Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: High fat consumption and cancer

  1. #1
    CaveGirl's Avatar
    CaveGirl Guest


    Shop Now

    So I was sent this article by a friend (same friend I was expalining primal eating to a few days ago).

    Apparently by a link between high fat consumption (I think it said like 26% for women) and developing pancreatic cancer.

    I'm not sure how I feel about this. I know the primal diet talks up high fat, high protein living. Would it the the type of fats (CAFO vs. grassfed) that could cause this link?

    I ordered Mark's book last week and still waiting to get it so i don't know if this is already discussed (sorry if it is).

  2. #2


    From the same site -- increasingly I think that everything that is wrong with our diet has to do with n6/n3 ratios. Which supports the use of grassfed meats

    It's grandma, but you can call me sir.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2009


    What else is in the diets of those studied?

    Probably sugar and starch loaded with fat being the scape goat.

    Seeing AARP involved in the study taints it for me.

    I get a PETA vibe from it too for some reason.

    Thanks for posting!

  4. #4
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick Guest


    Pretty simple -- in a modern society, the more fat people eat, the more Omega-6 fats they tend to eat.

  5. #5
    egmutza's Avatar
    egmutza Guest


    This is an observational study, so it really doesn't tell us much of anything, other than that better, more controlled studies need to be done to see if the correlation actually means causation. Dr. Eades has an excellent post up about this subject:

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009


    JM posted about this study:

    "Since they blamed the fat consumption on the resulting cancer of the pancreas, one would assume their intake would exceed a majority–over 50 percent–of the total caloric intake. It was not even close. Dietary fat only comprised 20-40 percent of total calories and protein was less than 20 percent. That left upwards of 60 percent of total calories coming from carbohydrates, which this previous research out of Sweden in November 2006 found is directly tied to the development of pancreatic cancer, not dietary fat. Plus, the actual number of cases of pancreatic cancer in this study of a half million adults (1337) is just one-fourth of one percent of the entire study participants. It’s not like this is some sudden epidemic brought on by eating animal fat as the news headlines and the researchers would have you to believe."

  7. #7
    egmutza's Avatar
    egmutza Guest


    Here's another good post on this study from Tom Naughton:

    What we’re looking at is 1) a survey study with a low response rate that 2) required old people to accurately recall what they’d eaten in the past year (twice), which then provided data that is 3) almost certainly polluted by self-selection and confounding variables, and is 4) being analyzed by researchers who indicated from the beginning that their main concern is dietary fat, all for the purpose of 5) identifying associations, which don’t tell us very much anyway.

    Other than that, it’s a fine piece of work. Now go fry up some bacon, and don’t worry about your pancreas. But try to avoid throwing the pan out the window.

    Read the full post at

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Austin, TX Unfortunately.


    Learn More

    The average "journalist" is a stenographer. To make matters much worse, they are rarely trained in any matter of science or critical thinking. Increasingly, I read things that absolutely fail to ask the obvious questions, yet as our own non-journalist bloggers do so here!

    I remember old Mrs. Hemlepp teaching our junior HS newspaper class, Who, What, Why, When, and Where. I guess all those years in college journalism they no longer teach that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts