World Health Organization: Processed Meat is Carcinogenic

[Fallen]

Processed meats - such as bacon, sausages and ham - do cause cancer, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

Its report said 50g of processed meat a day - less than two slices of bacon - increased the chance of developing colorectal cancer by 18%.

Meanwhile, it said red meats were "probably carcinogenic" but there was limited evidence.

The WHO did stress that meat also had health benefits. Cancer Research UK said this was a reason to cut down rather than give up red and processed meats. And added that an occasional bacon sandwich would do little harm. Processed meat is meat that has been modified to increase its shelf-life or alter its taste, such as by smoking, curing or adding salt or preservatives. It is these additions which could be increasing the risk of cancer. High temperature cooking, such as on a barbeque, can also create carcinogenic chemicals.

How bad?

The WHO has come to the conclusion on the advice of its International Agency for Research on Cancer, which assesses the best available scientific evidence. It has now placed processed meat in the same category as plutonium, but also alcohol as they definitely do cause cancer. However, this does not mean they are equally dangerous. A bacon sandwich is not as bad as smoking. "For an individual, the risk of developing colorectal (bowel) cancer because of their consumption of processed meat remains small, but this risk increases with the amount of meat consumed," Dr Kurt Straif from the WHO said.

Estimates suggest 34,000 deaths from cancer every year could be down to diets high in processed meat. That is in contrast to one million deaths from cancer caused by smoking and 600,000 attributed to alcohol each year. Red meat does have nutritional value too and is a major source of iron, zinc and vitamin B12. However, the WHO said there was limited evidence that 100g of red meat a day increased the risk of cancer by 17%. An eight ounce steak is 225g. The WHO said its findings were important for helping countries give balanced dietary advice.

Little harm

Prof Tim Key, from the Cancer Research UK and the University of Oxford, said: "This decision doesn't mean you need to stop eating any red and processed meat, but if you eat lots of it you may want to think about cutting down."Eating a bacon bap every once in a while isn't going to do much harm - having a healthy diet is all about moderation." The industry body the Meat Advisory Panel said "avoiding red meat in the diet is not a protective strategy against cancer" and said the focus should be alcohol, smoking and body weight.

https://40.media.tumblr.com/8c58377b7b413e634a52b2d6f8517e5f/tumblr_nwu3vsBjyH1tquz95o1_1280.png

The report can be found here: www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2015/pdfs/pr240_E.pdf (http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2015/pdfs/pr240_E.pdf)

I haven't had any luck getting the page to load, though.


So, what is “processed meat” exactly? “Typically, it means anything more manipulated than cut or ground,” says dietician Lisa Cashman, RD. “This includes most lunchmeats found in deli counters, anything with a casing or in sausage form, and, of course, anything smoked or cured like bacon.”

[Taernath]

http://orig06.deviantart.net/c3aa/f/2011/116/2/c/ron_swanson_likes_bacon_by_optimiss-d3ey4dg.png

[Jarvan]

If eating Bacon would be the cause of my death... I can live with that.

[mgoddess]

If eating Bacon would be the cause of my death... I can live with that.
^^

Not giving up my meat any time soon. Mmmmm, tasty, tasty meat.

[kutter]

I prefer to not eat what my food eats, so bring on the PIIIIGGGG!!! I love me some babybacks.

[Thondalar]

Oxygen is carcinogenic. Stop breathing!

[Astray]

This just in! Everything everywhere causes cancer so stop doing stuff.

[Androidpk]

Now Latrin is going to want to ban meat.

[crb]

This is a shit "study." All they did was a meta analysis of observational studies where people self report diet and they found a correlation between processed meat consumption and cancer. They don't have a hypothesis they tested, they don't have a mechanism whereby one causes the other, it is totally a cum hoc fallacy.

I really, really, hate it when people try to grab headlines doing shit like this.

People who eat more ____ are more likely to get cancer. You could put ANYTHING in the blank... because if you remove the blank and the sentence reads:

People who eat more are more likely to get cancer. You have more or less a true statement because obesity is strongly linked to many cancers (and diabetes, and heart disease). Which is why real science doesn't rely on bullshit self reported observational studies.

Its cool though, these are the same people that told us eggs were bad, saturated fat was bad, carbs are good, and trans fat will save us from heart disease.

If anyone is legitimately interested in the science of nutrition, including the history of it, and how various special interests have hijacked it, this book is a very good read, and very well sourced, by a Time investigative journalist.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1451624433/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=1451624433&linkCode=as2&tag=everythingshak06&linkId=372Y6E57AQDIU43F

[Atlanteax]

crb = the antithesis of Latrinsorm

[Taernath]

This is a shit "study." All they did was a meta analysis of observational studies where people self report diet and they found a correlation between processed meat consumption and cancer. They don't have a hypothesis they tested, they don't have a mechanism whereby one causes the other, it is totally a cum hoc fallacy.


To be fair though, there would be ethical and funding issues if they did otherwise. They can't really control someone's diet, then watch them for decades and see if they develop cancer.

[subzero]

This is a shit "study." All they did was a meta analysis of observational studies where people self report diet and they found a correlation between processed meat consumption and cancer. They don't have a hypothesis they tested, they don't have a mechanism whereby one causes the other, it is totally a cum hoc fallacy.


Life causes cancer.

[Tgo01]

This just in! 100% of people born die!

