by Heather Moore
Senior Writer
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
It seems we need to change the name of the classic BLT sandwich to CLT: cancer, lettuce, and tomato. Numerous studies have shown that there is a definite link between red and processed meats and cancer. Scientists at Sweden's Karolinska Institute recently analyzed the results of 15 prior studies on stomach cancer and found "unequivocal" evidence that eating bacon, sausage, smoked ham, and other processed meats raises ones risk of developing stomach cancer.
According to study author Susanna Larsson, the findings, which are published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, "show very clearly that there is an association between increased consumption of processed meat products and stomach cancer."
This news shouldn't come as any big surprise. Following one survey of nearly 700 Nebraskans, doctors at Tufts University and the National Cancer Institute reported that people who ate meat had 3.6 times the risk of esophageal cancer and double the risk of stomach cancer compared to those who ate diets high in vegetables, fruits, and grains.
Another study conducted by doctors at Yale University showed that high fat intake, animal protein, vitamin B12, and cholesterol—found only in animal products—contributed to stomach and esophageal cancer. Dr. Susan T. Mayne announced that "prevention strategies for these cancers should emphasize increased consumption of plant foods, decreased consumption of foods of animal origin..."
Numerous other studies have also found a conclusive link between meat consumption and colorectal cancer. A 2005 study by the American Cancer Society (ACS), for example, found that people who eat large amounts of red or processed meat over a long period of time have a higher risk of colorectal cancer. Nearly 150,000 adults participated in the ACS study, and those who ate the most red meat were 30 to 40 percent more likely to develop cancer in the lower part of the colon than those who ate the least red meat. The study participants who ate the most processed meats were 50 percent more likely to develop colon cancer and 20 percent more likely to develop rectal cancer than those who ate the least processed meats.
The ACS researchers defined "high" consumption of red meat as three or more ounces per day for men (about the amount of meat in a large fast-food hamburger) and two or more ounces per day for women. For processed meat, including bacon, sausage, hot dogs, ham, bologna, and salami, "high" consumption was one ounce eaten five or six days per week for men, and two or three days per week for women.
Another study conducted by researchers at the Medical Research Council and the Open University Department of Chemistry in the United Kingdom showed a similar link between red and processed meats and bowel cancer, and a massive European Prospective Investigation of Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study also cited preserved and red meats as major culprits for colorectal cancer.
The EPIC study was the largest study of diet and cancer ever undertaken. It involved more than half a million people from ten European countries. The study also indicated that a diet high in fiber can help reduce your risk of cancer. Study participants who ate the most fiber reduced their risk of colorectal cancer by as much as 40 percent.
Unlike fruit, vegetables, and grains, meat and dairy products have absolutely no fiber. They are high in fat, calories, concentrated protein, and cholesterol; even "low fat" dairy products are packed with fat and cholesterol, relative to plant-based foods.
The ACS's Web site states: "In the majority of population studies, greater consumption of vegetables, fruits, or both together has been associated with a lower risk of lung, oral, esophageal and colon cancer. The best advice is to eat five or more servings of vegetables and fruit each day."
Dr. T. Colin Campbell, an internationally renowned nutrition expert, has stated that, "The vast majority of all cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and other forms of degenerative illness can be prevented simply by adopting a plant-based diet."
So stay healthy. Skip the CLT and switch to a safe and delicious VBLT: veggie bacon, lettuce, and tomato sandwich. Vegetarian recipes and product suggestions can be found on www.VegCooking.com.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
This means that the message is still not getting through to people. I say this as I'm eating some pepperoni with my chef salad.
Some progress has been made, I feel, but probably not enough.
A pure plant -based diet, speaking from one who was a 'cheating' vegetarian for years - chicken, fish, ovolacto, - is difficult to get enough full protein. Beans & rice, legume combinations are good; I don't like soy.
Exercise can also help prevent illnesses.
Note that the study she's referring to only showed "processed meats" to contribute. So eat a nice fresh juicy ribeye or pork chop and you'll be fine!
Processed anything is not good for you, including those fake soy burgers and pretend chicken made out of soy!
The section below is from a website that you might want to check out, it gives the other side of the story! PETA will say anything to try to make you believe that eating meat is bad for you, so consider the source of this "article" above before you put too much stake in what this PETA staff writer is trying to make you believe! Remember, she has an agenda!
http://www.westonaprice.org/mythstruths/mtvegetarianism.html#5
"Cancer
The belief that meat, in particular red meat, contributes to cancer is, like heart disease, a popular idea that is not supported by the facts. Although it is true that some studies have shown a connection between meat eating and some types of cancer (38), its important to look at the studies carefully to determine what kind of meat is being discussed, as well as the preparation methods used. Since we only have one word for "meat" in English, it is often difficult to know which "meat" is under discussion in a study unless the authors of the study specifically say so.
