Almost halving our consumption of red and processed meat would lead to thousands fewer cases of heart disease, diabetes and cancer in Britain every year, claim Cambridge University researchers.
They have calculated that if men cut their daily intake from an average of 91g
to 53g - the equivalent of a large burger to a small one - that would result
in a 12 per cent drop in bowel cancer cases.
It would also result in 12 per cent fewer Type 2 diabetes cases in men, and a
10 per cent drop in coronary heart disease.
Among women the results are not as dramatic, because they already eat less
meat.
If they ate 30g of red or processed meat a day, rather than the average of
about 54g, bowel cancer cases would drop almost eight per cent, diabetes
cases 7.5 per cent and heart disease cases about six per cent, they
estimated.
The team, from the university’s Institute of Public Health, used responses
from the 2000-2001 British National Diet and Nutrition Survey to estimate
meat consumption.
They then modeled how the burden of disease would fall, if consumption fell,
based on a number of academic studies.
Red meat is thought to lead to heart disease because eating too much of the fat it contains can clog up the arteries. Meat and fat contains a lot of calories - particularly if it is fried - and overeating can lead to Type 2 diabetes. The link between eating a lot of red and processed meat and bowel cancer is less well understood.
The Cambridge University study, published in the journal BMJ Open, is the latest in a long line to argue for lower meat consumption.
Earlier this year American researchers calculated that eating an 85g serving of red meat daily increased the chance of dying from heart disease by 18 per cent and cancer by 10 per cent.
Medics have also been increasingly keen to argue the cause of vegetarianism, or at least lower meat consumption, on environmental grounds. Climate change scientists say rearing livestock contributes to global warming because it is takes a lot of energy - which produces carbon dioxide - and animals create a lot of methane.
In March Dr Dean Ornish, of the University of California, San Fransisco, wrote in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine: “What is good for you is good for our planet.”
The Cambridge public health team has applied this thinking and calculated that almost halving meat consumption would reduce Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions by three per cent.
The authors argued: “Dietary recommendations should no longer be based on direct health effects alone."
However, many meat eaters regard such an attitude as preachy and say doctors should stick to medicine.
Maureen Strong, nutrition manager at the English Beef and Lamb Executive, said: “Lean red meat is a valuable source of protein, vitamins and minerals.
"Some, such as iron, are known to be in short supply in the diets of women, teenage girls and young children.
"Consumed in moderation, it plays an important part in a balanced diet, as advocated by the government’s Eatwell plate."
Red meat is thought to lead to heart disease because eating too much of the fat it contains can clog up the arteries. Meat and fat contains a lot of calories - particularly if it is fried - and overeating can lead to Type 2 diabetes. The link between eating a lot of red and processed meat and bowel cancer is less well understood.
The Cambridge University study, published in the journal BMJ Open, is the latest in a long line to argue for lower meat consumption.
Earlier this year American researchers calculated that eating an 85g serving of red meat daily increased the chance of dying from heart disease by 18 per cent and cancer by 10 per cent.
Medics have also been increasingly keen to argue the cause of vegetarianism, or at least lower meat consumption, on environmental grounds. Climate change scientists say rearing livestock contributes to global warming because it is takes a lot of energy - which produces carbon dioxide - and animals create a lot of methane.
In March Dr Dean Ornish, of the University of California, San Fransisco, wrote in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine: “What is good for you is good for our planet.”
The Cambridge public health team has applied this thinking and calculated that almost halving meat consumption would reduce Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions by three per cent.
The authors argued: “Dietary recommendations should no longer be based on direct health effects alone."
However, many meat eaters regard such an attitude as preachy and say doctors should stick to medicine.
Maureen Strong, nutrition manager at the English Beef and Lamb Executive, said: “Lean red meat is a valuable source of protein, vitamins and minerals.
"Some, such as iron, are known to be in short supply in the diets of women, teenage girls and young children.
"Consumed in moderation, it plays an important part in a balanced diet, as advocated by the government’s Eatwell plate."
No comments:
Post a Comment