Is red meat as dangerous as lead? 135



View Profile

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) will next month release updated lists of the substances that cause cancer and there’s one hell of bombshell that could ruin many summer barbies.

The IARC ranks substances (this is a broad term) in one of five groups. Group 1 is ‘carcinogenic to humans’; 2A is ‘probably carcinogenic’; 2B ‘possibly carcinogenic’; 3 ‘not classifiable’ and 4 ‘probably not carcinogenic’.

In October, reports say the IARC will add red meat to the 2B ‘possibly carcinogenic’ list, where it will join things like lead, marine fuel, the active ingredient in Roundup and the human papillomavirus, along with more than 250 other substances.

The 22-member IARC panel will meet in France to assess recently published studies that have implicated the consumption of red meat and bowel cancer risk; processed meats are also under fire.

Eating too much red meat has been linked to health problems including shorter lifespans, heart disease, and various kinds of cancer. In April 2014, the IARC cited studies linking red and processed meats to colorectal, esophageal, lung, and pancreatic cancer, and called determining the connection a “high priority.” Since then, the organisation has been collecting information to make their final determination.

It’s expected the IARC will recommend an enormous reduction in consumption of steak, lamb and sausages. The Daily Mail reports the IARC may be suggesting that eating any more than 300g a week could be a cancer risk. This is about the size of a large steak.

It’s worth noting that the IARC  has so far evaluated 982 substances – and found only one to be ‘probably not carcinogenic’.

Will this new recommendation make you reconsider your red meat intake? 

Starts at 60 Writers

The Starts at 60 writers team seek out interesting topics and write them especially for you.

  1. So that says a lot about what there agenda is, if the have rated over 900 substances and only once has been said not to be carcinageneic.

  2. Oh for heavens sake then in tens they will discover you should it some red meat braces something else will change over time that they do not know was helped by red meat. Remember save yourself do not eat butter eat plastic instead haha I mean Marg!

  3. I don’t have faith in the World Health Organisation, they tell us what we should be eating only to say several years later they got it WRONG, I don’t believe they really know what there’re talking about.

    2 REPLY
    • As each year passes, more scientific papers are published – some with new ideas, some refuting previous ideas. I just skim past them and stick to my own diet – lots of red meat!!!

  4. Rubbish! So many things are at sometime stated as bad for us only to later be told they are ok or even really good for us

  5. What about grass-fed beef? Any better? Jenny

    5 REPLY
    • Much better the feedlotters feed grain because the Japanese market wants it. No good for you though. LOL.

    • I know it’s better than corn-fed BUT is it better period? thanks, Jenny (p.s. neither cows nor people can digest corn)

    • Wonder why WHO who supposedly has the world’s good health(hahaha) and interest at heart hasn’t warned us not to eat GMO’s.
      Why? Probably because Monsanto pays them handsomely, and perhaps the cattle farmers don’t.
      A small farmer near Perth, who was established long before his neigbour who was conned and sucked in to growing patented GMO crops, lost his organic licence because some of Monsanto”s toxic GMO seed blew over into his property. (By the way, the small farmer can also be sued by Monsanto for having their patented seed on his property)
      The organic farmer lost his case, why? Because Monsanto send an entourage of legal eagles to help the neigbour fight his case in court and most likely filled the judge’s pocket with 30 pieces of silver or gold to rule against the organic farmer.
      That is our future, guys.
      Tell WHO where they can stick their their propaganda.
      So enjoy grass fed meat, eat organic and be healthy while we still can.

  6. It’s not red meat that is the problem it’s the crap that farmers are told they must inject/place in/on or feed the animals that cause the problems in humans/ I agree with Trish on the WHO and the media has to share some of the blame as well.

    2 REPLY
    • Yep i have seen the feedlotters rave on about grain fed beef and it is all being put down now and people want grass fed beef. All a matter of personal choice. All about money really.

    • and if you are going to get it you will get it no matter how much you walk or how much attention you pay to diet!

  7. I wonder how we, as meat eaters managed to make it this far ????

    3 REPLY
    • It is interesting to me though, ancient humans did have a very short life span, and they ate meat.

    • Humans had very short life spans right up till the beginning of the 20th century. That all changed as people worked out how the body worked, and Drs started learning how to treat patients. Also personal hygiene was deemed to be very important to stop the spread of disease etc. We have powered on since then and have doubled our life span. All the time eating red meat!!!!!!…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *