Colon cancer from meat consumption

[crisology]

In America, the second leading cause of death is colon cancer. Unprocessed meat intake is carcinogenic through numerous mechanisms of action, such as compromised gut microbiota, obesity, excess protein, excess fat, haem iron intake. Most cancers can be prevented through environmental factors, particularly abstaining from a diet that includes meat.

High protein/meat diets contribute to obesity. "[l]eucine-mediated mTORC1-S6K1-signaling plays an important role in adipogenesis, thus increasing the risk of obesity-mediated insulin resistance. (Muntoni, 2012)

Although there are more effective diet modifications to lose weight, restricting grain intake is one method that can result in some weight loss but intralumenal carcinogens are promoted when meat is not excluded from the diet. When subjects consumed less than 30 g. carbohydrates/day for nine weeks, their feces contained 1/4 of the ‘friendly’ bacteria or probiotics such as Bifidobacteria, Lactobacillus, etc., compared to the 'high carbohydrate dieters'. The reduced ratio of prebiotic consumption compromises gut health and increases susceptibility to colon cancer. (Duncan, 2007).

Additionally, there are other cancer protective mechanisms that can be obtained from plant (as opposed to meat) consumption. "Ingestion of fiber could modify carcinogenesis in the large bowel by a number of potential mechanisms. These mechanisms include binding to bile acids, increasing fecal water and possibly diluting carcinogens" according to The National Cancer Institute (2012, para 24).

The concentrated protein ratios within meat are beyond the amounts required for normal human growth and development and may also promote accelerate cell proliferation (tumor growth). (Campbell, 2007; Sharma, 2007)

Excessive fat content in meat has also been implicated in colon cancer pathogenesis through production of serum hormones. LNCaP cell (Aronson, 2010)

The type of iron in meat (haem) is absorbed without regulation and meat consumers are prone to iron overload. “Haem induces colonic hyperproliferation and hyperplasia by inhibiting the surface to crypt signalling of feedback inhibitors of proliferation” (O'Keefe, 2007)

References:

Aronson, W. J., Barnard, R. J., Freedland, S. J., Henning, S., Elashoff, D., Jardack, P. M., Cohen, P., Heber, D., Kobayashi, N.92010 (2010). Growth inhibitory effect of low fat diet on prostate cancer cells: results of a prospective, randomized dietary intervention trial in men with prostate cancer. J Urol. 183(1):345-50. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914662

Campbell, T. C. (2007). Dietary protein, growth factors, and cancer. Am J Clin Nutr vol. 85 no. 6 1667. Retrieved online from: http://www.ajcn.org/content/85/6/1667.full

Duncan S. H. Belenguer1, A., Holtrop, G., Johnstone, A. M. Flint1, H. J. and Lobley, G. E. (2007). Reduced dietary intake of carbohydrates by obese subjects results in decreased concentrations of butyrate and butyrate-producing bacteria in feces. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Vol 73, pg 1073-8. Retrieved online from: http://aem.asm.org/content/73/4/1073.full.pdf

Muntoni S, Mereu R, Atzori L, Mereu A, Galassi S, Corda S, Frongia P, Angius E, Pusceddu P, Contu P, Cucca F, Congia M, Muntoni S. (2012). High meat consumption is associated with type 1 diabetes mellitus in a Sardinian case-control study. Acta. Diabetol. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22391937

National Cancer Institute: PDQ® Colorectal Cancer Prevention. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Retrieved online August 18, 2012 from: http://cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/prevention/colorectal/HealthProfessional.

O'Keefe SJ, Chung D, Mahmoud N, Sepulveda AR, Manafe M, Arch J, Adada H, van der Merwe T. J Nutr. 2007 Jan;137(1 Suppl):175S-182S. Why do African Americans get more colon cancer than Native Africans? Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17182822

Sharma, S., O'Keefe, S. J. (2007). Environmental influences on the high mortality from colorectal cancer in African Americans. Postgrad Med J. 83(983):583-9. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17823224

[arc...@scfas.com]

It is not the meat use per sey but the reduction in the fiber that supports
the good gut bacteria. The fix is to make sure ample amounts of fiber are
included in the diet. For example, chilli with meat and beans has both. A
whole grain sandwich with meat has both. That is the take away message of
the research offered.

[crisology]

On Monday, August 20, 2012 9:38:15 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> It is not the meat use per sey but the reduction in the fiber that supports
>
> the good gut bacteria.

