Answer by Dr Bobby V, MD (oncologist) on Wed 02, Apr 2008 06:20am:
Hi,
Your question is whether beef is harmful for people who have already developed cancer. I am unaware of any large studies that specifically address this issue. Hence I cannot offer any answer backed up by scientific evidence.
However, if we extrapolate the knowledge gained about the effects of beef on healthy people, then evidence suggests that beef may be harmful. There are two concerns in this regard: beef associated with colon cancer, and estrogen in the beef linked with breast cancer.
As a general rule, red meat is considered harmful. Many studies have found an association between consumption of red meat and an increased risk of developing colon cancer subsequently.
Cattle are routinely administered hormones to make them grow faster. This makes them ready for slaughter at younger age (often less than 2 years), compared to natural growth where cattle are only fit for slaughter at age 4 to 5 years.
Some such hormones (like Zeranol, a synthetic estrogen compound routinely given to cattle) have been linked to human breast cancer in some studies.
Chicken or sea food are generally considered less harmful than beef.
Suggested reading:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/20/eveningnews/main554857.shtml
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/news/20050111/red-meat-eaters-risk-colon-cancer
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Eating_Lots_of_Red_Meat_Linked_to_Colon_Cancer.asp
Please rate my answer (select the stars below, no need to log in.)
|
Follow up:
Clarification / Comment by leens on Thu 10, Apr 2008 11:32pm:
Thank you for your reply. It is really helpful. I just want to ask you another question with regards to lung
cancer. Is there any food that had been found somehow that can be linked with lung cancer. Never been a
smoker. Please advise. Thank you.
Clarification / Comment by Dr Bobby V, MD on Fri 11, Apr 2008 11:20pm:
Hi,
The answer below may be slightly technical in nature and content, but I wanted to ensure that I address all
your concerns adequately! I am quoting key observations, and citing references of each.
The Carcinogenic Potency Database is available on the net at http://potency.berkeley.edu .
It describes chemicals tested for their potential to cause cancer in animals. However, most foods have not
been tested.
Carcinogenic substances found in the diet are of two broad types: One is "natural pesticides"
(produced by plants for protection against fungi, insects, and animal predators), and the second is
"mycotoxins" (secondary metabolites produced by molds in foods).
Reference: Cancer, Principles and Practice of Oncology, 7th Edition, Edited by DeVita et al. CHAPTER 20,
Section 5: Dietary Carcinogens. LWW
Coming to lung cancer specifically, fruits and vegetables are known to be protective against lung cancer.
Reference: Alberg AJ, Samet JM. Epidemiology of lung cancer. Chest 2003;123:21S4.
Low folate levels may also be associated with lung cancer.
Reference: Wei Q, Shen H, Wang LE, et al. Association between low dietary folate intake and suboptimal
cellular DNA repair capacity. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:963.
Patients with lung cancer may have overall lower levels of Vitamin A than the average population. Also,
"passive smoking", now called "environmental tobacco smoke" (ETS) accounts for 25% of lung
cancer in non-smokers.
Reference: Cancer, Principles and Practice of Oncology, 7th Edition, Edited by DeVita et al. CHAPTER 27,
Section 2: Non small cell lung cancer. LWW.
Wish you all the best!
|