Cape Town - The Cancer Association of South Africa has welcomed new research linking the consumption of red meat and processed meat to cancer – placing some of the cured meats in the same category as smoking, alcohol and asbestos.
Professor Michael Herbst, head of health and an activist at the association, said: “We are not surprised by the new evidence. We have for many years been advocating for the reduction of red meat intake because of the very same reason. We’ve been alert about the cancer risk posed by consumption of processed meats.
“There is enough evidence showing that some of the processes that processed meats go through, such as fermenting and chemicals used, including nitrates, do pose a cancer risk.”
But the food and meat industry was cautious about the research.
The Red Meat Producers Association said red meat in South Africa was “eaten in moderation” by many, and was therefore unlikely to cause cancer.
This week the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research (IARC) on Cancer classified processed meats – such as bacon, ham and sausages – in the category of group 1 carcinogens due to its causal link with colorectal or colon cancer.
This category is used when there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans. The evaluation is usually based on epidemiological studies showing development of cancer in exposed humans.
The agency placed red meat in group 2A, meaning that it was “probably carcinogenic to humans”. The study linked eating red meat to pancreatic and pancreatic cancer.
The experts – who analysed more than 800 studies that investigated the association of different cancers with the consumption of red meat or processed meat over the past 20 years – concluded that each 50g portion of processed meat eaten on a daily basis increased the risk of colon cancer by 18 percent.
The consumption of meat varied greatly between countries, from a few percent up to 100 percent of people eating red meat, depending on the country.
Dr Kurt Straif, one of the researchers and head of International Agency for Research on Cancer, said while the risk of individuals developing colon cancer because of their consumption of processed meat remained small, this risk increased with the amount of meat consumed.
“In view of the large number of people who consume processed meat, the global impact on cancer incidence is of public health importance,” said Straif.
Researchers said the new findings supported the current public health recommendations to limit intake of meat.
Dr Christopher Wild, one of the researchers, said while red meat had nutritional value, “these results are important in enabling governments and international regulatory agencies to conduct risk assessments in order to balance the risks and benefits of eating red meat and processed meat and to provide the best possible dietary recommendations”.
Gerhard Schutter, chief executive of the Red Meat Producers Association said while he didn’t dispute the research, it was important to note that South Africans didn’t eat as much red meat as others in rich countries who were included in the study.
“Unlike many First World countries that have unrestricted access to red meat because of affordability, the situation in South Africa is very different with many consuming far less meat than the meat eaten in those richer countries,” he said.
Professor Hettie Schönfeldt, from the Institute of Food, Nutrition and Well-being at the University of Pretoria, said the research “isn’t saying that eating red and processed meat as part of a balanced diet causes cancer”.
“No single food causes cancer. Nor is it saying it’s as dangerous as smoking. The IARC itself has said that the risk from processed meat and red meat remains small. The IARC represents the opinion of a selected group of scientists. Moreover, it conducts hazard analysis, not risk assessments. This distinction is important. It means they consider whether meat at some level, under some circumstance, could be a hazard,” she said.
Cape Argus