"Inflammation, high fat, high red meat and low fiber consumption have for long been known as the most important etiological factors of sporadic colorectal cancers (CRC)." (Tudek, 2012).

It may be true that the lack of fiber in meat is the biggest contributing cause to colon cancer incidences.

"It has been estimated that 25%-35% of colon adenoma risk could be avoidable by modification of dietary and life-style habits... After adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, physical activity, education, and alcohol and meat consumption, total fiber intake was inversely associated with the risk of colon polyps (odds ratio [OR] for highest vs lowest quartile = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-0.99). This association showed a dose-response effect (p = .04)" (Tantamango , 2011).

But meat intake (specifically) is independently associated with colon cancer risk: "Telomere length decreased in proportion to red meat content of the diet. A similar trend was observed in the white meat group" (O'Callaghan, 2012).

> The fix is to make sure ample amounts of fiber are
>
> included in the diet.

This isn't what the evidence indicates. Here's some data of biomarkers reflecting different effects of red meat as opposed to white meat intake and irregardless of fiber intake:

"[W]e demonstrated that dietary beef causes greater colonic DNA strand breakage than equivalent levels of chicken in rats and that resistant starch (RS) as 20% high amylose maize starch (HAMS) attenuated the damage. From that study, we now report measures of circulating factors that may influence CRC initiation or progression including malondialdehyde (MDA), leptin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), insulin, matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2), tissue inhibitor of MMP-2 (TIMP-2), interleukins (IL), and short chain fatty acids. MDA levels were increased by beef diets relative to the chicken diets. Leptin concentrations, which were lower for chicken than beef at the 35% level in the absence of HAMS, were lowered by HAMS. Higher dietary chicken (but not beef) increased IGF-I irrespective of HAMS feeding" (Toden, 2010).

So, according to the evidence and different mechanisms of action, there are indeed independent risk factors for colon cancer among those who consume meat and/or low fiber diets and between red meat and white meat intake. Digestion matters.

References:

O'Callaghan NJ, Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Fenech M, Conlon MA. (2012). Colonocyte telomere shortening is greater with dietary red meat than white meat and is attenuated by resistant starch. Clin Nutr. 31(1):60-4. Abstract retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21963168

Tantamango YM, Knutsen SF, Beeson L, Fraser G, Sabate J. (2011 ). Association between dietary fiber and incident cases of colon polyps: the adventist health study. Gastrointest Cancer Res. 4(5-6):161-7. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22295127

Toden, S., Belobrajdic, D. P., Bird, A. R., Topping, D. L., Conlon, M. A. (2010). Effects of dietary beef and chicken with and without high amylose maize starch on blood malondialdehyde, interleukins, IGF-I, insulin, leptin, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 concentrations in rats. Nutr Cancer. 62(4):454-65. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20432166

Tudek, B., Speina, E. (2012). Oxidatively damaged DNA and its repair in colon carcinogenesis. Mutat Res. 736(1-2):82-92. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22561673

["pill popper"]

"Inflammation, high fat, high red meat and low fiber consumption have for

lo="

Yup, there it is in black and white, low fiber relative to increased red
meat consumption.

Getting us back to the obvious, it is not red meat consumption per sey but
of available fiber to have the colon cancer risk reduction effect.

[arc...@scfas.com]

""[W]e demonstrated that dietary beef causes greater colonic DNA strand

brea= kage than equivalent levels of chicken in rats and that resistant
starch (R= S) as 20% high amylose maize starch (HAMS) attenuated the
damage. From that="

There it is in black and white, increasing the fiber ratio resulted in an
"attenuated damage".

The source of the animal protein made a difference too.

Fiber fermenting in the gut and scfas products thereof provides a lowering
of risk for colon cancer.

[crisology]

On Monday, September 3, 2012 9:31:52 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> "dietary beef causes greater colonic DNA strand
>

> breakage than equivalent levels of chicken

>
> There it is in black and white

Are you suggesting red meat has less fiber than chicken? There is more than one mechanism of action in which meat intake increases colon cancer risk.

Aside from the fiber, you did not address the various biomarkers reflecting tumorogenesis among meat consumers:

"measures of circulating factors that may influence CRC initiation or progression including malondialdehyde (MDA), leptin, insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), insulin, matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP-2), tissue inhibitor of MMP-2 (TIMP-2), interleukins (IL), and short chain fatty acids" (Toden, 2010).

