Red meat and bowel cancer

"Pete" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The airways have been flooded lately in this country with the results of
a large study in Scandinavia that reports a strong association between
red and processed meat intake and bowel cancer. The gist of the study is
here: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=52842 . What do others
make of this for it sounds pretty conclusive? Not necessarily causative
but certainly correlated. I'm not sure why red meat is being lumped with
processed meat for their may well be chemicals in the latter that may
cause the cancer.

Just as an aside...often people, including the authors of this article,
speak of red meat versus fish. Is chicken considered to be red meat?

--
All the best,
Pete

All I can tell you is my experience. I'm a 55 year old male, doing LC for
7 years. My recent colonoscopy was perfectly clear. This after 7 years of
eating tons of red meat.

--
*7 years & 50 lbs low carb lifestyler

--
JK Sinrod
Sinrod Stained Glass Studios
www.sinrodstudios.com
Coney Island Memories
www.sinrodstudios.com/coneymemories

I'd say "follow the money trail"... I will look into this "study" and
report back, BUT, if you follow low-carb diet for any length of time,
your "programmed" fear of red meat will fall out of you well...like...
well, the bull-[censored] that it is!!

First of all, this is an epidemiological study, the favorite kind of
low-fat/antimeat/vegetarians, because you can twist statistics around
to say whatever you like. All those types of studies do, is to suggest
certain possibilities to be followed up by clinical studies. And you
will never find a clinical study that proves a link between red meat
and colon cancer... cos they're isn't one.

Of course, the people they studied, did any of them who "ate lots of
red meat", also smoke, drink a lot, not exercise, etc etc.? But of
course, they "statistically removed those factors", and singled out
ONLY THE RED MEAT! It is oh-so-obvious that they were looking to link
colon cancer and red meat before they even began the study. What a
surprise that they found a link!

This was done by the WHO, who are 100% on board with the low-fat, whole
grains, fruits and veggies lower risk of (everything) and meat is bad,
you only need to eat 50 grams of protein a day... who does that sound
like?

I say eat your meat...leave the [censored] to the WHO!

Thanks Garhi. You can well imagine how the 'average' man on the street
might react to this type of 'research,' however.

I read something else recently that bothered me also. Another
justification for not eating red meat because cows are now fed grain
rather than grass. The theory was that these poor cows had more
saturated fats in their meat. 'Fortunately' most beef *is* fed grass in
my country (Australia).

--
All the best,
Pete

------------------------------------------------
Home Page: http://users.bigpond.com/lansma
Location: 42°53'S; 147°19'E

garhi said:

I'd say "follow the money trail"... I will look into this "study" and
report back, BUT, if you follow low-carb diet for any length of time,
your "programmed" fear of red meat will fall out of you well...like...
well, the bull-[censored] that it is!!

First of all, this is an epidemiological study, the favorite kind of
low-fat/antimeat/vegetarians, because you can twist statistics around
to say whatever you like. All those types of studies do, is to
suggest certain possibilities to be followed up by clinical studies.
And you will never find a clinical study that proves a link between
red meat and colon cancer... cos they're isn't one.

Of course, the people they studied, did any of them who "ate lots of
red meat", also smoke, drink a lot, not exercise, etc etc.? But of
course, they "statistically removed those factors", and singled out
ONLY THE RED MEAT! It is oh-so-obvious that they were looking to link
colon cancer and red meat before they even began the study. What a
surprise that they found a link!

This was done by the WHO, who are 100% on board with the low-fat,
whole grains, fruits and veggies lower risk of (everything) and meat
is bad, you only need to eat 50 grams of protein a day... who does
that sound like?

I say eat your meat...leave the [censored] to the WHO!

If that's true than good on ya mate! Grass and natural feed has
several advantages both for the health of the cow and for those who eat
it. There's a long article about this on dr. mercola's website, i'll
see if i can dig up the link.

Basically, I did read this study, and what it points out to me, is that
cancer is REALLY caused, as far as food-oriented factors go, by 2
things:

- chronically elevated insulin levels
- imbalance of omega 3/omega 6 fatty acids

grain fed, feedlot beef are basically force-fed corn and other grain,
this aside from making them sick also yes increases the 'saturated' fat
in their flesh, which isn't a problem in and of itself in my opinion,
HOWEVER the problem is it is just another imbalanced source of omega
6/omega 3. We are meant to eat these in a 1:1 or 2:1 ratio, instead
most people consume about 40:1 in favor of omega 6. Bad stuff, it will
probably be decades before this becomes mainstream science though.

This is why fish eaters have less bowel cancer -- not because red meat
is bad in and of itself -- it most assuredly isn't -- but because fish
fat is balanced in Omega 3 fatty acids -- IF it isn't farm-raised on
grain too, as it often is these days!!

This is why you have to be intelligent to be healthy these days --
because it isn't easy! There is mountains of info on this in the
low-carb literature, such as The Protein Power books. NOt sure about
the Atkins books, I'll have a gander later and see if he talks about
it.

The long article about the factory-farmed cattle industry is here:
http://www.mercola.com/2002/apr/17/cattle1.htm

Yours in health, Gary