Meats differ in effect on colon cancer risk

[doreen T]

Meats differ in effect on colon cancer risk

Last Updated: 2005-12-28 8:53:13 -0400

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - People who eat a lot of processed meats may have a higher risk of developing pre-cancerous growths -- polyps -- in the colon, while the opposite may be true for fans of chicken, a new study suggests.

Researchers found that among 1,520 adults with a history of colon polyps, those who ate a diet heavy in processed meats had a higher risk of polyp recurrence than those with the lowest intake. On the other hand, patients who favored chicken had a lesser risk of new polyps than those who ate the least.

Colon polyps are growths that, while usually benign, can become cancerous. Patients in the current study had all had polyps removed and were then followed for 4 years to detect any recurrences.

Overall, the one-quarter of patients with the highest intake of processed meat were 75 percent more likely to develop an advanced polyp compared with the one-quarter of patients who ate the least processed meat, the researchers found.

In contrast, those with the highest chicken intake were 39 percent less likely than those who ate the least to develop an advanced polyp.

"Our data indicate that intake of specific meats may have different effects on risk," the study authors state in the American Journal of Gastroenterology.

Dr. Douglas J. Robertson of the VA Medical Center in White River Junction, Vermont, led the study.

A number of studies have linked heavy consumption of red or processed meats to a higher risk of colon cancer, while diets high in fiber from fruits, vegetables and whole grains have been tied to a lower risk of the disease.

But not all studies have found these relationships. And in the current study, high fiber intake was not clearly tied to the overall risk of polyp recurrence.

Patients who ate the most fruit, vegetables and whole grains were, however, less likely to develop polyps in the upper part of the colon. Red meat, meanwhile, was not linked to polyp risk.

Despite that latter finding, the overall results are in line with advice to eat red and processed meats sparingly, Robertson and his colleagues write.

In theory, they note, processed meats could contribute to the development of colon cancer because processing may increase levels of potentially cancer-promoting substances called N-nitroso compounds.

SOURCE: American Journal of Gastroenterology, December 2005.


http://story.news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051228/hl_nm/meats_risk_dc

[Nancy LC]

Hmmm... I wonder what category chicken and turkey sausage falls into. :)

[TheCaveman]

OUCH! Nitrite apologists take another hit!

Red meat, meanwhile, was not linked to polyp risk.

Despite that latter finding, the overall results are in line with advice to eat red and processed meats sparingly, Robertson and his colleagues write.


?

[CindySue48]

Quote:
Red meat, meanwhile, was not linked to polyp risk.

Despite that latter finding, the overall results are in line with advice to eat red and processed meats sparingly, Robertson and his colleagues write.


?[/SIZE] They have been telling us for too long to not eat red meat! They can't change now!!!!!

A number of studies have linked heavy consumption of red or processed meats to a higher risk of colon cancer, while diets high in fiber from fruits, vegetables and whole grains have been tied to a lower risk of the disease. Reasearch that link red meat are invalid because they don't differentiate between red and processed......and recent research shows that fiber is NO protection against colon cancer.

[gryfonclaw]

OUCH! Nitrite apologists take another hit!


?


Yeah, you beat me to the punch on that one.

[~Michelle~]

Study: Vitamin D Halves Colon Cancer Risk

Taking 1000 IUs of vitamin D every day can cut the risk of breast,
colon and ovarian cancer by up to 50 percent, according to a new
study by top University of California experts who say Americans are
getting far too little of the powerful nutrient.

Dr. Cedric Garland, one of the top cancer epidemiologists in the
country, headed a review and analysis of nearly every scientific
study involving vitamin D and cancer since 1966. In all, 63 studies
were reviewed.
And the results were overwhelming: vitamin D appeared to be
instrumental in protecting against breast, colon and ovarian cancer.
It was most protective against colon cancer - cutting the risk by 50
percent. It reduced risks of ovarian and breast cancers by roughly 30
percent.
The study also found that most people don't get nearly enough vitamin
D. Americans average around 320 IUs daily. Sunlight stimulates the
body to produce vitamin D and the experts believe the growing vitamin
D deficit may be due to people's increased fears of getting too much
sunshine.
The researchers also found that people living in the northeastern
U.S., where it is less sunny, were more likely to be deficient in
vitamin D - and had higher rates of cancer.

African-Americans with darker skin pigmentation were also more likely
to be deficient in vitamin D - and they too had higher cancer rates.
The researchers say their finding could explain why black Americans
die sooner from cancer than whites, even after allowing for
differences in income and access to care.
"The high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency combined with the
discovery of increased risks of certain types of cancer in those who
are deficient, suggest that vitamin D deficiency may account for
several thousand premature deaths from colon, breast, ovarian and
other cancers annually," Dr. Garland wrote.
"A preponderance of evidence from the best observational studies ...
has led to the conclusion that public health action is needed.
Primary prevention of these cancers has been largely neglected, but
we now have proof that the incidence of colon, breast and ovarian
cancer can be reduced dramatically by increasing the public's intake
of vitamin D."
He says getting enough vitamin D from diet would be difficult - and
getting more from sunlight would increase the risk of skin cancer.

Can Pheromones Fix Your Relationship?
Instead, Dr. Garland favors supplementation. "The easiest and most
reliable way of getting the appropriate amount is from food and a
daily supplement," they say.
The 1000 IUs daily dose they propose is two-and-a-half times the U.S.
recommended daily allowance. The upper limit for safe intake is 2,000
IUs.