The fact that fiber consumption "attenuates damage" does not denote all the carcinogenic effects of meat intake were eliminated. The article addresses this but you ignored it:

"Higher dietary chicken (but not beef) increased IGF-I irrespective of HAMS feeding" (Toden, 2010).

Reference:

[arc...@scfas.com]

"The fact that fiber consumption "attenuates damage" does not denote all

the=

carcinogenic effects of meat intake were eliminated. The article

addresses=

this but you ignored it:"

Colon cancer is very firmly associated with the development of polyps.
Some over time can become a cancer, some don't. Fiber is one factor which
reduces the level of polyps and thus any potential cancer over time.

This is why the ratio of fiber even in a diet including red meat has a
direct impact on risk.

This is why all people don't have colon cancer by meat intake alone.

[crisology]

On Monday, September 3, 2012 2:33:57 PM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> "The fact that fiber consumption "attenuates damage" does not denote all
>
> the=
>
> carcinogenic effects of meat intake were eliminated. The article
>
> addresses=
>
> this but you ignored it:"


> Colon cancer is very firmly associated with the development of polyps.

And this has been very firmly established as a result of meat intake. Your point?

> Fiber is one factor which reduces the level of polyps and thus any potential cancer over time.

Meat does not have fiber. In addition, meat contains growth hormones, heme iron, excess fat and proteins that also contribute to colon cancer, other cancers and degenerative disease etiology

> the ratio of fiber even in a diet including red meat has a direct impact on
> risk.

Yes, fiber helps reduce the risk of colon cancer from meat intake. But as stated above, it does not necessarily attenuate the carcinogenic effect of insulin growth hormone from animal intake: "Higher dietary chicken (but not beef) increased IGF-I irrespective of HAMS feeding" (Toden, 2010). So, prevention is more effective than treatment.

> This is why all people don't have colon cancer by meat intake alone.

True. Some people acquire esophageal, lung, liver cancer, etc. from meat intake. Then there's obesity, arterial noncompliance, constipation, congestion, anxiety, etc. from meat intake...

[arc...@scfas.com]

"True. Some people acquire esophageal, lung, liver cancer, etc. from meat

in=

take. Then there's obesity, arterial noncompliance, constipation,

congestio=

n, anxiety, etc. from meat intake..."

This is the core flaw in your perspective. The cause of a particular
cancer is tied to its specific tissue and all are different. One can not
say that meat intake is the cause or all who eat mmeat would have all those
cancers and conditions.

As noted before, in india with a low or no meat use those conditions exist
also and for some at a higher rate then meat using areas.

The risk of a given cancer might be affected by lifestyle but it is not the
cause. The cause is some genetic change which causes uncontrolled cell
division.

There are no such black and white, on and off silver bullets to explain
complex biological systems and their disorders.
This is food theology for reasons not tied to human biology.

[crisology]

You still did not address the fact that humans who take red meat increase cancer pathogenesis even higher than those who consume birds (in spite of fiber intake as a remedy for taking the meat). Here's yet another reminder of the topic you continue to avoid:

"[W]e demonstrated that dietary beef causes greater colonic DNA strand breakage than equivalent levels of chicken (Toden, 2010)"

> One can not
>
> say that meat intake is the cause

Meat intake is a precipitating cause for tumorigenesis. There is more than one cause. Of course meat intake also contributes to the other diseases (heart disease, diabetes, obesity, Alzheimer's, other forms of cancer, etc.), while fruit intake is negatively or inversely correlated with each of those diseases that meat consumption contributes to. There's no "the cause" for cancer. Cancer is multifactorial.

> or all who eat mmeat would have all those
>
> cancers and conditions.

On Monday, September 3, 2012 6:06:22 PM UTC-4, crisology wrote:

> Some people acquire esophageal, lung, liver cancer, etc. from meat intake.

> The cause is some genetic change which causes uncontrolled cell
>
> division.

This happens with greater frequency among those who consume meat because meat intake is a causal factor for tumorigensis through multiple mechanisms of action.

"CRC risk and mucosal proliferation rates in AAs than in NAs were associated with higher dietary intakes of animal products and higher colonic populations of potentially toxic hydrogen and secondary bile-salt-producing bacteria. This supports our hypothesis that CRC risk is determined by interactions between the external (dietary) and internal (bacterial) environments" (O'Keefe, 2007).

