Breaking News on Food & Beverage Development - EuropeUS edition | Asian edition

Headlines > Science & Nutrition

Red and processed meats ‘confirmed’ to increase risk of bowel cancer: Report

6 commentsBy Nathan Gray , 23-May-2011
Last updated the 25-May-2011 at 15:43 GMT

A new report from the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) recommends limiting red meat consumption and completely avoiding processed meats, and 'confirms' that red and processed meats increase risk of bowel cancer.

The report, referred to by the WCRF as “the most authoritative ever report on bowel cancer risk”, examined the links between bowel cancer risk and diet, physical activity and weight, concluding that intake of red meats should be limited to 500 grams per week, whilst processed meats should be avoided altogether.

“Our review has found strong evidence that many cases of bowel cancer are not inevitable and that people can significantly reduce their risk by making changes to their diet and lifestyle,” said Professor Alan Jackson, chair of the WCRF Expert Panel.

“On meat, the clear message that comes out of our report is that red and processed meat increase risk of bowel cancer and that people who want to reduce their risk should consider cutting down the amount they eat,” he added.

Red meat and cancer

Lots of attention – and headlines – have been dedicated to the health risks said to be associated with consumption of red meat.

High consumption has been associated with many poor health outcomes , including diabetes , cardiovascular disease and several types of cancer (including lung and colorectal , prostate , and bladder )

In 2007 the World Cancer Research Fund published a report that directly linked diet to cancer, reporting that red and processed meats posing particular risks. However, analysis of data from over a half million people in Europe, as part of the EPIC study, recently found no association between dietary intakes of red meat and the risk of bladder cancer (EPIC study previously reported here ).

The new WCRF report is part of its Continuous Update Project (CUP), which aims to update previous advice in reports based on new evidence. The findings are based on a systematic review of the evidence carried out by WCRF/AICR-funded scientists at Imperial College London. They added 263 new papers on bowel cancer to the 749 that were analysed as part of the 2007 Report.

Meat benefits

The report follows recently published research from the British Nutrition Foundation which considered the nutritional value of meat, and its contribution to intakes of essential nutrients. The review looked at data on current red meat consumption in the UK and the contribution this makes to nutrient intakes,highlighting the nutritional benefits of eating red meats in moderation. (Nutrition Bulletin, Vol 36, Issue 1, Pages 34–77, March 2011).

Dr Laura Wyness, senior nutrition scientist with the BNF, told FoodNavigator that their review “concluded that moderate intakes of lean red meat can play an important part in a healthy balanced diet.

“Meat contributes protein, unsaturated fatty acids including omega 3s and micronutrients such as iron, zinc, selenium, vitamin D and vitamins B3 and B12. Some of these are already in short supply in the diets of some sections of the population,” she said.

However, the report also went on to state that, in line with current dietary advice, the average intakes of red and processed meat should not rise.

Report details

The WCRF/AICR said recommended that people “limit consumption to 500g (cooked weight) of red meat a week … and avoid processed meat.”

The advice was given after the reporting panel “confirmed that there is convincing evidence that both red and processed meat increase bowel cancer risk.” They added that consumption of an extra 100 grams of red meat per day could increase the bowel cancer risk by 17 per cent.

The review panel has also reassessed its view on the protective role of fibre, adding that the protection against bowel cancer afforded by eating foods containing fibre, such as wholegrains, pulses, fruit and vegetables is now “convincing”.

The panel also concluded that milk, garlic, and dietary supplements containing calcium, “probably” reduce the risk of developing bowel cancer.

They said that the conclusions on fibre were made after adding seven more studies to the existing eight from the 2007 Report. The result was that the evidence “became much more consistent.”

“There has been a lot of debate over the last few years about the strength of evidence that red and processed meat increase risk of cancer. We hope our review can help give clarity to those people who are still confused about the strength of the evidence,” said Prof. Jackson.

6 comments (Comments are now closed)

meat source

Unfortunately there seems to be no control for the source of the meat. Meat from factory farms and confined feeding operations is dramatically different in nutrient profile than free range or wild meat. Thus all sources of meat are lumped together in this "probability" and it erroneously turns consumers away from healthy meat consumption. The study also failed to control for processed meat with and without nitrates which alone have been implicated in cancer. Lots of ambiguity here...

Report abuse

Posted by marco aurilio
06 June 2011 | 15h31

Probable or convincing?

I find it strange that, in February this year, another 'authoritative' report, this time by the UK's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), described the evidence linking red meat with bowel cancer as 'probable'. Indeed, at the time, SACN said that: "high intakes of red and processed meat probably increase
colorectal cancer risk and a reduction in intakes would probably decrease risk. (However, we) were unable to quantify the amount of red and processed meat that may be associated with increased colorectal cancer risk due to the limitations and inconsistencies in the data".
What amazing advances in science have occured in the last 3 months to upgrade the threat to 'convincing' and to impose a maximum of 500g/week with a ban on processed meats? I suspect none, suggesting that a certain amount of subjectivity is at work here. Interestingly, Professor Alan Jackson was involved in both reports.

Report abuse

Posted by Dr Carrie Ruxton
28 May 2011 | 11h58

Defining "Processed Meat"

Thank you for your comments requesting clarification on the term 'processed meat'.

According to WCRF report, a processed meat is any meat preserved by smoking, curing, salting, or through addition of preservatives.

Examples include: ham, bacon, pastrami and salami, as well as hot dogs and some sausages.

However, they said that hamburgers and minced meats only count as processed meat if they have been preserved with salt or chemical additives.

Kind regards,

Nathan Gray

Report abuse

Posted by Nathan Gray
27 May 2011 | 02h06

Read all comments (6)

Related products

On demand Supplier Webinars

Colouring Foods: Market trends and technical challenges
DIANA, FOOD DIVISION
All supplier webinars