When reporting annoys me

[andrewducker]

The BBC reports that we should cut our processed meat intake if we want to avoid cancer.

Of course, they don't actually mention what the chances are of us getting cancer, nor what the change that processed meat causes is, thus making it completely impossible for readers to make an informed decision.

Fortunately, a look at the basic research shows that there is a definite increased risk, although my understanding isn't good enough to tell me exactly what it is.  Anyone care to dig into those figures and tell me what the percentage chance of me getting rectal cancer is both with and without meat-eating?

Edit:

Of the 500,000 people (age 51-70) in the study, 50,000 of them got cancer in the following 8 years. So if you live to be 50-odd then you have a 10% chance of getting cancer. If you eat meat then your chances of getting cancer are 20-60% higher than if you don't. Which presumably means that your chances are nearer 6-7% if you don't. So, an extra 3% chance of getting cancer in your old age if you eat meat.

Hardly worth panicking about.

Comments

[bracknellexile.livejournal.com]

You didn't actually expect to get factual info from the BBC these days, did you? :)

As for the actual report, when it includes lines such as: "Furthermore, because the study's definitions of red meat and processed meat overlapped—bacon and ham, for example, were included in both categories—exactly which type of meat is related to cancer remains unclear," I'll take it with a pinch of salt.

"Processed" also seems to make no distinction between jerky, cured, smoked or mechanically-recovered-barely-meat-any-more.

And let's face it, pretty much anything you eat, drink, breathe or live near supposedly gives you cancer these days. I gave up on the scaremongering cancer threat reports a long time ago. I'd never get out of bed otherwise!

[andrewducker]

Some stabs in the dark in the post.

[accordingly.livejournal.com]

Yeah, my mum worked for Bowel Cancer UK up until a few weeks ago, she says the same thing. I'm not sure of the statistics though...

[cairmen.livejournal.com]

I believe that most of the studies have shown that red meat is less than ideal. Chicken, turkey, pork less so.

[andrewducker]

See, that's my problem with the article.

"Less than ideal" could mean "Over 20 years of living on bacon your chances of cancer by 1%" or it could mean "Look sideways at a ham sandwich and your chances of cancer doubles."

If I'm going to make an informed decision then I need better than that.

[cairmen.livejournal.com]

Completely agreed. It's a huge problem with this sort of article. "You might die! At some point! Because of something!"

Doesn't help that nutrition science is, erm, in the early stages. Much like medicine in the sixteenth century!

[andrewducker]

Exactly. I'm currently thinking that my stats above _might_ be accurate (that eating processed meat moves your chances of cancer from 7%-10%, a figure that worries me not in the least), but I could be misreading it entirely.

[davidcook.livejournal.com]

And a related site, Kill or Cure, which summarises what the Daily Mail things will cause or cure cancer these days ...

[despotliz.livejournal.com]

Also note that for colorectal cancer, the relative risk of getting cancer increases as you eat more red and processed meat, with the highest risk being those who ate a hell of a lot of it.

Almost no one ever goes out for a smoke at a cancer research conference, but our canteen does a roaring trade in sausage, egg and bacon butties on a Friday morning.

[andrewducker]

Clearly I need a graph showing bacon butties versus cancer :->

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

My thoughts exactly! Although I hadn't realised the initial chance was 10% - I had in mind (I think from previous studies - maybe of younger people) that it was c. 5-6%, hence a 20% increase in risk made it 6-7% - even less to fuss about.

I have just read Bad Science, which tackles the appalling nature of science reporting in the media. If you've not read it, it is worth picking it up - though I doubt you'll learn much that you don't know!