"Cancer results from disturbances of cellular signal transduction and data processing at the genetic level. In the early phase of the disease, disturbances are mainly caused by environmental toxic agents, i.e. genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens, whereas endogenous agents derived from dys-regulated metabolic reactions may take over this role at later stages. Among these metabolic reactions becoming dys-regulated in the course of tumorigenesis, eicosanoid biosynthesis from arachidonic acid seems to play a particular role" (Marks, 2000).
And meat is a concentrated source of arachidonic acid.

> There are no such black and white, on and off silver bullets to explain

There's a dose-dependent risk for colon cancer among those taking meat. "[R]esults indicate that a daily increase of 100 g of all meat or red meat is associated with a significant 12-17% increased risk of CRC. A significant 49% increased risk was found for a daily increase of 25 g of processed meat...the overall association between meat consumption and risk of CRC appears to be positive" (Sandhu, 2001).

"5-10% of all cancer cases can be attributed to genetic defects..The evidence indicates that of all cancer-related deaths, almost 25-30% are due to tobacco, as many as 30-35% are linked to diet" (Anand, 2008).

So, diet is the biggest factor related to the acquisition of cancer and most cancers can be prevented by eliminating meat, dairy, refined grains, alcohol, etc from the diet.


References:

Anand, P., Kunnumakara, A. B., Sundaram, C., Harikumar, K. B., Tharakan, S. T., Lai, O. S., Sung, B., & Aggarwal, B. B. (2008). Cancer is a Preventable Disease that Requires Major Lifestyle Changes. Pharm Res. Abstract retrieved online from: doi: 10.1007/s11095-008-9661-9

Marks, F., Müller-Decker, K., Fürstenberger, G. A. (2000). Causal relationship between unscheduled eicosanoid signaling and tumor development: cancer chemoprevention by inhibitors of arachidonic acid metabolism. Toxicology. 16;153(1-3):11-26. Abstract retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11090944

O'Keefe, S. J., Chung, D., Mahmoud, N., Sepulveda, A. R., Manafe, M, Arch, J., Adada, H., van der Merwe, T. J. Why do African Americans get more colon cancer than Native Africans? Nutr. 2007 Jan;137(1 Suppl):175S-182S. Abstract retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17182822

Sandhu, M. S., White, I. R., McPherson, K.(2001). Systematic review of the prospective cohort studies on meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analytical approach. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 10(5):439-46. Abstract retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11352852

[arc...@scfas.com]

This thread started with a post about the ratio of meat intake to fiber
intake and risk levels. The solution, keep the fiber ratio high.

Then:

]esults indicate that a daily increase of 100 g of all meat or red meat is

=

associated with a significant 12-17% increased risk of CRC. A significant

4=

9% increased risk was found for a daily increase of 25 g of processed

meat.=

..the overall association between meat consumption and risk of CRC appears

=

to be positive" (Sandhu, 2001).

Interpretation, cause a large change in the meat fiber ratio and the risk
level changes accordingly.

Also:

2010). Effects of dietary beef and chicken with and without high amylose

ma=

ize starch on blood malondialdehyde, interleukins, IGF-I, insulin, leptin,

=

MMP-2, and TIMP-2 concentrations in rats. Nutr Cancer. 62(4):454-65.

The starch mentioned is fiber, speaks again to meat fiber ratio and risk
levels.

Solution, make sure fiber levels are up such as adding plenty of beans in
chilli, eat whole grain versions of foods, increase fruit and veggie intake
as an overall part of the diet. Eate meat in moderation and choose lean
sources including seafoods.

There is no one to one certain cause of cancer and meat consumption. If it
were the case then all who eat meat regardless of fiber and other factors
would always have cancer. In s. asia where meat use is low or is not used
at all people still get cancer. In japan and associated islands where the
longest life spans occur meat is part of the diet, with plenty of fiber.
While red meat is used on some occasions the main meat intake is seafood.

[crisology]

On Friday, September 7, 2012 10:26:58 AM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
> This thread started with a post about the ratio of meat intake to fiber
>
> intake and risk levels. The solution, keep the fiber ratio high.

That was your/one "solution" or treatment for the meat intake. But a more effective solution (a preventative measure) was also provided, in which refraining from meat intake reduced colon cancer risk (as well as other largely preventable diseases covered).

> Then:
> ]esults indicate that a daily increase of 100 g of all meat or red meat is
> =
> associated with a significant 12-17% increased risk of CRC. A significant
> 4=
> 9% increased risk was found for a daily increase of 25 g of processed
> meat.=
> ..the overall association between meat consumption and risk of CRC appears
> =
> to be positive" (Sandhu, 2001).
>
> Interpretation, cause a large change in the meat fiber ratio and the risk
> level changes accordingly.

