• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Red and Processed Meat Bowel Cancer risk up to 20%

Have you noticed that when Parliament is on jolly holidays or when it is a slow news day news corps dredge through the medical journals to just fill rolling news broadcasts? I bet those corps are quite glad that there are hold ups in London by the Extinction Rebellion group otherwise they would have to dredge up even more dross.
 
The way I see it, @mazza 2 is that as we progress through life, our window of choices of what to eat narrows up. For some this does involve less carbs. The question is should the response to T2 diabetes be to go full blown keto or carnivore and my belief is not necessarily, unless we have to.
 

That may be a consideration of yours, but it isn’t the subject of this thread, and no one on this thread is recommending that.
The thread is about the risk of cancer from red meat as reported in the article in the original post.
 
Last edited:
Hi All,

Anyone wishing to discuss other subjects (or just post pictures of meat) can please do so elsewhere.

This is a pretty important subject to a lot of people here, with implications for their long term food choices. I appreciate that there are lots of views on this, but please don’t mock it - many of us find our health is affected by food choices.
 
I wonder if the information is correct that it’s not about the meat but what usually is eaten with it.
Very few people eat just a steak. Most of the time it comes with refined carbs like fried potatoes, gravy, rice, or pasta.
 
I agree. It is very important. And important to point out that we do not need to resort to a meat only or meat heavy diet to meet our needs whether it be red or not. I did sense some mocking in earlier posts in the thread.
 
Mocking of the study possibly. This is not about any particular choice of diet. The study did not focus on anything but red meat and processed meat pertaining to the general population. Just a few moments ago the newsreader on BBC News said "Experts say just one extra rasher of bacon per day raises the risk of bowel cancer" then came the ro-ro report that has been shown ad nauseum. As always there were no refs to the actual study and no expert to speak to the study/evidence.
 
Listlad said:
The question is should the response to T2 diabetes be to go full blown keto or carnivore and my belief is not necessarily, unless we have to.
Click to expand...
So you think it's not necessary until it is.. odd....

Edit to ad the main point however is does this news report accurately reflect the findings from the 2 or 3 food questionnaires that were compiled for the UK Bio Bank data source that was used for the study.
If you think 29 questions about what food you thought you ate over the past year should be used to work out your cancer risk then feel free to believe what has been reported. However I think my critical faculties can see a number of problems with that premise.
 
It would be useful to hear from an expert on comparative risk. How does eating bacon compare in risk with drinking alcohol, riding a motorcycle or just breathing in a polluted city for example. If we are going to reduce risks to our health we ought to have some sort of priority.
 
Maybe not. However there is no smoke without fire. I would not dismiss the thinking behind the various study outcomes completely. But I can see why you might want to. I think I posted a serious question earlier where I asked if we are saying that the certain cancer related charity was completely off track with their thinking. What is your answer to that? Is it too much to expect a balanced view?

Post 47

https://www.wcrf-uk.org/uk/preventi...tions/limit-red-meat-and-avoid-processed-meat

And don’t forget, I eat red meat. I am just not being sucked into a tribal way of closing down open thought on the matter.
 
Last edited:
Listlad said:
I think I posted a serious question earlier where I asked if we are saying that the certain Cancer Charity was completely off track with their thinking. What is your answer to that? Is it too much to expect a balance view?
Click to expand...

I would say that the cancer charity in question did not do any research itself. It most likely used information from elsewhere. They did not quote the references or any evidence. It is no more than a blog. I am not decrying the charity at all. They probably do very useful work, but without references to where they got the information from, it is no better than any of the media reports.

One quote from the article (under the link) says

You may have seen news stories about the links between red and processed meat and cancer. This is because eating processed meats or having a diet high in red meat is a cause of bowel cancer.
(My bold highlighting)

It has not been proved to be a cause, only a possible cause, with poor research.
 

Your link appears to have general dietary advice to lower the risks of cancer. But on the proviso that there are not other issues like the carb intolerance some encounter with T2 diabetes.

There has already been one call to order from a fellow moderator.

Continuing to derail & bicker on the topic will incur sanctions.

Hope this helps.

Regards..
 
