• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Red meat, hormones, and a possible link to cancer

fedup2

Well-known member
Here is a another view of red meat!

A new report from the British Nutrition Foundation has dispelled the idea that eating red meat is ‘bad’ for us. After reviewing hundreds of scientific studies on red meat and health, the BNF report concluded that there’s no scientific evidence to suggest that eating moderate amounts of lean red meat is unhealthy.

Furthermore, meat may actually help in the fight against obesity thanks to its protein content. The BNF report recognises that higher protein intakes improve the feeling of fullness at the end of a meal and so can help to prevent snacking later in the day. Ultimately, this helps to reduce calorie intakes, which in turn may boost weight loss.

The BNF report also dispels the myth that all meat is high in fat or causes heart disease. The report confirms that red meat has become much leaner in recent years, with the fat content having been reduced by more than 30% for pork, 15% for beef and 10% for lamb. Meanwhile, the report points out that red meat actually contains more heart healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, than saturates. But that’s not all. The report highlights that meat contains small amounts of omega-3 fats, which help to keep the heart healthy. Only oily fish contain good amounts of omega-3s, making the small amounts in red meat an important source, especially for people who eat little or no oily fish.

The report also reveals that while some studies have shown that meat eaters have a slight increase in the risk of heart disease compared with those who don’t eat meat, other studies have shown that eating lean red meat doesn’t increase cholesterol or blood pressure, and may even reduce levels of ‘bad’ or LDL cholesterol. This is possibly because it contains many heart healthy nutrients such as monounsaturates, omega-3 fats, B vitamins and selenium.

The link between red meat and colorectal (bowel) cancer also remains unclear according to the report. While many studies have shown that high intakes of meat, and particularly processed meat, increase the risk, the incidence of bowel cancer in the UK has increased dramatically in the past 35 years, while red meat intakes have declined by around 25%. The BNF report recognises that being overweight or obese and not taking much exercise are stronger risk factors for bowel cancer, while eating plenty of fruit and vegetables probably helps to lower the risk. The report highlights that it’s probably overall eating habits – rather than just meat consumption – that’s more important when it comes to lowering risk. In particular, the report found that good intakes of fibre appeared to counteract any increase in risk linked to high intakes of red or processed meat.

Finally, the report recognises the important contribution red meat can make to nutrient intakes. Red meat provides almost a fifth of the iron in most people’s diets in the UK – this is particularly important for women as currently, 40% of women under 34 have seriously low intakes of iron putting them at risk of anaemia. Furthermore, meat and meat products contain many other nutrients important for good health, including protein, zinc, selenium, vitamin B12 and vitamin D.

In the past couple of decades, many people have eaten less meat because of worries that it’s fattening or unhealthy. So, it’s great to hear that the British Nutrition Foundation believe it’s fine to eat lean red meat in moderation as part of a healthy, balanced diet. And when it comes to losing weight, it now seems that lean red meat is an excellent choice.

Choosing lean cuts of meat, trimming off any visible fat and using a cooking method that doesn’t require oil or butter, will help to reduce the calories and fat further – while giving you plenty of protein to prevent hunger kicking in. And serving lean red meat with plenty of fibre-rich veg, pulses, wholegrains and fruit will help to make meals more filling without adding too many calories, whilst helping to protect you from bowel cancer. Try the following:

Bring back meat and two veg – always serve lean roast meat with at least two servings of vegetables (potatoes don’t count as one!)
Steak out – serve lean steak with loads of salad, grilled mushrooms and grilled tomatoes
Don’t get in a stew – add beans, veggies or barley to meat stews, casseroles and soups
Beef it up – add stacks of veggies to mince dishes such as chilli con carne, spaghetti bolognese, lasagne and cottage pie.
Make a meal of it – use wholegrain bread for beef or ham sandwiches and pile in the salad.
Finally for good health – and to keep calories down – it’s best to eat no more than 140g/5oz of red or processed meat a day. And swap fatty and salty processed meats like burgers, bacon and sausages for lean red meat.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
The article I posted is not really about beef being unhealthy per se -- it's about a suspicion that hormones in red meat is linked to increased risk of breast cancer. I know a lot of you question the use of hormones yourselves.
I actually question feeding red meat to women. I say save the good stuff for the men. :wink:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
reader (the Second) said:
The article I posted is not really about beef being unhealthy per se -- it's about a suspicion that hormones in red meat is linked to increased risk of breast cancer. I know a lot of you question the use of hormones yourselves.
I actually question feeding red meat to women. I say save the good stuff for the men. :wink:

I agree. Most women don't enjoy a good bloody rare steak.

Next thing you know we'll be allowing them to vote!
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Mike said:
Red Robin said:
reader (the Second) said:
The article I posted is not really about beef being unhealthy per se -- it's about a suspicion that hormones in red meat is linked to increased risk of breast cancer. I know a lot of you question the use of hormones yourselves.
I actually question feeding red meat to women. I say save the good stuff for the men. :wink:

I agree. Most women don't enjoy a good bloody rare steak.

