Red meat is strongly linked to cancer
- Thread starter sputnik
- Start date
I think the term "strongly linked" is a touch much.
In this trial, they measured dietary intake with two different questionairres at two different time points (82, 92/3) and measured multiple cancers before 2001.
They provided a couple of increased risks with meat consumption in 1992/3 adjusted for multiple other risk factors
1) Highest quintile of redmeat
oultry/fish ratio had a 27% increased risk of colon cancer (significant)
2) 2nd quintile and highest quintile of red meat consumption had increased risk of rectosigmoid and rectal cancer of 43 and 71% respectively. (why the midpoints, ie 3/4 quintile, found nothing is either due to random action, lack of cancers or just the significant effect is just bollocks, cant tell from this)
3) highest quintile of redmeatoulty/fish ratio had a 33% increased risk of proximal colon (this ties into #1)
problems with this, is that it is based around a single FFQ, with multiple issues of what is red meat and what is processed, within the context of a long latency disease state.
when trying to control for this, by joining the high meat easters (this is not just red meat, its ALL meat from beef, pork, chicken, turkey and the processed items) from 82/92 together, there is a subtle change
1) increased risk of 43% in recotsigmoid and rectm cancers in those who had high intakes at both time points ( and increased risk of 35% if you had low itnake anad high intake at mixed time periods)
2)distal cancer showe3d a similar of 50% for high at both time points, or 38% if mixed
3) 53% increased risk of distal colon cancer if you ate hgih meat both time points.
there are a few issues with this research. Estimation of meat intake is poor, and the number of samples. estimation of vege/fruit intake is poor, done at 1 time point (most people eat more veges as they age, obscuring effect at earlier age), physical activity was estimated at the 1992 time point, as were a host of other potential items. It woudl be fine if peoples diet and other habits did not change at all over a lifetime, however they change, even within seasons over the course of their lives.
To quote walter willett from the associated editorial
In this trial, they measured dietary intake with two different questionairres at two different time points (82, 92/3) and measured multiple cancers before 2001.
They provided a couple of increased risks with meat consumption in 1992/3 adjusted for multiple other risk factors
1) Highest quintile of redmeat
oultry/fish ratio had a 27% increased risk of colon cancer (significant)2) 2nd quintile and highest quintile of red meat consumption had increased risk of rectosigmoid and rectal cancer of 43 and 71% respectively. (why the midpoints, ie 3/4 quintile, found nothing is either due to random action, lack of cancers or just the significant effect is just bollocks, cant tell from this)
3) highest quintile of redmeat
oulty/fish ratio had a 33% increased risk of proximal colon (this ties into #1)problems with this, is that it is based around a single FFQ, with multiple issues of what is red meat and what is processed, within the context of a long latency disease state.
when trying to control for this, by joining the high meat easters (this is not just red meat, its ALL meat from beef, pork, chicken, turkey and the processed items) from 82/92 together, there is a subtle change
1) increased risk of 43% in recotsigmoid and rectm cancers in those who had high intakes at both time points ( and increased risk of 35% if you had low itnake anad high intake at mixed time periods)
2)distal cancer showe3d a similar of 50% for high at both time points, or 38% if mixed
3) 53% increased risk of distal colon cancer if you ate hgih meat both time points.
there are a few issues with this research. Estimation of meat intake is poor, and the number of samples. estimation of vege/fruit intake is poor, done at 1 time point (most people eat more veges as they age, obscuring effect at earlier age), physical activity was estimated at the 1992 time point, as were a host of other potential items. It woudl be fine if peoples diet and other habits did not change at all over a lifetime, however they change, even within seasons over the course of their lives.
To quote walter willett from the associated editorial
[b said: