Red Meat Tied to Pancreatic Cancer Risk

[Whoa182]

Will there ever be any evidence that convinces you that red meat isnt all that healthy? *hides*


Red Meat Tied to Pancreatic Cancer Risk

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Jun 26 - A diet high in red meat, but not certain other animal products, appears to raise the chances of developing pancreatic cancer, Swedish researchers report in the June 1st issue of the International Journal of Cancer.

"Findings from our study," lead investigator Dr. Susanna C. Larsson told Reuters Health "suggest that high consumption of red meat is associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer."

Dr. Larsson of the Karolinska Institute, Stockholm and colleagues conducted a prospective population-based study of more than 61,000 women. In particular, the investigators were interested in the possible effects of meat, fish, poultry and egg consumption. In all, 172 incident cases of pancreatic cancer were found in more than 941,000 person-years of follow-up from 1987 through 2004

Long-term consumption of red meat was positively associated with the risk of pancreatic cancer, whereas long-term consumption of poultry was negatively associated with risk. For those with the highest versus those with the lowest red meat consumption, the hazard ratio for pancreatic cancer was 1.73. For poultry consumption, the corresponding ratio was 0.44.

There were no significant associations with consumption of processed meat, fish or eggs.

"These findings," Dr. Larsson concluded, "raise the possibility that individuals may lower their risk of pancreatic cancer by reducing red meat consumption."

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/537325

[kaypeeoh]

Heresy! Are you trying to get kicked off this website? You may as well have spit on Atkins grave. ;-)

Thanks for the report. It reinforces my belief that beef is bad.

[Turtle2003]

There were no significant associations with consumption of processed meat, fish or eggs

Hmm, a nice steak is bad, but I can eat all the bologna and hot dogs that I want. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. :p

[mike_d]

They didn't specify if the beef or pork was natural and organic-- not loaded with pesticides and GROWTH hormones. They need to narrow it down a bit.

[DietSka]

red meat was positively associated with the risk of pancreatic cancer, whereas long-term consumption of poultry was negatively associated with risk

Non LCers/regular people who are more health conscious eat chicken (and veggies and avoid junk food).
Non LCers/regular people who are less health conscious eat red meat (and white bread, potatoes and pie).
:rolleyes:

172 incident cases of pancreatic cancer were found in more than 941,000 person-years of follow-up from 1987 through 2004

Isn't that like a really really really small percentage?

Besides,

Red Meat - Study Finds No Association Between Diet and Pancreatic Cancer Among Men and Women

Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH)

BOSTON, April 4 (AScribe Newswire) -- Researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH), assessing dietary patterns among men and women and risk of pancreatic cancer, found no association with two wide-ranging dietary patterns and the risk of pancreatic cancer. The findings appear in the April 6, 2005 edition of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Dominique Michaud, assistant professor of epidemiology at HSPH and lead author of the study and colleagues, assessed the dietary patterns of nearly 125,000 participants who were enrolled in the Brigham and Women's Hospital-based Nurses Health Study (NHS) and the HSPH based Health Professionals Follow-up Study (HPFS). Analyzing detailed food frequency questionnaires sent to the participants every four years between 1984 (for NHS participants) and 1986 (for HPFS participants) and up to 2000, they identified two dietary patterns; the western diet, consisting of high consumption of red meat, processed meat, French fries, processed grains, sweets, desserts and sugared beverages and the prudent diet, consisting of high consumption of fruits, vegetables, fish, poultry, legumes and whole grains. During the span of the study 366 cases of pancreatic cancer were documented (185 men and 181 women).

The researchers found no strong association between the two dietary patterns and the risk of pancreatic cancer among the study participants, even when looking at lifestyle factors such as smoking and body mass index. Participants who were the strongest adherents to the prudent diet also had healthier lifestyle behaviors, such as not smoking, exercising more, taking multivitamins and drinking less alcohol compared to the participants in the study who were the strongest adherents of the western diet.

"Although we did not find any associations with two major dietary patterns, individual dietary components are still likely to play a role in the risk of pancreatic cancer," said Dominique Michaud. "We have previously shown that a high glycemic load and dietary sugar are related to an elevated risk of pancreatic cancer among women. More research needs to be done to examine individual dietary factors. Prevention is a priority in such a highly fatal disease. Both smoking and obesity increase pancreatic cancer risk and should be considered for prevention."

The research was funded by grants from Public Health Service and the National Cancer Institute.