Next thing you know we'll be allowing them to vote!
Or drive.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
After getting off work???? What would the world look like if we let that happen? How would the children turn out? Who would cook? Would we all eat in restaurants if this happened? :shock:
 

fedup2

Well-known member
Sorry guys! Its to late to worry about all those things. The minute they threw their side saddles away and wrapped their legs around a horse, it was over. They fell in love with the feeling of power and control and never let it slip again! Back in the good old days, they would sit in the pickup outside the local ‘refuge’ while you were inside partaking of a little ‘juice of the barley’ & discussing important business while playing a game of cards.

Then the horn tooting started. Pretty soon they were brave enough to walk right inside the refuge. Then thinking that if they could straddle a horse, why not a bar stool! Things started going to hell in a hurry after that. Normal traditions continued their downward spiral with the invention of the ‘cowboy shock collar’. The cell phone! Now there was nowhere to run, nowhere to hide!
I hate to tell you this guys, but not only will they be looking at your steak one day, you might be cooking it for them!

Well, I’ll tell you what! I won’t let myself get……..ah……..gotta go….ah….wife is calling…!
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
After getting off work???? What would the world look like if we let that happen? How would the children turn out? Who would cook? Would we all eat in restaurants if this happened? :shock:

And we'd have to buy them shoes!!!!! :?

LOTS OF THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :shock: :eek: :shock:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
fedup2 said:
Sorry guys! Its to late to worry about all those things. The minute they threw their side saddles away and wrapped their legs around a horse, it was over. They fell in love with the feeling of power and control and never let it slip again!

According to my wife and mother-in-law, they felt more than that!!!!!!! :eek: :shock: :shock: :eek: :wink:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
R2, back to the article for a minute...
Our genes developed on a diet very high in meat and animal fats...all of these "studies?" are statistical fabrications developed by someone with an agenda. Native Eskimo society survived on a diet of meat and fat(what else is there to eat in the Artic?) and had none of our western civilization health problems. But when we 'civilized' them and made them eat our diet, they developed our health problems.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
fedup2 said:
Sorry guys! Its to late to worry about all those things. The minute they threw their side saddles away and wrapped their legs around a horse, it was over. They fell in love with the feeling of power and control and never let it slip again! Back in the good old days, they would sit in the pickup outside the local ‘refuge’ while you were inside partaking of a little ‘juice of the barley’ & discussing important business while playing a game of cards.

Then the horn tooting started. Pretty soon they were brave enough to walk right inside the refuge. Then thinking that if they could straddle a horse, why not a bar stool! Things started going to hell in a hurry after that. Normal traditions continued their downward spiral with the invention of the ‘cowboy shock collar’. The cell phone! Now there was nowhere to run, nowhere to hide!
I hate to tell you this guys, but not only will they be looking at your steak one day, you might be cooking it for them!

Well, I’ll tell you what! I won’t let myself get……..ah……..gotta go….ah….wife is calling…!
:lol: :lol: you boys were on a roll today
 

fedup2

Well-known member
And you gals were great sports so here is one for you!

A young couple, just married, were in their honeymoon suite on their wedding night. As they undressed for bed, the husband, who was a big, burly man, tossed his pants to his bride and said, "Here put these on."

She put them on and the waist was twice the size of her body. "I can't wear your pants, she said." "That's right," said the husband, "and don't you forget it. I'm the man who wears the pants in this family."

With that she flipped him her panties and said, "Try these on." He tried them on and found he could only get them on as far as his kneecap. He said, "I can't get into your panties!"

She said, "That's right, and that's the way it's going to be until your attitude changes
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
fedup2 said:
And you gals were great sports so here is one for you!

A young couple, just married, were in their honeymoon suite on their wedding night. As they undressed for bed, the husband, who was a big, burly man, tossed his pants to his bride and said, "Here put these on."

She put them on and the waist was twice the size of her body. "I can't wear your pants, she said." "That's right," said the husband, "and don't you forget it. I'm the man who wears the pants in this family."

With that she flipped him her panties and said, "Try these on." He tried them on and found he could only get them on as far as his kneecap. He said, "I can't get into your panties!"

She said, "That's right, and that's the way it's going to be until your attitude changes

We can joke because we know who wears the panties in our houses!!!! :cowboy:
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
R2 said:
My question after reading the article was not about red meat or fatty meat and the human body, I grant you that meat is a "natural" and beneficial nutrient for humans. Perhaps not in gargantuan portions like today

Actually, it was "gargantuan portions" back then...65% or more of their diet.

R2 said:
The question that the article raised is about the use of growth hormones in cattle and whether there could be a link between increase in certain types of cancer and hormones artificially injected/fed to cattle.

Mike said:
Hormones are naturally occuring in cattle. Would be the least of my worries.

Mike is more right than the article...if the cattle receive no artificial hormones, they still have hormones...just as all living organisms.

