? Exercising? Sleeping? Stressed? There's a reason why we look at the big picture of our clients' health, and "studies" like this just pinpoint one specific target. Not worth much in my eyes.
Lastly, is it really "news" that processed meats are bad? The key is to go for quality, organic, grass-fed meats and ditch the hot dogs. If you needed inspiration and this is it for you, then I'm glad! Otherwise let's get on with our lives because this is nothing new. Pass over the bacon.
0 -
This is laying the ground work for government regulations. I find it interesting that the study was totally bias and took nothing else that could be contributing factors.
This is from the same establishment scientists that gave us the current food paridime. Why would we trust any thing they say they got the whole CICO thing wrong. Even with evidence that says they are wrong they still ignore the science and double down on eat less do more is the only way to loose weight.
0 -
You can get bacon that doesn't contain nitrates, and if you want to go further and avoid the carcinogens produced with the smoking process, you can have pork belly instead. It's delicious roasted.0
-
Trader Joe's and my local grocery store both carry no nitrate bacon that is very good0
-
The masses will take it in continued blind faith though. I had a friend call me about it today! She was saying that it "Scared her to death!" Man, the media can create a stir! I feel this is generated by the people who are set to lose the most money from people eating more meat, instead of the carbage they've been telling us to eat!0
-
I just replied to a friends Facebook post about it with a photo of my bacon wrapped sausage I had for lunch and what I think of it with the link that Goat shared too. People are going to start freaking out. Do you think they will lower the price of meat when everyone stops buying it? Lol that would be awesome!0
-
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Do you think they will lower the price of meat when everyone stops buying it? Lol that would be awesome!
bahahaha! Yes. Yes it would be.
0 -
uggh. I'm so glad this was posted. I read this thread and thought, whew, I'm glad no body I know will fall for this. then I went over to facebook and low and behold the first post I see is someone posting about the "bad news". Gah!!!! Let the ranting begin! (not here though)0
-
ACA may be used to mold future diet standards in the name of saving money on healthcare services.0
-
-
fastforlife1 wrote: »Trader Joe's and my local grocery store both carry no nitrate bacon that is very good
Yes....I found one at Wal-Mart. Hormel has a few different meats with no nitrates or hormones added.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »ACA may be used to mold future diet standards in the name of saving money on healthcare services.
Honestly that's my biggest fear.0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »ACA may be used to mold future diet standards in the name of saving money on healthcare services.
Honestly that's my biggest fear.
How are they going to know what you eat?0 -
lithezebra wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »ACA may be used to mold future diet standards in the name of saving money on healthcare services.
Honestly that's my biggest fear.
How are they going to know what you eat?
Evil government magic, of course. Honestly, I think that the most likely course of action would be a tax on food deemed 'unhealthy', kind of like a cigarette tax.0 -
I'm hoping that this study leads to wider availability of nitrate free ham and bacon. I hate Applegate Naturals, and want more yummier brands.0
This discussion has been closed.