Last edited:

My argument isn't about what people choose to eat or not. The fact is that we the public are forever bombarded with conflicting information about what is considered good food or bad food. To be honest, too much of anything is bad for our health, even water. Reading about how they reached the conclusion about red meat does not seem conclusive to me. If you ask most people about their diet, I do not think most people tell the whole truth. For example, if a doctor were to ask a smoker how many they smoke a day or how much they drink per week, most will under estimate. In the study it stated people were asked how much bacon or red meat they ate, how do we know they answered correctly!! Also, different food affects people differently as can be seen with people who have diabetes or food allergies. To be honest, whatever you decide to eat or drink, do it in moderation and hopefully all will be good.
 

Indeed you’re correct, here is CRUK’s statement from their website on the subject:
https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/ab...processed-meat-eaters-at-risk-of-bowel-cancer
 
I only once got the slipper at primary school, when my best friend at the time had an altercation with another boy. I wouldn't have minded but I wasn't even there at the time; smoke means nothing, facts count.

Hong Kong has the longest lived persons in the world, they consume the most meat. Various tribes eat mainly meat, no bowel or colon cancer of note. Gaucho's eat plenty of red meat, Red meat consumption has gone down, yet cancer rates are up. Meat has been a staple for millennia, the cancer issues are correlated with modern living; I know this is not causation, but is are the following things coincidence, high sugar / carbs, man made oils = higher rates of diabetes, obesity, cancers, pcos, high blood pressure, the list is too long and much higher in the last 50 years in any society that has similar variables .

What often happens in this space, is that there are bad studies say 10 of them. Then a group performs are combined study on the 10 (meta analysis), the stats would be accurately wrong, you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

I would hope you would agree that if high insulin and being overweight are proven greater risk factors for cancer, should meat be singled out when no explanations have been given for the paradox of "real" high meat consumption in real populations where meat is biased towards, would it not be reasonable to see a straight correlation between between meat consumption and cancer in most circumstances. Persons have been doing Atkins, LCHF, Keto and Paleo in recent times, I am yet to see a study or indication that these populations have more cancer than others, why.

Why should we accept results that don't even meet the right tipping point, and the pretend that 20% is what the ordinary man or woman in the street would recognise as 20%, rather the 1. whatever % i.e. the truthfully "absolute" risk - this is slight of hand and a joke. If you earn £100.00 and I say you are getting a 20% increase, would you not expect £120.00, if I presented you with £101.40 for example you would rightly call me a con man.

It insults our intelligence that not one of these studies crosses the boundaries of the scientific method that is being used. It is like having your fingerprint tested and not having an acceptable match, yet this still be used to convict you. Whilst this is going on, the really dangerous diets are getting a free pass especially into the psyche of our children.
 
Listlad said:
Oxford University. It’s the second oldest in the world (allegedly), educator of 28 Nobel Prize winners, and often cited as the best university on the planet. So what is going wrong here?
Click to expand...
It should be said that Oxford does also do some vital work. I was at the APPG meeting for research into Type 1 diabetes on 28th March at the Houses of Parliament, Dr John Todd of Oxford University is doing pioneering international work under the name "POinT", which helps to identify via screening Type 1 candidates, help preserve beta-cell function.

A big name is irrelevant, people make decisions, who are no better or worse than you and I.
 
Another citation goes to Prof. Rory Collins of Oxford University. Not one whit of data has been published by Prof. Collins who carried out extensive research into statin use funded by the pharmaceutical industry.
Not all that glitters is gold.

My point is that we (the laypeople) are now forced to learn and to dig out the real science, there's no room for blind trust any more wherever the studies come from or whichever publication chooses to print them.
 
Argh, stuff like this is one of the (many) reasons I can never tell my mum that I'm (1) diabetic and (2) doing a lower carb higher fat and protein diet to lower my weight and therefore hopefully my BG. My dad died of stomach cancer (I'm adopted, no genetic link), so she is hyper-vigilant about all cancers ESPECIALLY anything to do with the digestive system. Knowing I'm diabetic would be bad enough, but knowing I'm deliberately eating fat and meat would be more than she could cope with. She's one of those people who thinks that type 2 diabetics got it from being lazy gluttons, and if they ever eat one bite of food ever again that isn't rabbit food or whole grains (you know, the "good carbs") they will instantly go blind and their legs will drop off.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…