Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / February 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Red meat cancer risk

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
ironjustice@aol.com - 01 Feb 2006 10:28 GMT
Red meat cancer risk clue found

There are health concerns over red meat
Eating lots of red meat is linked with DNA damage which raises the risk
of bowel cancer, researchers suggest.
Scientists at the Dunn Human Nutrition Unit and the Open University
compared a red meat diet and a vegetarian diet.

Their study, published in Cancer Research, found the red meat diet was
associated with a higher level of DNA damage.

Previous work suggests regular meat eaters are significantly more
likely to develop bowel cancer.

Almost 17,000 people die from the disease each year.

Clues

Last year the Dunn team published a study suggesting the chance of
developing the disease was a third higher for people who regularly ate
more than two portions per day of red meat compared with those who ate
less than one portion per week.

 These combined discoveries ... may give us some clues about
developing a screening test for very early changes related to the
disease

Professor David Shuker, Open University

In the latest study the same Dunn team examined cells from the lining
of the colon taken from healthy volunteers eating different diets.

They found higher levels of DNA damage in the cells taken from people
eating red meat.

Work by the Open University team suggests the reason could be the
presence of substances called N-nitrosocompounds, which form in the
large bowel after eating red meat.

Their work suggests that these compounds combine with DNA, and alter it
so that it is more likely to undergo harmful changes or mutations that
increase the likelihood of cancer

Professor David Shuker, head of the Open University team, said: "These
combined discoveries have allowed us to link red meat consumption to an
increased risk of bowel cancer and may give us some clues about
developing a screening test for very early changes related to the
disease."

'Moderation is key'

Professor Colin Blakemore, chief executive of the Medical Research
Council, which funded the research, said: "Large bowel cancer is the
second most common cancer in western countries and nearly one million
cases occur each year worldwide.

"This latest study, together with the compelling epidemiological
evidence published last year, is an important step towards
understanding, and potentially preventing this common disease."

A spokesman for the charity Beating Bowel Cancer said: "The fact is a
third of all cancers are linked to what we eat and we must not
underestimate the importance of a well-balanced diet in the prevention
of bowel cancer.

"This study certainly seems to add further weight to previous evidence
about the possible link between bowel cancer and a high consumption of
red meat.

"As with all dietary advice, moderation is key as we already know that
a diet high in fat and red meat yet low in fibre, fruit and vegetables
can increase the risk of developing this disease - currently the second
biggest cause of cancer death in the UK."

Professor Annie Anderson, expert advisor to Bowel Cancer UK, said: "The
new data not only provides further evidence of risk but also flags the
importance of what we eat with our meat - for example, there is further
risk with low fibre intakes.

"Current data on eating trends suggests we are eating more fast foods,
which we know are high in calories and fat and implicated as a cause of
obesity and diabetes, but such cuisine may also be the very type of
meals (high in meat - and meat products - and low in vegetables) that
also contributes to bowel cancer risk."

But a spokesman for the Meat and Livestock Commission said: "The
results of this very small-scale study merely suggest a mechanism by
which red and processed meat might possibly increase an individual's
risk of developing colorectal cancer.

"The authors themselves acknowledge that larger-scale, prospective
studies are needed to identify how important and robust this suggested
mechanism could be."

Who loves ya.
Tom

Jesus Was A Vegetarian!
http://jesuswasavegetarian.7h.com

Man Is A Herbivore!
http://pages.ivillage.com/ironjustice/manisaherbivore

DEAD PEOPLE WALKING
http://pages.ivillage.com/ironjustice/deadpeoplewalking
vernon - 01 Feb 2006 17:19 GMT
> Red meat cancer risk clue found
>
> There are health concerns over red meat
> Eating lots of red meat is linked with DNA damage which raises the risk
> of bowel cancer, researchers suggest.

SUGGEST?

EVERY real study has proved the opposite.

The next installment will be, the definition of "lots" of red meat will be a
pound a day of raw meat.
Roman Bystrianyk - 01 Feb 2006 17:24 GMT
FYI

"Red meat 'linked to cancer risk'", BBC News, June 15, 2005,
Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4088824.stm

A major study has found fresh evidence of a link between red and
processed meat and bowel cancer, scientists say.

The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
looked at the dietary habits of over 500,000 people across Europe over
10 years.

Bowel cancer risk was a third higher for those who regularly ate over
two 80g portions of red or processed meat a day, compared to less than
one a week.

EPIC's study is reported in the Journal of the National Cancer
Institute.

Since it began, 1,330 people have developed bowel cancer.

The study also found a low fibre diet increased the risk of bowel
cancer.

Eating poultry had no impact but the risk for people who ate one
portion or more of fish every other day was nearly a third lower than
those who ate fish less than once a week.

Strong evidence

Lead researcher Professor Sheila Bingham, of the MRC Dunn Human
Nutrition Unit in Cambridge, said: "People have suspected for some time
that high levels of red and processed meat increase risk of bowel
cancer, but this is one of the largest studies worldwide and the first
from Europe of this type to show a strong relationship."

Professor Bingham said there were several theories about why red meat
should increase the risk of bowel cancer.

She believes the most likely explanation is that compounds called
haemoglobin and myoglobin, which are found in red meat, trigger a
process called nitrosation in the gut, which leads to the formation of
carcinogenic compounds.

Alternatively, the problem might be caused by compounds called
heterocyclic amines, carcinogenic compounds created in the cooking
process.

However, these compounds are also found in poultry, which has not been
linked to an increased cancer risk.