[Astray]

This just in! 100% of people born die!

HOLY FUCK that's crazy man.

[Androidpk]

Actually some people are cryogenically frozen before they die.

[subzero]

Actually some people are cryogenically frozen before they die.

I can vouch for that. But they still die.

[Thondalar]

This just in! 100% of people born die!

I hate to fall into this relative fallacy, but...

Being born is, statistically, the leading cause of death. 100%...blows everything else out of the water.

Speaking of statistics...this particular "study" focuses on colorectal cancer...the overall chance that you will develop that particular cancer is like...less than 1%. So, according to this study...you're increasing your fraction of a percent chance by 18%...STOP THE PRESSES!>!!!

[drauz]

http://rlv.zcache.com/dihydrogen_monoxide_t_shirts-rc5a8c356043b4ebca6b8ad055b058c44_f0yq2_1024.jpg

[Thondalar]

wait...dihydrogen monoxide?.....that's....well...that's...water?

wtf? I need water!

[subzero]

http://rlv.zcache.com/dihydrogen_monoxide_t_shirts-rc5a8c356043b4ebca6b8ad055b058c44_f0yq2_1024.jpg

Heh, I remember hearing about a hoax somewhere in the northeastern area years ago that was something along the lines of telling people they had dihydrogen monoxide in their water. People being the idiots they are, were skerred. Just like when they put up little characters from Aqua Teen Hunger Force on light posts and whatnot in Boston(?). ZOMG, BOMB!

[Methais]

This just in! 100% of people born die!

Marriage is the leading cause of divorce!

[crb]

To be fair though, there would be ethical and funding issues if they did otherwise. They can't really control someone's diet, then watch them for decades and see if they develop cancer.

Which is why they would do animal studies, and more rigorous observational studies. You should buy that book I linked too, seriously. Lots of good history of nutritional science in it, step by step how some observational studies were massaged and ended up with incorrect data.

[leifastagsweed]

This is not new news. I knew this 20 years ago and I am no scientist. It is just another study being newly propagated and sensationalized in the media. What people don't know is what's happening to create that amazing bacon. Factory farming is more detrimental to our health than charring meat.

[Tisket]

I agree with Leifa...this isn't news. Well, it is news but it's old news. I've known about it for years.

Also: haha @ those who teased me about being (semi) vegetarian.

[Velfi]

What people don't know is what's happening to create that amazing bacon. Factory farming is more detrimental to our health than charring meat.

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/boss-hog-the-dark-side-of-americas-top-pork-producer-20061214

Relevant article from a few years back.

[Jeril]

I agree with Leifa...this isn't news. Well, it is news but it's old news. I've known about it for years.

Also: haha @ those who teased me about being (semi) vegetarian.

How can you be (semi) vegetarian when we all know you eat plenty of meat?

[Tisket]

Busted.

[Androidpk]

What exactly is a semi-vegetarian?

[Tisket]

Fish is too delicious to give up.

[Velfi]

http://i.imgur.com/aaMKkc4.png

[Androidpk]

Fish is too delicious to give up.

I can appreciate that you call it semi-vegetarianism. I've known some people that claim they can still be called a full on vegetarian if they still eat seafood

[Taernath]

Where do insects fit in on the vegan Hierarchy of Disapproval?

[Androidpk]

Where do insects fit in on the vegan Hierarchy of Disapproval?

Depends. Are they free-range organic insects?

[Luftstreitkräfte]

how is bacon a processed meat just because they cut it into strips and pump it full of nitrates? it's not all blended up like other shit. i hate how they lumped bacon in with everything else. i demand a recount.

[Latrinsorm]

Now Latrin is going to want to ban meat.How many longitudinal studies have been performed that confirm this headline?
To be fair though, there would be ethical and funding issues if they did otherwise. They can't really control someone's diet, then watch them for decades and see if they develop cancer.You don't have to, people volunteer to be vegetarians. Why would they do such an insane thing? You've got me, the point is that they do. It's just like how people voluntarily smoke or don't, voluntarily drink or don't, and so on. Get a large enough group of them and you can start controlling for things like family history too, as you should. People vastly overestimate how hard it is to do good science.

[Taernath]

You don't have to, people volunteer to be vegetarians. Why would they do such an insane thing? You've got me, the point is that they do. It's just like how people voluntarily smoke or don't, voluntarily drink or don't, and so on. Get a large enough group of them and you can start controlling for things like family history too, as you should. People vastly overestimate how hard it is to do good science.

Self-reported data are always questionable. You can ask someone their height but there is a tendency for them to overestimate or round up even though it's an easily measurable variable. For something like smoking being responsible for cancer, the effect size was so astronomic that it was easily detectable. For this study, eating around 10 pieces of bacon a day only increased your chances by ~4% total. It is basically a scare article that everyone is using to generate traffic.

[Latrinsorm]

Self-reported data are always questionable. You can ask someone their height but there is a tendency for them to overestimate or round up even though it's an easily measurable variable. For something like smoking being responsible for cancer, the effect size was so astronomic that it was easily detectable. For this study, eating around 10 pieces of bacon a day only increased your chances by ~4% total. It is basically a scare article that everyone is using to generate traffic.For a one time thing, maybe, but that would be bad science anyway. A cohort will by definition become practiced in whatever it is you're asking them to report.