While interpretation of other research verifies a fiber intake remedy for meat consumption, the actual interpretation of data from Sandhu's (2001) short-term study reflects a significant, linear correlation between meat intake and colon cancer risk ranging between "large change" (100g/day increase) and smaller increases (25g/day) in meat consumed. No safe minimum meat intake was established.

"Higher dietary chicken (but not beef) increased IGF-I irrespective of HAMS feeding" (Toden, 2010)."

> The starch mentioned is fiber, speaks again to meat fiber ratio and risk
>
> levels.

The fiber helps to attenuate colon cancer. That's been established. But there are some biomarkers for colon cancer such as IGF levels that may not be attenuated to the same degree/"irrespective" of fiber intake. Again, prevention (abstinence of meat and bird intake) is more effective than treatment (through extra fiber intake). "[W]ith and without" the fiber, Toden (2001) reveals differences in biomarkers associated with attenuating colon cancer associated with meat intake.

> Solution, make sure fiber levels are up such as adding plenty of beans in
>
> chilli

Actually, chili intake is associated with stomach cancer. Again, prevention of cancer through fruit intake as opposed to meat intake will provide the most effective health solution, in contrast to trying to treat colon cancer with processed foods (chili) that increase stomach cancer (Gangadharan, 2000).

> Eate meat in moderation

What's "moderation"? Please provide a specific amount of safe meat intake for humans. I could not find any evidence that could be interpreted to support a safe amount of meat intake, only increased risks of colon cancer associated with meat intake in short-term studies.

> There is no one to one certain cause of cancer and meat consumption.

This was covered. It was established that diet was the biggest factor and that meat consumption is only one significant cause of cancer. Cancer is multifactorial.

> In s. asia where meat use is low or is not used
>
> at all people still get cancer.

Both the meat and rice intake have been associated with cancer incidences in India (Gangadharan, 2001).

> In japan and associated islands where the
>
> longest life spans occur meat is part of the diet

In Japan, meat intake is less than 1/3 of U.S. and in Okinawa, (the location of the highest life expectancies) the biggest difference between the Western diets and high colon cancer incidences is the higher vegetable content and lower colon cancer risks in Okinawa. (Willcox, 2009).

> the main meat intake is seafood.

Minimal amounts of seafood are consumed in traditional Okinawan diets. Although their collective diets aren't perfect, the main/staple foods are still vegetables, particularly sweet potato. So not only do Okinawans eat much more fiber and carbohydrates but they don't regularly consume meat (Willcox, 2009). Willcox (2009) reveals on page 502, a graph depicting a 2-3 times higher rate of colon cancer among U.S. consumers. According to the USDA, U. S. also consumes over 3 times more meat than modern Japanese.

References:

Mathew A, Gangadharan P, Varghese C, Nair MK. (2000). Diet and stomach cancer: a case-control study in South India. Eur J Cancer Prev. 9(2):89-97. Abstract retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10830575

Mathew, A. Gangadharan, P., Varghese, C., Nair, M. K. (2000). Diet and stomach cancer: a case-control study in South India. Eur J Cancer Prev 9(2):89-97.

Toden, S., Belobrajdic, D. P., Bird, A. R., Topping, D. L., Conlon, M. A. (2010). Effects of dietary beef and chicken with and without high amylose maize starch on blood malondialdehyde, interleukins, IGF-I, insulin, leptin, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 concentrations in rats. Nutr Cancer. 62(4):454-65. Retrieved online from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20432166

Willcox, D. C., Willcox, B. J., Todoriki, H., Suzuki, M. (2009). The Okinawan Diet: Health Implications of a Low-Calorie, Nutrient-Dense, Antioxidant-Rich Dietary Pattern Low in Glycemic Load. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 28, No. 4, 500S–516S. Retrieved online from: http://www.okicent.org/docs/500s_willcox_okinawa_diet.pdf

[arc...@scfas.com]

> Eate meat in moderation

""What's "moderation"? Please provide a specific amount of safe meat intake
for humans. I could not find any evidence that could be interpreted to
support a safe amount of meat intake, only increased risks of colon cancer
associated with meat intake in short-term studies."

The east asian diet such as china provides an example. Meat is used
whenever it is available and except for the very most poor people is never
absent. Here are two bits that discuss the factors:

CONCLUSION: The study suggested that mucous blood stool history and mixed
sources of drinking water were the risk factors of colon cancer and rectal
cancer. There was not any significant association between dietary habits
and the incidence of colorectal cancer.