Professor Tim Key, of the charity Cancer Research UK, said: "This study
strengthens evidence that bowel cancer risk can be cut by increasing
fibre in the diet and reducing consumption of red and processed meat."

The researchers defined red meat as beef, lamb, pork and veal.

Processed meat was mostly pork and beef that were preserved by methods
other than freezing. They include ham, bacon, sausages, liver pate,
salami, tinned meat, luncheon meat and corned beef.

The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) said people in Britain ate well
below the 160g per day consumption levels that were used to class high
intake in the study.

Mike Attenborough, MLC technical director, said: "Once again this
points towards the need for moderation and balance in what we eat."

The study was funded by the Medical Research Council, Cancer Research
UK and the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
vernon - 01 Feb 2006 19:36 GMT
> FYI
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> A major study has found fresh evidence of a link between red and
> processed meat and bowel cancer, scientists say.

Garbage research.
Total 100% garbage with an agenda.

They just hint at the REAL culprit, low fiber.
clifto - 01 Feb 2006 21:01 GMT
> The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) said people in Britain ate well
> below the 160g per day consumption levels that were used to class high
> intake in the study.

!!! 160g? High intake?! I feel like I'm broke any time I can't afford to
get more than that in every *meal*.

> Mike Attenborough, MLC technical director, said: "Once again this
> points towards the need for moderation and balance in what we eat."

Damn. Remind me not to walk too close to the meat counter next time.

Signature

       If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
          my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

J - 01 Feb 2006 21:24 GMT
> Damn. Remind me not to walk too close to the meat counter next time.

oh clifto, oh clifto.
ironjustice is a crossposting disease.
I spend so much of my time, posting the filters message, trying to convince
others, from other newsgroups, not to reply to him or leave the cancer
newsgroups out of it, looking up AUP's and threatening some with reporting
and then you reply (and crosspost).
I just replied and uncrossposted these newsgroups.
Of all the people I thought who could help (longterm) here in doing such to
discourage crossposts, I would have thought you.
How I do it, is sort by poster and see if the poster is a regular here or on
sci.med.diseases.cancer.
If they are, I post to the cancer newsgroup, where the replier is a regular.
If not, I post back to the *other* newsgroups to stop crossposting.
vernon is reportable, but how can I threaten him (and instruct him on
watching his headers) with reporting him, if you, of all people crosspost?
Can't you and I align ourselves on a plan on how to discourage crossposters?
And it starts with skipping over (if not plonking) ironjustice or any of the
crossposters.
Please.
J
clifto - 01 Feb 2006 23:33 GMT
> oh clifto, oh clifto.
> ironjustice is a crossposting disease.

I already have him in my killfile. Didn't notice the crosspost on that one.
I'll try to be more careful. :)

Signature

       If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
          my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

J - 02 Feb 2006 00:51 GMT
> > oh clifto, oh clifto.
> > ironjustice is a crossposting disease.
>
> I already have him in my killfile. Didn't notice the crosspost on that one.
> I'll try to be more careful. :)

Thank you, clifto.
J
TC - 01 Feb 2006 22:00 GMT
> > The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) said people in Britain ate well
> > below the 160g per day consumption levels that were used to class high
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>         If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
>            my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

On even the most zealous low carb diet it would be difficult to eat
more than 100 to 110 grams per day. That is the high end. That is a lot
of meat.

I can see how 160g might cause problems. I challenge anyone to find
stats of any group of people that eat that much protein. My guess is
that very very few people could sustain or would want to sustain that
kind of protein consumption.

TC
Jim Prescott - 02 Feb 2006 00:17 GMT
>> > The Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) said people in Britain ate well
>> > below the 160g per day consumption levels that were used to class high
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>more than 100 to 110 grams per day. That is the high end. That is a lot
>of meat.

Check your math.  80g ~= 3oz ~= 1 serving of meat.  Even someone following
the food pyramid would be getting 160g of meat a day.  Someone on LC, or
a typical American not watching what they eat, will probably have more
than that.

Perhaps you are thinking of protein.  Like most foods, meat is mostly
water.  A 295g trimmed ribye steak is only about 64g protein (58% water,
27% protein, 15% fat for "Beef, rib eye, small end (ribs 10-12), separable
lean and fat, trimmed to 0" fat, all grades, cooked, broiled" at:
    http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/cgi-bin/nut_search.pl
Signature

Jim Prescott - Computing and Networking Group    jgp@seas.rochester.edu
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, University of Rochester, NY

Daniel Badu-Asmah - 06 Feb 2006 23:20 GMT
I am sick and tired of scientists coming out with conflicting theories about
the causes of  Cancer.

Red meat is a cure to Phalloidins which binds to actin filaments in the
body. The only thing is whenever you want to eat red meat, make sure it is
well cooked. Probably you might have to boil it for hours before eating it.

Just eat what you want and remember as a man thinks in his heart, so he
becomes.

Daniel Badu-Asmah
(Cancer Research Student)
vernon - 07 Feb 2006 14:05 GMT
>I am sick and tired of scientists coming out with conflicting theories
>about the causes of  Cancer.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> well cooked. Probably you might have to boil it for hours before eating
> it.

Hours?
Have you ever learned the temperature that all life dies.

> Just eat what you want and remember as a man thinks in his heart, so he
> becomes.
>
> Daniel Badu-Asmah
> (Cancer Research Student)
nospam@aol.com - 01 Feb 2006 20:45 GMT
>Red meat cancer risk clue found
>
[quoted text clipped - 92 lines]
>Who loves ya.
>Tom

Junk results from research.  Where is the link?

Ora
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.