I was also concerned about this.
Red meat raises red flags | Harvard Gazette
Same thing, I believe.
Just seen this on the bbc...
BBC News - Red meat increases death, cancer and heart risk, says study
What I find interesting with those two links is that they don't mention that the study was funded by the World Cancer Research fund, as mentioned in this link: Eating red meat regularly 'dramatically increases the risk of death from heart disease' | Mail Online
I've struggled to find out where their funding actually comes from, but they have form when it comes to providing biased findings:
Flabby claims about food and cancer | Basham and Luik | spiked
Here are some interesting quotes from the link:
Crucially, they almost exclusively reference epidemiological studies, which inherently cannot establish that being fat or that eating red meat gives you cancer, as that’s not what this type of study does. Instead, such studies look for associations between various factors and the risk of disease. For example, this report was interested in whether the variation in people’s weights or their diets were correlated with the development of cancer. But the very nature of epidemiological studies means that the margin of error arising from the nature of the data almost invariably exceeds the supposed relationships that the study has found.Is the second truth in the World Cancer Research Fund’s report – that eating certain foods increases our risk for cancer - really true? Of the 17 cancers discussed in the report, virtually all have statistically non-significant associations with every type of food, which means that they provide no evidence of a link between a particular food and a particular cancer.
For example, of the 17 studies cited which assessed the link between colon cancer and processed meat, 13 are not statistically significant. Despite those scary headlines about red meat, the report concludes that ‘there is limited evidence…suggesting that red meat is a cause of oesophageal cancer’. Again, ‘there is limited, inconsistent evidence…that grilled…or barbecued animal foods are causes of stomach cancer’. And ‘there is limited evidence suggesting that processed meat is a cause of stomach cancer’. Given the limited nature of this evidence, it is difficult to see how the report authors justified the advice to avoid red and processed meat.
and more recently.....Consider, for example, the American Cancer Society’s 2001 study of diet and stomach cancer, which looked at 436,000 men and women and found no increased risk of stomach cancer associated with eating processed meats. What that study did find, however, was an increased risk of stomach cancer with women who consumed more vegetables!
The latest BS about the Big C | Rob Lyons | spiked
There are two different problems here. The first is that the correlation between, for example, eating red meat and cancer may be so weak that we can’t really be sure that the correlation is real. It may be due to the limitations of the study’s methods. Secondly, even if the correlation is real - that people who eat red meat are more likely to get cancer - that doesn’t mean that red meat causes cancer. There may be other things about people who like red meat that mean they are more likely to get cancer. These factors may not be obvious. That’s also why the US National Cancer Institute noted in 1994, ‘in epidemiological research, [increases in risk of less than 100 per cent] are considered small and are usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to chance, statistical bias, or the effects of confounding factors that are sometimes not evident.’Apparently none of these riders matter because the important thing is the headline: lifestyle causes cancer. It reflects a mindset among researchers, medics, politicians and campaigners that assumes that it is their job to tell us how to live our lives.
There's much more in the links that I didn't quote - they are worth a read if the issue concerns you.
My website: http://www.shoppinganywhere.net/
I'm listening to Carbohydrates Can Kill, and the Dr being interviewed, and he mentioned metabolism derangement is a catalyst for cancer (like hyperglycemia).
My thoughts here: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread50585.html
Re-focusing on the Primal Lifestyle in 2012!
Starting: 221.0lb, 29.5% BF (1/9/2012)
Latest: 208.9, 26.1% BF (3/19/2012)
My sorely neglected blog - http://ThatWriterBroad.com
I love articles like this- they keep the price of meat down.