The study which began the meat=cancer theory was done by Dr. Ernst Wynder in the 1970s. Wynder claimed that there was a direct, causal connection between animal fat intake and incidence of colon cancer (39). Actually, his data on "animal fats" were really on vegetable fats (40). In other words, the meat=cancer theory is based on a phony study.
If one looks closely at the research, however, one quickly sees that it is processed meats like cold cuts and sausages that are usually implicated in cancer causation (41) and not meat per se. Furthermore, cooking methods seem to play a part in whether or not a meat becomes carcinogenic (42). In other words, it is the added chemicals to the meat and the chosen cooking method that are at fault and not the meat itself.
In the end, although sometimes a connection between meat and cancer is found, the actual mechanism of how it happens has eluded scientists (43). This means that it is likely that other factors besides meat are playing roles in some cases of cancer. Remember: studies of meat-eating traditional peoples show that they have very little incidence of cancer. This demonstrates that other factors are at work when cancer appears in a modern meat-eating person. It is not scientifically fair to single out one dietary factor in placing blame, while ignoring other more likely candidates.
It should be noted here that Seventh Day Adventists are often studied in population analyses to prove that a vegetarian diet is healthier and is associated with a lower risk for cancer (but see a later paragraph in this section). While it is true that most members of this Christian denomination do not eat meat, they also do not smoke or drink alcohol, coffee or tea, all of which are likely factors in promoting cancer (44).
The Mormons are a religious group often overlooked in vegetarian studies. Although their Church urges moderation, Mormons do not abstain from meat. As with the Adventists, Mormons also avoid tobacco, alcohol, and caffeine. Despite being meat eaters, a study of Utah Mormons showed they had a 22% lower rate for cancer in general and a 34% lower mortality for colon cancer than the US average (45). A study of Puerto Ricans, who eat large amounts of fatty pork, nevertheless revealed very low rates of colon and breast cancer (46). Similar results can be adduced to demonstrate that meat and animal fat consumption do not correlate with cancer (47). Obviously, other factors are at work.
It is usually claimed that vegetarians have lower cancer rates than meat-eaters, but a 1994 study of vegetarian California Seventh Day Adventists showed that, while they did have lower rates for some cancers (e.g., breast and lung), they had higher rates for several others (Hodgkin's disease, malignant melanoma, brain, skin, uterine, prostate, endometrial, cervical and ovarian), some quite significantly. In that study the authors actually admitted that:
Meat consumption, however, was not associated with a higher [cancer] risk.
And that,
No significant association between breast cancer and a high consumption of animal fats or animal products in general was noted. (48)
Further, it is usually claimed that a diet rich in plant foods like whole grains and legumes will reduce one's risks for cancer, but research going back to the last century demonstrates that carbohydrate-based diets are the prime dietary instigators of cancer, not diets based on minimally processed animal foods (49).
The mainstream health and vegetarian media have done such an effective job of "beef bashing," that most people think there is nothing healthful about meat, especially red meat. In reality, however, animal flesh foods like beef and lamb are excellent sources of a variety of nutrients as any food/nutrient table will show. Nutrients like vitamins A, D, several of the B-complex, essential fatty acids (in small amounts), magnesium, zinc, phosphorous, potassium, iron, taurine, and selenium are abundant in beef, lamb, pork, fish and shellfish, and poultry. Nutritional factors like coenzyme Q10, carnitine, and alpha-lipoic acid are also present. Some of these nutrients are only found in animal foods--plants do not supply them. "
Can you provide original sources for the studies you reference? Thanks in advance.
Here you go. Of course, these are not the only articles--there has been much published on this matter. There have also been studies linking meat to breast and pancreatic cancer.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14150738
http://www.chem.ubc.ca/faculty/wang/wisdom/CancerDiets.htm
http://www.oncolink.com/resources/article.cfm?c=3&s=8&ss=23&id=1792&month=10&year=2001
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Eating_Lots_of_Red_Meat_Linked_to_Colon_Cancer.asp
http://www3.open.ac.uk/media/fullstory.aspx?id=8310
http://jncicancerspectrum.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/jnci;97/12/906.pdf
Thanks.