Bring home the bacon? Interpreting the latest cancer info

So does eating salted fish, drinking alcohol, breathing polluted air and being exposed to the Sunday.

“There is no sufficient evidence to condemn red meat”, Dr Nyongesa says.

The short answer is no, you’re probably fine. Is more research needed or does this support previous scientific inquiry? However, it does suggest that you should not make processed meats an everyday choice, especially if you have a family history of colorectal cancer.

“Scientists have been studying cancer and its causes for years”, President Pawelek said.

At this point, people have rolled their eyes and said, “if bacon is so bad, then I don’t want to live”.

Last week the World Health Organization released a report that argues that meat eating can cause cancer – that colon cancer and, possibly, stomach cancer are caused by processed meats, such as ham, sausages and bacon.

IARC is set to meet in 2016 to study the effects of coffee. Despite the huge amount of evidence to the contrary that has been published since, the agency has not changed its position.

Q: What’s the distinction between the classification that the IARC gave to processed meat vs. red meat?

I’ve written before about the dangers of making assumptions about causes from observational studies. My review of the literature and that of the experts at the IARC use the same data. We just reach different conclusions. A World Preservation Foundation study found that 75 per cent of common chronic illnesses could be prevented if people ate vegan foods instead of meat, eggs and dairy products. Not likely, but at least their claims of health risks arising from the consumption of meat have yet again been shown to be wildly exaggerated. What I can’t deny is that treating these as experts who cried wolf means that when they do identify a real source of danger, people like myself (and on this issue, there are many) will ignore those warnings, too.

Dietician Keri Glassman, who has gained recognition for her website “The Nutritious Life”, has continually emphasized her goal to see a focus on more “whole, real food and as little processed as possible, and should focus on more plant-based foods” in America. If true, this is not to be dismissed, but it’s a risk that can be managed.

The IARC delivers an opinion only on whether a link exists, not on how strong it is. IARC alone has it classified as “probably” causing cancer.

He also advised Nigerians to maintain a healthy lifestyle, including healthy diet and increased physical activities and to avoid sedentary lifestyle. What we really need to know is the absolute risk increase.

This isn’t to say that colorectal cancer is not something to be concerned about.

“Polyps are considered signs of colorectal cancer and it’s natural to have them when people get old”, said Jang Hong-seok, director of colorectal cancer center at Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital. It may be fluoride in toothpaste, butylated hydroxyl toluene (BHT) in cereal, caramel in colas, oxybenzone in sunscreens, arsenic in rice, estrogens in milk, Para Red in paprika, aspartame in diet drinks, glyphosate in cereals, titanium dioxide in mozzarella, bisphenol A in canned foods, red dye No. 2 in maraschino cherries, tertiary-butylhydroquinone in chicken nuggets, nanoparticles in sweets, chloropropanols in soy sauce, formaldehyde in pho noodle soup, dioxane in shampoos, chlorine in tap water, aflatoxins in peanut butter, PCBs in farmed salmon, microplastics in sea salt, pesticide residues on produce, acrylamide in French fries or most recently, processed meats. Specifically, she investigates how an individual’s own personality colors their perceptions of others’ personality and affect, and which traits promote accuracy over bias.

So even with daily consumption – an unusual situation – the increased risk of getting cancer is small. It took years before smoking risks finally gained widespread acceptance as more than just scare tactics, and that was when people in general were more inclined to trust doctors and health authorities – as opposed to today, when skepticism, mistrust and outright derision that often greets their findings.