R2 said:
You're a natural foods type. What is your opinion? I know that scientific research where there is one study is up for being refuted in subsequent studies, but I also have wondered about hormones and ill effects on children especially.

First the "scientific research"(as I'm sure you understand)...who are the researchers, who paid for the research, is there an agenda?

You stated my opinion...natural foods in a balanced diet! Most of these health problems parallel changes in our food systems and diet. Eat what your grand parents and great-grand parents ate...before these problems became epidemics. The organic chemistry of living organisms and nutrition is very complicated and even the experts don't understand all they think they do.

I've run across something interesting here recently...glyconutrients. The jest of it is that there are certain sugars we aren't getting in our diet because these sugars occur in vine ripened fruits and vegetables. When you think about it, how many of the 'fresh' fruits and vegetables in our super markets are vine ripened?

Eat close to Nature...and avoid as many processed foods and un-natural chemicals as you can.
 

sw

Well-known member
Here you go R2, google spinach or lettuces and you will see what media manipulation of facts leads to, a yuppy belief that "hormone treated beef" is causing problems with human health.

Hormones & Growth Promotants



NCBA Staff Contact:
Gary Weber, Executive Director, Regulatory Affairs
202-347-0228
[email protected]

Summary:
As producers in the beef industry, we rely on a steady supply of new and innovative animal health products to keep our herds healthy and help provide American consumers with a safe and wholesome beef supply.

Background:
Numerous U.S. and international scientific studies have shown that the U.S. cattle industry produces safe and wholesome beef. Growth-promoting hormones help stimulate growth by increasing the efficiency in which feed is converted to muscle. Certain products, when administered to animals in very small amounts, supplement their natural hormone production and improve growth rates by allowing the animal to produce more muscle and less fat. This helps the industry produce leaner beef for consumers.

Key Points:

Just like human drugs, these products go through thorough testing and a rigorous review by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before they are approved for use.
There is a three-level threshold process that creates an enormous margin of safety to protect human health:
It begins by identifying a level at which no effect on human health is seen in research studies.
To that level, FDA adds a margin of safety (essentially taking the no-effect level and multiplying it many times over.)
And the final threshold is at the production level where the level used in cattle is far less than the margin of safety FDA sets.
As an example, FDA has set a tolerance on estrogen levels in beef from cattle receiving an estrogen-containing implant. The safe level is 21 billionths of a gram. On average, a serving of beef actually has a fraction of that allowable level - .3 billionths of a gram - nearly 57,000 times lower than what the FDA allows, and thousands of times lower than what our bodies naturally produce, not to mention a fraction of what is present in many other foods such as soybean oil, cabbage, cereals and grains.
The scientific conclusions of the FDA, the World Organization for Animal Health and the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the world’s food safety body, indicate that the miniscule amount of estrogen in beef from cattle receiving implants is well below any level that would be of significance to humans.
In most instances, estrogen levels in beef from implanted cattle are so low, that it’s virtually impossible to detect. Consequently the data illustrates the use if estrogen-containing implants has no impact on humans.

Additional Information
Animal ID
Antibiotics
Brucellosis
BSE Information
Cattle TB
FMD Information
Hormones & Growth Promotants
Animal Health Archive






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NCBA... working to increase profit opportunities for cattle and beef producers by enhancing the business climate and building consumer demand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

RobertMac

Well-known member
Certain products, when administered to animals in very small amounts, supplement their natural hormone production and improve growth rates by allowing the animal to produce more muscle and less fat.

Bulls produce more muscle and less fat.
We castrate bulls to produce less muscle and more fat.
We give steers hormones to produce more muscle and less fat.
Does any one see anything wrong with this?

This helps the industry produce leaner beef for consumers.

Then why is the industry paying more for fatter beef, if we are trying to sell the consumer leaner beef?
 

mrj

Well-known member
My opinion, based on reading various studies from various sources, both beef industry and non-industry funded, leaves me to believe hormone levels in beef whether natural or the very slight elevation possibly due to hormone feeds has virtually no effect on humans.

First, hormone content of many veggies is MUCH higher than any beef.

Next, aren't hormones stored in fat?

Conclusion: isn't it far more likely that increased breast size in children is due to the fact that they eat far MORE total calories than ever before? MORE of those calories are from FAT, much of it hidden in foods we don't really stop to think of as containing fat Add in the lack of exercise, and it isn't too surprising that the 'fat' in the diet piles up on chests of fat young kids, is it?

Many of these 'scare' stories have ties to anti-animal agriculture groups, if enough searching is done.

MRJ
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
I've glanced at studies that linked early pubesence to soy. One well known cattle pontifier says it's the soy in human milk replacers that's causing the rash of homosexuals currently seen. I personally don't believe that. Edit: I have never seen a homosexuals rash. :oops: I'm meaning the great number of homosexuals currently seen. I think it's just immorality run amuck.
 
Top