High protein diet has similar cancer risks than smoking?!

tennisdude2004

It seems to me that maybe the meat might not be the issue and the method of cooking or delivery of said meat could be. Since they are guessing, why can't I?

I think there are quite conclusive studies about cooking methods which make meat a greater risk, but depending on what foods or drink to have with the meat it can be negated.

Not just meats but any food that has been through the maillard reaction which is basically the caramelization of aminos and sugars. yup, cooking food leads to death.

Yes but just drink wine with everything - mmmmm wine is there anything it can't do?????

Nope. It can even give you cancer:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2096711/Oral-cancer-risk-trebles-just-glasses-wine-day.html

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

ndj1979

someone posted this in another thread ..and i will repeat what I said there…if high protein is more harmful than smoking then I am F'd…

as others have pointed out, I believe this was just an observational study and the guardian, in my opinion, is rubbish...

misstweedy

Oh, I love this, sums it up nicely!

michael300891

Many people have pointed out the obvious: correlational study etc, im going to point out the less-obvious:

First, the authors trawled through the data, finding nothing of interest for diabetes, then rerunning the models looking at protein and age, then finding no main results arbitrarily splitting into 50-65 year olds and 66+ which had significant differences.

Second, there is no mention in the paper anywhere of smoking, media outlets have simply compared hazard ratios for protein from this paper, with that against other papers to produce their god-awful irrelevant headlines.

Probably the most interesting thing, is that the head author of the paper has an equity stake in a company called L-Nutra who specialise in plant-based dietary supplements to prolong lifespan.

This paper substantially supports the business plan.

---

Doctoral Research in Exercise Metabolism

tennisdude2004

someone posted this in another thread ..and i will repeat what I said there…if high protein is more harmful than smoking then I am F'd…

as others have pointed out, I believe this was just an observational study and the guardian, in my opinion, is rubbish...

In fact it's lots of observational studies one dating back to the eighties.

I'm going out on a limb here but this story might be a bunch of crap?

tennisdude2004

Many people have pointed out the obvious: correlational study etc, im going to point out the less-obvious:

First, the authors trawled through the data, finding nothing of interest for diabetes, then rerunning the models looking at protein and age, then finding no main results arbitrarily splitting into 50-65 year olds and 66+ which had significant differences.

Second, there is no mention in the paper anywhere of smoking, media outlets have simply compared hazard ratios for protein from this paper, with that against other papers to produce their god-awful irrelevant headlines.

Probably the most interesting thing, is that the head author of the paper has an equity stake in a company called L-Nutra who specialise in plant-based dietary supplements to prolong lifespan.

This paper substantially supports the business plan.

---

Doctoral Research in Exercise Metabolism

Agreed, I bet over the next couple of weeks the adverting budget for l-nutra gets used up! Lol

ndj1979

someone posted this in another thread ..and i will repeat what I said there…if high protein is more harmful than smoking then I am F'd…

as others have pointed out, I believe this was just an observational study and the guardian, in my opinion, is rubbish...

In fact it's lots of observational studies one dating back to the eighties.

I'm going out on a limb here but this story might be a bunch of crap?

in my opinion…yes, crap… a big load of it...

pattyproulx

Ya - garbage study is garbage. It's just vegan propaganda. This wasn't even high protein. It was on the low-end of moderate (20%+)

Also, as others have said, these types of studies never isolate the food from other factors.
Think of the most unhealthy people you know. Ya, the ones who sit on the couch watching TV and eat out/order-in most days and don't do a lick of exercise. These people also often smoke and drink a lot. Those people also eat meat. They're not unhealthy because they eat meat but they are unhealthy and they eat meat.

So when you're doing a study of meat-eaters vs veg*ns, you're comparing averages and you're fooling yourself if you think the only difference between the average veg*n and meat-eater is what they eat.

Helloitsdan

False. And this is not a peer-reviewed study.

^^This.

In fact you can see studies from overseas where they are alleviating the symptoms of cancer with higher protein diets.
In the american lifestyle, possibly.
But look at where we are getting our meat from.
Factory meat full of antibiotics and very low in Omega fats.

Stay on top of the headlines by reading http://suppversity.blogspot.com

JojoEffeckt164

Ok. Here are my 5 cents to this... Since decades science tries to tell us, that almost everything causes cancer.... coffein, salami, processed food, cans.... and so on and so on....

the newest trend is to tell us that Meat and Milk causes cancer... fits good to the new vegan style. If you want to be in you have to be vegan or at least have tried it.

The truth is though that the humans brain could only grew that big because of bone marrow. Our eyes are not on the side as it schould be for vegetarian species. and in cave paintings you can see already pictures of using milk from animals. The trueth is also that living vegan doesnt give you all nutritions you need! There are B-Vitamins missing.

Life causes cancer. The older we get, the higher gets the chance that our cells fail and start reproducing themself uncontrolled (nothing else is cancer). Sometimes cells fail earlier and this scares us of cause.

But to keep cutting things out of our diet till we only eat raw veggies anymore, what some people do isn´t healthy at all. Guess what: I bet that causes cancer as well! Everything in moderation!

neanderthin

Many people have pointed out the obvious: correlational study etc, im going to point out the less-obvious:

First, the authors trawled through the data, finding nothing of interest for diabetes, then rerunning the models looking at protein and age, then finding no main results arbitrarily splitting into 50-65 year olds and 66+ which had significant differences.

