Sausages, ham cause cancer, red meat 'probably' too: agency (Update)

red meat
An uncooked rib roast. Credit: Michael C. Berch/Wikipedia
Sausages, ham and other processed meats cause bowel cancer, and red meat "probably" does too, a UN agency warned Monday, in a potentially heavy blow for the fast-growing livestock industry.

A review of 800 studies from around the world found "sufficient evidence in humans that the consumption of processed meat causes colorectal cancer," said the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).

The finding, it added, supports "recommendations to limit intake of meat"—particularly in processed forms.

The category includes meat that has been salted, cured, fermented or smoked—hot dogs, sausages, corned beef, dried meat like beef jerky or South African biltong, canned meat or meat-based sauces.

For every 50 grammes (1.8 ounces) of meat eaten on a daily basis, the population-wide risk of developing colon cancer was 18 percent higher, said the agency.

This meant enlarging the group of people likely to develop bowel cancer in their lifetime from six to seven out of every 100 who eat a three-rasher bacon sandwich every single day, explained statistician David Spiegelhalter of Cambridge University, who was not involved in the study.

The IARC agreed the cancer risk was statistically "small", but "increases with the amount of meat consumed."

For unprocessed red meat—beef, veal, pork, lamb, mutton, horse or goat, the review found "strong" evidence of a link, but not convincing enough to place it in the group of confirmed cancer-causing agents which includes tobacco smoke, asbestos, and now also salami.

The agency cited research attributing about 34,000 cancer deaths per year worldwide to diets high in processed meat.

This was dwarfed by the estimated one million cancer deaths attributed to tobacco smoking, 600,000 to alcohol use, and more than 200,000 to air pollution every year, said the agency.

The IARC said its data did "not permit" the determination of a safe meat quota.

'Tortured data'

"It is not yet fully understood" how cancer risk was increased, the agency added—speculating about the potential role of chemicals that form during meat processing or cooking.

Meat producers slammed the report, as independent experts urged caution in interpreting the numbers.

Read: Should I stop eating meat? No need, experts say

The North American Meat Institute (NAMI) said the IARC "tortured the data to ensure a specific outcome".

NAMI vice president Betsy Booren pointed to the high consumption of processed meats like salami and ham as part of the Mediterranean diet, yet "people in countries where the Mediterranean diet is followed, like Spain, Italy and France, have some of the longest lifespans in the world and excellent health."

British nutrition expert Elisabeth Lund said: "Very few people in Europe eat sufficient meat to fall into the high meat consumption category," and stressed it remained a crucial source of iron and zinc.

Ian Johnson, a Britain-based nutrition researcher, added that "there is little or no evidence that vegetarians in the UK have a lower risk of bowel cancer than meat-eaters."

The IARC's cancer warning is the latest on a long list of troubles for the meat industry: from salmonella and "mad cow" scares, to dietary fat blamed for disease-causing high cholesterol and livestock methane emissions contributing to global warming.

"How many more health scares must we endure before people realise that animal protein is not good for us?" asked Jasmijn de Boo of The Vegan Society, a group that advocates against human use of animal proteins.

According to another UN agency, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), meat consumption has doubled since 1980 in developing countries, as populations and income expand, while remaining static in the rich world.

By 2050, world meat production is projected to double, says the FAO website.

The report of the IARC, based in Lyon, France, was compiled by 22 experts from 10 countries.

Explore further

Eating red and processed meat—what do scientists say

More information: Abstract
Full Text (subscription or payment may be required)

© 2015 AFP

Citation: Sausages, ham cause cancer, red meat 'probably' too: agency (Update) (2015, October 26) retrieved 14 October 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Oct 26, 2015
Eating keeps you alive and slowly kills you at the same time.

Oct 26, 2015
I don't believe anything that comes out of the UN. They have no credibility whatsoever.

Oct 27, 2015
Oh no! It can't be! One statistical analysis shows that [insert food here] supports the hypothesis that it increases the likelihood of getting cancer! I can't believe it!

Nov 02, 2015
i am still pondering margarine or beef.....U.N. ???? hockey sticks anyone???

Nov 03, 2015
The new way to publish without actually doing any research is the meta analysis. Additionally, the meta analysis is only as good as the data interpreters. Like computers its garbage in GIGO.

We've known for decades of the link between nitrosamines. Eating meat in moderation itself - as human ancestors have done, as their primate relatives do - probably has little impact on longevity or disease. However, putting nitrates and who knows what else in meat concoctions and or cooking it at excessive temperatures has shown to be carcinogenic. My parents and grand parents spent their entire lives eating ham, bacon, fried everything in bacon grease and lived into their 90s. Additionally, limited current studies regarding vegan and vegetarian diets show "mild improvements primarily for men" - though "conclusive results" have yet to be demonstrated. (http://www.ncbi.n...C407313I

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more