CONCLUSION: Risks of colorectal cancer are significantly associated with
the histories of intestinal diseases or relative symptoms, high lipid diet,
emotional trauma and family history of cancers. The suitable physical
activities and dietary fibers are protective factors.

The major lipid sources are plant oils.

A global perspective:

Rates of CRC vary considerably with geography. The disease is common in
USA, Australia, Western Europe, and Scandinavia and is relatively uncommon
in Asia, Africa, and South America

Considering the studies you provided point to the ratio of meat to fiber
intake the above global pattern makes sense. Western diets with low fiber
to meat ratios are high, elsewhere where fiber to meat is high the rate is
low. So what is a moderate amount, I think the chinese model gives
direction. Meat is added to veggies and either rice or wheat products as a
part of the diet. It is not the major part such as in the west with some
added veggie and starch sources. The traditional eastern asia diet such as
the chinese is among the most healthy overall.

[Adalberto]

Well, if you search for "mucous blood stool" on PubMed, you'll find lots of research correlating that to infectious diseases, such as Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter and the like.
In rural/ancient/traditional settings these bacteria may very well come from water sources, but in MODERN times these diseases are associated with MODERN day meat treatment, contamination and consumption; for a full fact-based report see Dr. Greger's video on "Why is it legal to sell unsafe meat?"
http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/

Nobody can no way compare rural/ancient/traditional "meat" to MODERN day unsafe/illegal/toxic "meat"; there is no safe limit for the latter: ZERO is the suggested amount.

[arc...@scfas.com]

> low. So what is a moderate amount, I think the chinese model gives=20

> direction. Meat is added to veggies and either rice or wheat products

as=
a=20

> part of the diet. It is not the major part such as in the west with

some=
=20

> added veggie and starch sources. The traditional eastern asia diet such

=
as=20

> the chinese is among the most healthy overall.


"Well, if you search for "mucous blood stool" on PubMed, you'll find lots

of=

research correlating that to infectious diseases, such as Salmonella,
Shigella, Campylobacter and the like.
In rural/ancient/traditional settings these bacteria may very well come
from water sources, but in MODERN times these diseases are associated with
MODERN day meat treatment, contamination and consumption; for a full
fact-based report see Dr. Greger's video on "Why is it legal to sell unsafe
meat?"

http://nutritionfacts.org/2012/08/23/why-is-unsafe-meat-legal/

Nobody can no way compare rural/ancient/traditional "meat" to MODERN day

un= safe/illegal/toxic "meat"; there is no safe limit for the latter: ZERO
is t= he suggested amount."

What a joke, there were no, absolutely none, practices in china for meat
handling that would give it an advantage over current practice. China
modern and traditional use feces including human for fertilizer. What
better source for spreading the infections you mention then from the plants
they are used with.

The american news is full of plant origins for such infections. The fda
handles this for plants and the ag dept. for meat. The numbr of such
events is higher in the fda regulation because its regulations are far
weaker then the ag dept. for meat.

I think we are seeing here a theology of food not science. So raise or
obtain your meat from a known source and you are good to go, no?

[Adalberto]

Il giorno giovedì 20 settembre 2012 17:41:05 UTC+2, (sconosciuto) ha scritto:
>
> What a joke, there were no, absolutely none, practices in china for meat
> handling that would give it an advantage over current practice. China
> modern and traditional use feces including human for fertilizer. What
> better source for spreading the infections you mention then from the plants
> they are used with.
> The american news is full of plant origins for such infections. The fda
> handles this for plants and the ag dept. for meat. The numbr of such
> events is higher in the fda regulation because its regulations are far
> weaker then the ag dept. for meat.
>
> I think we are seeing here a theology of food not science. So raise or
> obtain your meat from a known source and you are good to go, no?
>

For a survey of all faecal bacteria contaminations reported in the US in the latest years, check out this page on Dr. Greger's blog:

http://nutritionfacts.org/2011/09/30/cantaloupe-and-listeria-an-estimated-85-of-cases-are-from-deli-meats-not-melons/

While raising our own sprouts is very easy even in modern city-apartments, what's about raising our own eggs or meats?!?
So 100 cases of Salmonella in commercially-available Alphalpha sprouts per year can be easily avoided by cultivating our own sprouts (not fertilizing them by means of our faeces, of course, eh eh), but what do you suggest to avoid those 118,000 Salmonella contamination reported on Eggs, the same year?