- - - -

CONTACT: Kevin Myron, HSPH Media Relations, 617-432-3952, kmyron~hsph.harvard.edu

ABOUT HSPH: Harvard School of Public Health is dedicated to advancing the public's health through learning, discovery, and communication. More than 300 faculty members are engaged in teaching and training the 900-plus student body in a broad spectrum of disciplines crucial to the health and well being of individuals and populations around the world. Programs and projects range from the molecular biology of AIDS vaccines to the epidemiology of cancer; from risk analysis to violence prevention; from maternal and children's health to quality of care measurement; from health care management to international health and human rights. For more information on the school visit: www.hsph.harvard.edu

Media Contact: Kevin Myron, 617-432-3952, kmyron~hsph.harvard.edu

[MyJourney]

172 is 0.01% of 941,000

[ceberezin]

Large epidemiological studies that isolate a single variable out of a mass of data and claim causality from association are inherently unreliable. Especially since cancer is so multifactorial, it doesn't make sense to say of any one factor that this does that.

The fact that another epidemiological study found no correlation between diet and pancreatic cancer suggests that both studies are unreliable. As Feinman and Volek have pointed out, of all the studies that demonize red meat, not a single one accounts for carbohydrate content of the diet or insulin levels of the subjects.

So if you're out to demonize red meat, and all you've got is an epidemiological study, you're wasting our time.

[Whoa182]

Good point ceberezin.

When you can back up these studies with mechanistic links of how they can cause cancer, then case does become a bit stronger.

[HairOnFire]

Large epidemiological studies that isolate a single variable out of a mass of data and claim causality from association are inherently unreliable. Especially since cancer is so multifactorial, it doesn't make sense to say of any one factor that this does that.

.....

So if you're out to demonize red meat, and all you've got is an epidemiological study, you're wasting our time.

Thank you for the clarification.

[mike_d]

Junk science, they didn't report the effect of tobacco smokers or even how the meat was cooked before it was consumed.However, in ever-smokers, preference for well-done red meat was associated with an 8.8-fold increased risk of cancer ...

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/10/12/1259

And ...People who ate the most red meat were more likely to have ever smoked than those who ate the least red meat. Smokers have increased risk for stomach cancer.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,186370,00.html?sPage=health.foxnews/cancer

[pbowers]

so traditional masai and inuit must be dropping like flies from pancreatic cancer, right?

notice how it's an association with a risk factor, not the disease itself? completely meaningless.

[Whoa182]

What masai life expectancy?

[Turtle2003]

I’m trying to keep an open mind on the subject of beef and its possible deleterious effects on our health, but I have this nagging feeling that the demonization of this particular meat, and of course saturated fat, is just the last remnant of the once grand ‘lipid hypothesis’ which to my mind at least now lies in tatters.

I can hear the experts thinking, “Well maybe all fat isn’t bad after all, and maybe it’s not so bad to eat chicken and fish, and yes, I suppose that nuts might even be considered good for you, but there is still beef, and beef is still evil. We’ll always have beef to kick around.”

As to these two studies, I liked the fact that the Harvard study grouped eating behaviors into patterns and compared those patterns, rather than trying to isolate one single factor and point to it as the cause of some disease or other. I’ve always been annoyed at those who point at someone who just ‘dined’ at McDonalds and reference only the beef, while ignoring the large fries, the apple pie, and the gigantic container of Coke that person also consumed.

Question:
The fact that another epidemiological study found no correlation between diet and pancreatic cancer suggests that both studies are unreliable.

How does this suggest that the Harvard study is unreliable, or are you just saying that we can’t trust either one because they arrived at different conclusions? One taints the other?

[Turtle2003]

What masai life expectancy?


The most recent life expectancy figures I found for Kenya point to a decline in recent years, down to 45 years. This includes not only the Masai, but the majority of the population, who subsist mainly on corn meal, cassava, yams, peanuts, beans, greens and whatever vegetables they can grow.

I found many articles on the web that mentioned the Masai and their low life expectancy and blamed it on their diet. Of course, they didn’t mention that the people living all around these nomadic herders also had a low life expectancy. Typical.

Over the years, I think that researchers who were trying to refute the lipid/cholesterol hypothesis used the Masai as examples mainly because their diet did not promote high cholesterol levels and heart disease, as the hypothesis predicted.

[pbowers]

What masai life expectancy?why would it matter? what we want to know is do many masai and inuit live to an age at which cancer strikes. life expectancy doesn't tell us that, because it factors in the high incidence of infant deaths (due to poorer postnatal care of less-developed peoples), thus bringing the average down without telling us anything about the majority who live into adulthood.