Second, there is no mention in the paper anywhere of smoking, media outlets have simply compared hazard ratios for protein from this paper, with that against other papers to produce their god-awful irrelevant headlines.

Probably the most interesting thing, is that the head author of the paper has an equity stake in a company called L-Nutra who specialise in plant-based dietary supplements to prolong lifespan.

This paper substantially supports the business plan.

---

Doctoral Research in Exercise Metabolism

Agreed, I bet over the next couple of weeks the adverting budget for l-nutra gets used up! Lol

That's too funny. Their peers must feel bad for the obvious promotional tactic.......maybe they thought the internet didn't exist.

Expect_The_Worst

I saw this in the daily mail this morning too. I am just so confused :-(

Then the article has done its job. Cause confusion and more misinformation.

Did you also see the related article?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/05/high-protein-diet-kill-you

My favorite comment is "I've read your article twice, I'm still yet to find a single piece of information."

Lifelink

*Study funded by "Live Vegan!" :-/

ikr?

*watches and reads up on old people who live to be 110+ eating regular bacon everyday, nearly every meal*

Dat ad hoc doe.

nancyluckhurst3

At 71 years old I have seen so many studies. My mother lived to be 94 ate real butter all her life, loved her red meat, had 2 eggs every morning of her life with bacon. Now that is a study I can believe. The rest are just BS for the most part. They do a study telling you this or that is bad and less than a year later they will cite a study debunking the first one.

Thought I would share this with you as it both shocked and humoured me...

I was driving to the gym this morning when the news came on the radio. Apparently a study in America has revealed that diets high in animal protein, specifically red meat, eggs and dairy, increases the risk of death from cancer and diabetes fourfold in those under the age of 65 - almost as much as smoking?! :huh:

You can read a news article about the study here: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/mar/04/animal-protein-diets-smoking-meat-eggs-dairy

I will continue to get 25-30% of my calories from protein...that is all.

lisaabenjamin

False. And this is not a peer-reviewed study.

^^This.

In fact you can see studies from overseas where they are alleviating the symptoms of cancer with higher protein diets.
In the american lifestyle, possibly.
But look at where we are getting our meat from.
Factory meat full of antibiotics and very low in Omega fats.

Stay on top of the headlines by reading http://suppversity.blogspot.com

Actually it IS a peer reviewed paper. It was published in the journal Cell Metabolism, which has a peer review policy. The problem is, the conclusions drawn in that original paper have been twisted and extrapolated to create a sensational headline which, after several rounds of chinese whispers has translated into a conclusion that is a long way from the original work!

All the original paper shows is a statistical significance that X may contribute to Y. It doesn't prove that high protein diets cause cancer/death as there are lots of confounding factors to take into account. In any case, this statistical significance was only seen in people aged between 50-65 - there was no correlation in people under 50, and the correlation in over 65s was actually the opposite!

The original paper also makes no comparison whatsoever to smoking! That was added by the press officer or a journalist to create a sensational headline. Smoking makes you four times more likely to get cancer....eating high protein makes you four times more likely to get cancer...therefore eating high protein must be as bad as smoking. Errr, fail.

cwsreddy

I love the amount of "I don't want to believe it so it must be crap" going on in this thread.

it entertains me.


That said, a few people have mentioned the funding for this study so I'll copy paste from the other thread:

This is exactly my beef (get it) with all the studies that support HFCS, fortified nutritients, conventionally raised beef/chicken, blah blah blah - everything the government and the FDA says is "good for you", because those studies are inextricably tied up with big food, big pharma etc etc.

Having noticed the funding source I do think it calls the study into question to a degree, but no more than the MAJORITY of studies that are done about ANYTHING food related. They're all funded by someone who wants a certain result - otherwise you'd have never heard the study even happened.

PaleoPath4Lyfe

High-carbohydrate diets are good for you. Just throwing it out there.

Maybe for YOU, but not for me and a lot of us.

Fat and protein intake have been substantiated as being the most important macro-nutrients that need to be consumed in one's way of eating, no matter what way that is.

PaleoPath4Lyfe

I love the amount of "I don't want to believe it so it must be crap" going on in this thread.

it entertains me.


That said, a few people have mentioned the funding for this study so I'll copy paste from the other thread:

This is exactly my beef (get it) with all the studies that support HFCS, fortified nutritients, conventionally raised beef/chicken, blah blah blah - everything the government and the FDA says is "good for you", because those studies are inextricably tied up with big food, big pharma etc etc.

Having noticed the funding source I do think it calls the study into question to a degree, but no more than the MAJORITY of studies that are done about ANYTHING food related. They're all funded by someone who wants a certain result - otherwise you'd have never heard the study even happened.

Exactly!

cwsreddy

High-carbohydrate diets are good for you. Just throwing it out there.

Maybe for YOU, but not for me and a lot of us.

Fat and protein intake have been substantiated as being the most important macro-nutrients that need to be consumed in one's way of eating, no matter what way that is.

sure, at about a gram of protein per pound of lean bodyweight. no real need for more than that outside of extenuating circumstances.

BerryH

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25158-i-can-has-cheezburger-protein-cancer-risk-overblown.html#.UxbihmQgGc1

Thank you! :drinker:

Just as the UK's discussing taxing sugar :noway: