High protein diets could be almost as big a cancer risk than smoking

  • eiresp

    Posts: 101

    Mar 06, 2014 10:31 AM GMT
    It´s early to draw any conclusion from this research but could this have a huge impact gym goers everywhere?


    http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/mar/04/animal-protein-diets-smoking-meat-eggs-dairy
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 06, 2014 10:56 AM GMT
    eiresp saidIt´s early to draw any conclusion from this research but could this have a huge impact gym goers everywhere?
    http://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/mar/04/animal-protein-diets-smoking-meat-eggs-dairy

    Fixed! Yeah, I read this news today also. I think it's too early to say anything. It's just one research.
  • Paperless_Pen

    Posts: 573

    Mar 06, 2014 11:22 AM GMT
    1. This does not apply for the average man.
    2. The average man does not go to the gym regularly
    3. What does the meat include, red meat? Bacon?
    4. High salt content may be to blame.

    http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/03March/Pages/high-protein-diet-may-be-harmful-for-middle-aged.aspx

    The media is sensationalising everything.

    We need protein.
    We don't need to smoke.
    This is preliminary so more studies are needed.
  • 1AlanZSky

    Posts: 1505

    Mar 06, 2014 11:26 AM GMT
    "There are several reasons to be cautious when interpreting the results of this study, including that the researchers did not take into account important factors such as physical activity in their study."

    It's probably RED MEAT and/or processed meat that is the main cause of cancer.
  • DiverScience

    Posts: 1426

    Mar 06, 2014 3:49 PM GMT
    Oy.

    Ok...

    1) The study did not study young men. Only 50-65 and 65+ so there's nothing in here about developing or young bodies.

    2) It's self reported with simply "meat" no segregation of kinds, or sources beyond plant/animal.

    3) They split out all-cause, cardio-vascular, cancer, and diabetes mortality numbers and still saw the cancer/diabetes results. Personally I'd like to see more granularity. Especially before we actually draw the connection to the all-cause mortality, which could be due to higher protein intake by people who go out and fall down mountains.

    4) Some of the sample sizes ended up rather small, and diet is not longitudinal.

    5) The authors make NO comparisons to other things, like smoking, and where the Guardian got the "more dangerous than smoking" bullshit, I have no idea. The stats don't support that at all.

    That said:

    This study tracks with much of the other epidemiological data we've got. But again, it's mostly for aging populations, not developing or maintaining ones.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 06, 2014 4:34 PM GMT
    Interesting topic, and thanks, Diver.

    Since joining this site (when I was 51 - now 5icon_cool.gifeverything we've read on here has been telling us to eat protein, massive amounts of it, bacon is good for you, eat lashings of butter, etc etc etc.
    There are so many variables to take into consideration in regards to the above. Some people have genetic propensities for
    increased LDL as an example, or diabetes, at any age and it's always worried me that those things are often not talked about or taken into consideration.

    ON another note, there are over 23,000 profiles on RJ that are 50 65 in age range.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 06, 2014 5:13 PM GMT
    A very detailed look at the study/problems and what it actually did:

    http://examine.com/blog/high-protein-diets-linked-to-cancer-should-you-be-concerned/

    e.g.
    A more accurate headline for this study would have been “High protein for those between 50 years to 65 years old who have poor diet and lifestyle habits may be associated with increased cancer risk.”
    and
    Many good controls were in place, but there are a few questions that readers may have that this study cannot address:

    “Does exercise exert a protective effect?” - this study did not measure exercise.
    “What about sources of protein?” - this study did not measure anything beyond whether it came from an animal or plant. Chicken breast is not comparable to processed bologna meat.
    “Do these results apply to persons younger than 50?” - we don’t know
    “What about eating your veggies and fruits?” - vegetable and fruit servings were not counted, just carbohydrates and fats.
    “What did they eat in place of protein in the low protein group?” - protein as a percent of caloric intake was assessed, but not levels of carbs or fats (beyond group averages before division into thirds for analysis), so we don’t know if the macronutrient used to replace protein had a protective effect or not.
    “Fast food versus home cooked?” - not measured.
    “Could a healthy lifestyle completely circumvent these effects?” - perhaps, but the study never looked into ‘a healthy lifestyle’ beyond macronutrients
    “What about weight loss?” - the study controlled for ‘attempted weight loss’, so it would be prudent to assume that no significant weight loss occurred in most subjects. Due to this, any questions pertaining to whether weight loss exerted a protective effect (usually does in other studies, if the weight loss occurs in obese persons) cannot be answered by this study
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1980

    Mar 06, 2014 6:20 PM GMT
    There have been numerous studies over the last two decades that show a strong link between meat consumption and cancer, primarily colon and prostate cancer. Hundreds of thousands of people have taken part in these studies and the evidence is pretty clear.
    http://www.pcrm.org/health/cancer-resources/diet-cancer/facts/meat-consumption-and-cancer-risk
    It's hardly a surprise, considering all the chemicals and antibiotics that the animals are pumped full of for months before they're slaughtered.
    (Not to mention all the additional artificial ingredients that are added to processed meats like cold cuts, sausage, etc.)
  • 1AlanZSky

    Posts: 1505

    Mar 06, 2014 6:56 PM GMT
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/03/06/cameron-diaz-diet-coke-more-unhealthy-than-smoking_n_4909622.html

    Smoking is better than drinking diet coke? An ex-smoker, she only changed because her parents said she set a bad example. Pffft.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 07, 2014 2:32 AM GMT
    http://examine.com/blog/high-protein-diets-linked-to-cancer-should-you-be-concerned/


    These "MEAT CAUSE CANCER STUDIES" are often Epidemiological - i.e. STUDIES WHICH YOU DO TO PROMPT MORE STUDIES. Not studies from which to draw conclusions.

    Case closed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 07, 2014 4:39 AM GMT
    NHANES is run by the CDC, case closed.