[kyrasdad]

When you can back up these studies with mechanistic links of how they can cause cancer, then case does become a bit stronger.

Relying on correlation to establish causation is the problem. It isn't that you can't do this at all, but on such massive studies it becomes particularly unreliable.

It is a bit absurd to demonize a whole food like red meat when there is processed junk sitting on grocery store shelves with "light" or "low fat" or "whole grain" or "organic" or "low carb" labels that are infinitely worse for human health and provide no nutritonal value. I don't discount the possibility that it is not as healthy a food as others, but I seriously doubt that that is the case. It's just counterintuitive to me.

Because I like red meat and eat it often, I'm hoping I am right. I just think that if it does have health consequences, there are many things we should be considering first that have more severe consequences, that are consumed more often, that are marketed to children, that are more universally agreed-upon as threats to public health.

[ceberezin]

The fact that another epidemiological study found no correlation between diet and pancreatic cancer suggests that both studies are unreliable.
I was really trying to highlight the unreliability of epidemiologocal studies that claim to show causality. The fact that this study claimed no causality makes it somewhat less suspect, in my my view, but food frequency questionnaires are not a reliable source of information.

[Turtle2003]

why would it matter? what we want to know is do many masai and inuit live to an age at which cancer strikes. life expectancy doesn't tell us that, because it factors in the high incidence of infant deaths (due to poorer postnatal care of less-developed peoples), thus bringing the average down without telling us anything about the majority who live into adulthood.

Excellent point.

[DietSka]

About the Masai. Incidentally, I've just finished reading an autobiographical book called The White Masai by Corinne Hofmann (huge hit in Europe). In 1986 this white, educated Swiss woman goes on holiday in Kenya and falls in love with a Masai and eventually moves there to be with him. In the bush. Yeah, she's a nutter, but that's another story. :)

He's as traditional/primitive as they came in 1986: wears body paint and jewellery, has his hair styled in a traditional fashion, wears nothing but a loin cloth (and a blanket when it's cold), carries his spears with him. The women in his village are bare-breasted (and pee standing up, unphased by the trickle down their legs). His village is somewhere deep in the bush and very hard to reach. They live in huts made of branches and use cow manure as mortar (it's something many cultures do/have done, apparently it works great!). The other Kenyans describe them as "savages". When they see a doll they think it's a dead baby. Speaking of babies, a woman with a newborn is described as carrying her naked baby around and when he pooped she just spit on his bum and rubbed it off. So truly truly primitive.

Physically, they are very tall and skinny. Elderly people are mentioned many times, they are very respected and get priority in everything.

What did they eat?

They would slaughter a goat and share it. The meat is boiled or fried and they eat lots of it. They could go a long time without eating (aided by chewing miraa, a plant with anorectic and caffeine-like effects). This plant is very popular throughout the book, they use it like we use alcohol socially.

When there are important celebrations they slaughter an ox. They kill the animals by suffocating them and when they're dead they cut the jugular and they drink the blood with relish. "It makes you strong."

The author once cooks spaghetti and the locals laugh "That's not food". When she pours tomato sauce one asks "Is that blood?" Another person who drops in thinks she's cooking "worms in blood".

Then they make tea. They don't mention what kind of tea it is, just that it's in powder form. And she says that he put sugar in the teapot, "not two or three tablespoons but a whole cupful! I am amazed and convinced that this tea is undrinkable. [...] Then I realize that this tea actually substitutes for a meal." Tea and teahouses are very popular and mentioned throughout the book. For weddings and other ceremonies they would get whole sacks of sugar, twice in the book she talks about 100kg of sugar for a wedding.

Milk is also popular and a source of income.

No eating with your left hand. :)

Rice. Corn meal. Sugar. Sugar. Sugar. Sugar is mentioned a LOT often than meat and it's not the author's bias.

She thinks to open up a shop to cater to all the people in the region. She sells the basics like food and detergent, etc. In the first day she sells 600kg of cornmeal and 200kg of sugar. The second day she sells 8 sacks of cornmeal and 300kg of sugar.

Fruits and veggies are barely mentioned. The traditional way of life appears to have been very simple, the men took care of the animals and the women took care of the children. No gathering is mentioned.

So there. I don't think the Masai nowadays are a good example for anything. They do offer clues as to how life used to be for them (i.e. women not gathering) but other than that...

[pbowers]

interesting stuff, dietska. that book will definitely go on my list (of books i plan to read, but never get around to).

even with all the sugar that seems to have entered into their diets, if we find that the masai don't suffer from pancreatic cancer (or any others associated with meat), we could surely rule it out as the cause.