Younger women who eat red meat regularly appear to face an increased risk for a common form of breast cancer, according to a large well-known Harvard study of women's health.
Study: Red Meat Increases Risk of Breast CancerBy Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
The study of more than 90,000 women found the more red meat the women consumed when they were in their 20s, 30s and 40s the greater their risk for getting breast cancer fueled by hormones in the next 12 years. Those who consumed the most red meat faced nearly twice the risk of those who ate red meat infrequently.
The study, published today in the Archives of Internal Medicine, is the first to examine the relationship between red meat consumption and breast cancer in premenopausal women, and the first to examine the question by type of breast cancer.
Although more research is needed to confirm the association and explore the possible reasons for a link, researchers said the findings provide another motivation to limit consumption of red meat, which is already known to increase the risk for colon cancer.
"There are already other reasons to minimize red meat intake," said Eunyoung Cho, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, who led the study. "This just may give women another good reason."
Cho added that the findings could be particularly important because the type of breast cancer the study found associated with red meat consumption has been increasing. Eating less red meat may help counter that trend.
Other researchers said the findings could offer women one of the few things they can do to reduce their risk for the widely feared malignancy. Breast cancer strikes nearly 213,000 U.S. women each year and kills nearly 41,000, making it the most common cancer and the second most common cause of cancer death among women.
"So many risk factors for breast cancer are things that you can't alter," said Nancy E. Davidson, a breast cancer expert at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. "This represents something women could take charge of -- something you can change to affect your risk."
The reason why red meat might increase the risk for breast cancer remains unknown, but previous research has suggested several possible reasons: Substances produced by cooking meat may be carcinogenic; naturally occurring substances in meat may mimic the action of hormones, or hormones farmers feed cows to make them grow bigger could fuel breast cancer in women who consume meat from the animals.
Researchers have long wondered whether there might be a risk between red meat consumption and breast cancer risk, but few studies have addressed the question. Those that have, including one large analysis that pooled data from eight studies, failed to find any association. But the earlier studies focused on older women and did not differentiate between types of breast cancer.
In the new study, Cho and her colleagues analyzed data collected from 90,659 female nurses ages 26 to 46 who are participating in the Nurses' Health Study II, a long-term project examining a host of women's health issues. As part of the study, researchers gathered detailed information about their diets every four years.
When the researchers analyzed whether red meat consumption was associated with an increased risk for breast cancer between 1991 and 2003, they found no overall link. But when they examined only the 512 women who developed breast cancer whose growth is fueled by the hormones estrogen and progesterone, they found an association.
The risk increased with the amount of red meat consumed, with those who ate more than 1 1/2 servings a day having nearly double the risk for the so-called hormone-receptor positive breast cancer compared to those who ate three or fewer servings per week. A serving is roughly equivalent to a single hamburger or hot dog.
"That's a pretty strong association," said Cho, who is also a professor of epidemiology at the Brigham & Women's Hospital in Boston.
Other researchers praised the study for being well conducted, but said more research is needed to confirm and explore the findings.
"The study is well done and I'm sure it will create some interest to try to replicate the findings, " said Eugenia Calle of the American Cancer Society. "But until that happens we can't draw conclusions about whether this is a true association or something that's just been observed in a single study."
Other experts agreed, but noted that the findings are consistent with a growing body of evidence that indicates that a person's diet early in life can affect their health risks later on.
"This would kind of confirm that your lifestyle, including your diet, in young adulthood is important in potentially explaining your risk later in life," said Carolina Hinestrosa of the National Breast Cancer Coalition.
While it may be premature to make formal dietary recommendations based on the findings, the study is so well respected that women should take the findings into consideration, she said.
But noting that earlier studies reached the opposite conclusion, Randy Huffman, vice president for scientific affairs at the American Meat Institute, said that research into "diet and health is known for its fluid and often contradictory conclusions. This study is a perfect example of that."
"The wisest course of action in the wake of one more contradictory study is to consume the balanced diet recommended by the U.S. Dietary Guidelines," Huffman said.
British Meat: the recipe for BSE
British Meat: the recipe for cancer
British Meat: the recipe for food poisoning
British meat crisis: has BSE spread from cattle to sheep?
R E S O U R C E S
The ALF FAQ
Meat and Cancer
Veal: A Cruel Meal
Animal Rights FAQ
The Taste of Depravity
American Meat and BSE
Animal Rights Resources
Bowel Cancer Resources
When Meat Is Not Murder
Low IQ Link to Eating Meat
The Post-Darwinian Transition
The Slaughter of Animals for Food
British Meat Cancer Education Service
49 Good Reasons For Being A Vegetarian
How To Be A Vegetarian In Ten Easy Steps
The Meat Industry Online
"Because one species is more clever than another, does it give it the right to imprison or torture the less clever species? Does one exceptionally clever individual have a right to exploit the less clever individuals of his own species? To say that he does is to say with the Fascists that the strong have a right to abuse and exploit the weak - might is right, and the strong and ruthless shall inherit the earth."