Scientific paper getting me worked up

(Lizzy Benton) #1

Hi dear fellow meat eater

Hi dear fellow meat eaters. This is my first post having been a lurker for a few weeks now. My husband is a psoriatic arthritis sufferer and it has been a long road via prednisone and anti malarial meds to finally being med free 3 days (I know, early days).
He(we) have been 99%carnivore for couple of months and I am convinced that the diet has been responsible for his final progression.
Today, i came across a paper from my twitter feed which had my heart sinking immediately.

I wondered if there are any scientifically qualified/well read people on here who could help me understand how big a risk this is and how worried I should be for the longterm effects of eating mammals on cancer. I know this has been a hotly contested topic but so far i have not come across a plausible cause. This is the first. Anyone?

(Chris) #2

Mice, first of all. To me that’s a confounding factor, you can only extrapolate to humans to a degree.

There is a long-standing epidemiological link between the consumption of red meat (beef, pork, and lamb) and the incidence of carcinomas, atherosclerosis, type 2 diabetes, and all-cause mortality (1⇓⇓–4). Although such diseases have multifactorial origins, all are aggravated by chronic inflammation (5, 6). Red meat-rich diets also correlate with circulating markers of inflammation and endothelial dysfunction (7). Here, we focus on red meat-related risk of carcinomas (further citations regarding the association are provided in Table S1).

Uh huh. Zero of these studies referenced were done on carnivorous humans. Typically red meat eaters are the type that ignore doctor’s advice. They’re eating more breads, more processed foods, more sweets, more plant oils than a healthy person. All of those things cause systemic inflammation, which this study claims is one of the culprits.

Eat an all meat diet for 6 months and have your inflammation tested. Proof may be in the pudding.

Cmah −/− mice were fed Neu5Gc-rich or control diets for 12 wk and then injected with varying amounts of control or immune sera calculated to achieve levels of anti-Neu5Gc antibodies in the range found in humans (34). As shown in Fig. 2 A , evidence of systemic inflammation (elevated levels of peritoneal fluid IL-6 and serum acute-phase proteins, serum amyloid A protein, and haptoglobin) was seen only with the combination of dietary Neu5Gc plus infusion of anti-Neu5Gc antisera, and not with control combinations. Furthermore, the levels of inflammatory markers showed a dose dependency with the amount of antibody injected (Fig. 2 B ). Similar studies were not done in Cmah +/+ mice, because high levels of endogenous Neu5Gc would neutralize any transferred antibodies (24).

Very unnatural methods being used to try to simulate a result. This is called fudging the numbers. Also known as “bullshit”.

At the end of the day, these epidemiological mouse studies have very little value. Too much has to be adjusted for, or too many assumption have to be made. They have to shape the study to try to get the result they are trying to achieve.

All in all, I wouldn’t sweat it, it’s meaningless at its core.

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #3

Chris pretty well summed it up. They observed this effect in mice, and they admit they have no idea whether there’s anything at all similar going on in human beings. Definitely not time to worry yet.

Georgia Ede has a lively lecture debunking the recent WHO study claiming that red meat causes cancer:

(Todd Allen) #4

Ever watched mice on a big game hunt? I doubt mice following their ancestral paleo diet eat a lot of red meat.

Even funnier, they didn’t feed the mice red meat in this study. They fed them “soy based chow”, also unlikely to be a natural food of mice, with artificially manipulated Neu5Gc levels, and then jump to the conclusion that red meat may cause inflammation and cancer in people because mice eating soy chow with lots of added Neu5Gc get inflammation and cancer.

(Lizzy Benton) #5

I can see all of that. Thanks for your responses.

Watchful waiting…or possibly getting those Anti-Neu5Gc Antibodies tested?

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #6

I suspect that if red meat really did cause cancer, someone would have noticed at some point during the last 2,000,000 years . . . just saying.

(Brian) #7

I’m more of the opinion that how red meat is prepared can affect just how good it is or isn’t for you. Burning it to a crisp isn’t such a good thing. Lots of bad stuff happens when we burn the bejeebers out of it. But to be fair, you get lots of bad stuff burning the bejeebers out of vegetables, too.

These “scientific papers” get a little ridiculous after a while. And the headlines that recycle totally unsupported stuff just get stupid after a while. I guess people think that if they say something long enough, eventually the masses will believe it’s true. UUGGHHH!!!

(KetoQ) #8

Lizzy –

First, it sounds like a carnivorous diet is working for you and your husband. It can be a healthy and beneficial way of eating for some people.

Whatever we consume, whether it be red meat, green vegetables, alcohol, sugar, packaged and processed foods – we may be consuming things that may have a negative effect.

You have to determine for yourself if the benefits outweigh the risks.

This study, and others, essentially claim that Neu5Gc can be a cancer cell marker, as well as a source of chronic inflammation – and that it is incorporated into human tissue via consumption of red meats.

I’ll take their word for it. But I don’t think that is what will give me cancer if I ever get it. I believe I am further ahead health wise, and can reduce cancer and heart risk, eating low carb.

There are certainly a lot of other things in our modern world that are carcinogenic.

https://www.naturallivingideas.com/15-every-day-things-that-increase-your-cancer-risk/

#9

:rofl::rofl:Very witty! Cracked me up!!!

(Ken) #10

It’s all within the context of a Carb based diet. Some people can’t see the Forest for the Trees.

(Banting & Yudkin & Atkins & Eadeses & Cordain & Taubes & Volek & Naiman & Bikman ) #11

Most vegetables need to be heated to 180F before any actual breakdown of their structure. Most red meat is eaten at 130-140 IT when grilled, with smoked meats taken to 200* or so.

HCAs are perhaps overstated as a problem with red meat, but can be easily mitigated with marinades.

(Brian) #12

I think you’re right, but I also think that the nasties from severe overburning are where some people try to hang their hat when saying that “red meat causes cancer”.

FWIW, I think I do the bulk of my meat in the sous vide anymore. Sometimes, it doesn’t even get a browning sear. Marinades are something I would like to explore a little more, though, maybe I can add some more depth of flavors. :slight_smile:

(Banting & Yudkin & Atkins & Eadeses & Cordain & Taubes & Volek & Naiman & Bikman ) #13

I do a lot of sous vide, though less in the summer, as I like to cook with my smoker more (and I do some smoker/sous vide synergy).

A simple anti-HCA marinade would be olive oil. I wouldn’t sous vide in olive oil, though. can go funky. I prefer to SV proteins naked, or with some salt. Anti-HCA marinade studies:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS782US782&um=1&ie=UTF-8&lr&q=related:EaDoz7iymVbZiM:scholar.google.com/

There’s a ton of research, and nearly everything that has no sugar works some, while some things work better. .

(Cathrine Helle) #14

I feel like these kind of “studies” pop up CONSTANTLY :frowning: Even though I don’t care - I’ll eat what makes me healthy regardless of what they say - but it forms public opinion. It scares people. Why are there no such “studies” pushed on veganism? Because it’s somehow more noble than eating meat? There’s nothing noble or selfless about malnourishing your body, and there’s nothing wrong with a predator eating meat!

(You've tried everything else; why not try bacon?) #15

What you and your wife do in the privacy of your home is none of our business! :rofl::rofl::rofl: