AIBU to be annoyed at World Cancer Research Fund "outlawing" processed meat in lunchboxes?

[bookbird]

AIBU to feel that parents are constantly scare mongered? I'm constantly worrying about what's best to feed my children.

When they say processed, they mean anything preserved with salt. This means ham, bacon and salami are all off the menu! (well, no more than 70g a week).

Should WCRF keep such thoughts to themselves rather than announcing on BBC? Also why isn't this top news on the Food Standards Agency website.

I agree with "Spam" - we need proper information on what it is about these "processed meats" which causes the problem. And, preferably, a change in the law so that whatever it is can be stopped. At the very least to know what the cancer-encouraging ingredient/process is, and food labelling improved so that we can make sensible informed choices.

Anything less than that is just going to make us fret in a useless way, not make better choices about our food.

I imagine that the WCRF issued a press release showing a link between processed meat and increased levels of bowel cancer, and, it being a slow news day, the media went a bit mental with it. As some people have said - a) a little bit of everything and not too much of anything is a good philosphy to have and b) we all have to die of something, someday - yes, bowel cancer is nasty, but so are most illnesses.

There's a great website here with an ontology of cancer causes/preventions taken from the Daily mail - showing that stats can 'prove' a link between any substance and cancer

As ever, moderation in all things is the key.

I'm a bit about not using processed meats in lunchboxes. The reason for curing meat was to preserve it in pre-refridgeration times. If the lunch is likely not to stay cold, then a ham sandwich is likely to keep better than a chicken or egg one, don't you think?

this is not new research at all.

There was a similar study released last year concerning sausages and processed meat.

The only new angle is that the charity are again trying to raise awareness of a known potential health risk - it's up to you whether you decide that risk is worth taking.

I've had a bit of a dig around - the links in the original article were useless, but Cancer Research UK do actually explain what the basis of this is.Link here

It appears to be a natural red/pink pigment found in red meat and processed meats which is thought to be the culprit.

But nitrites found in some processed meats are also a possible cause of cancer, and so is too much salt.

More digging... The WHO "Expert report" has preserved meat down as a "probable" increased risk for colorectal cancer.

It also has overweight as a "Convincing" increased risk.

Therefore, some reason for worry about large quantities of processed meat in the diet, but less of a worry than stopping children (and adults of course) from being overweight.

Bluddy hell I can just about get DD2 to eat anything other than Jam everyday!.. I'll have to see if she will try tuna..smelly fishy lunchboxes it is!

amis - thta's helpful, thanks. Any idea if quality sausages and/or expensive ham are low in nitrites?

I dunno, maybe we should just go veggie...

It's all a bunch of crap... and so very typical of the Daily Mail to report a scaremongering piece of journalism. No-one should ever buy that paper - as they love to sensationalise EVERYTHING! If they don't have you fearing everything (immigration/health/education etc) then they aren't doing their editorial jobs properly.

The simple truth is no-one really knows, apart from the real givens like smoking generally leading to lung and other related cancers, what causes cancer.

I've seen research that says that almost every foodgroup can potentially be a cause. Are you really going to let yourself live in fear of even breathing in case this is a cause too?

Simply put - if you live by these basic rules, you'll probably not go too far wrong:

1 - eat sensibly and in moderation.
2 - have a good balanced diet across the key foodgroups. Check out the NHS/DoH website if you're unsure what this is.
3 - buy the best quality food you can afford. I realise that this varies across many households, but food is not something to scrimp on. Let other luxuries (like drink / cigarettes go, but never scrimp on the food for your family).
4 - ensure you all exercise reguarly and try to ensure that you keep yourself in the best possible state of fitness.

That's about all anyone can reasonably expect you to do and have a decent chance of living a long and healthy (ish) life.

Don't spend anytime worrying about this sensationalist crap. The more we're all talking about it, and the more papers they sell, the more this stuff will happen.

We need to vote with our feet, and IGNORE this topic, and NOT buy their awful paper. Then they might start writing more considered journalism.

Enjoy your week (without guilt or worry!).

YANBU

But I'm unsure if the true culprit is the original advice from WCRF or the fact that it was condensed to a sweeping generalisation and then broadcast like that as the lead story on the news.

I do get annoyed oh yes I do!... with the dumbed down health messages, I'm interested in nutrition and read quite a bit of research on it. My dd's diet is something I'm really happy with and it includes chocolate and pasties from the bakers and biscuits.

It also includes all manner of other good stuff too and while I'm being all annoyed and huffy I'll mention how i do NOT like over zealous parents who preen at themselves giving their babies and toddlers what are essentially low fat diets! Poor kids! Give them some lovely fat and a run around in the park!

No idea where that came from, I'm calm now

My MIL recently died from bowel cancer at the age of 61 after a life of eating crap food and definitely a lot of processed meat.
I personally will be giving dc's more cheese and fish in their sarnies after this report-it's not too munch of a hardship to go without ham etc, is it?

MUCH not 'munch'

Wasn't there an article about cheese increases the likelihood of testicular cancer? Oh and watch out for the mercury in fish.

It is pointless worrying about this stuff, you (and your kids) must die of something.

This might be a really stupid question but what about vegetarian 'ham'? The quorn kind and others look to me like they are processed in a similar way (colouring & salt)to real ham - does anyone know?

We've been preserving foods for thousands of years.
It goes back to...'anything in moderation'. As usual it's the parents who feed their kids bacon, ham, pepperami every day that influence the media to make sure we get rid of risk altogether.
Decent, preferably locally sourced, hams and bacon eaten every so often are fine IMO.

lazylion that's a good question... I am a bit about foods that pretend to be what they are not. Would rather have proper food less often than pretend food that is meant to be healthier (but is it?).

I would have thought that you could minimise the risk by eating lots of roughage when you're not eating bacon/ham so nothing "hangs around" too long, IYSWIM...

The "thousands of years" argument is a bit of a red herring though. We've been smoking for thousands of years, getting shitfacecd for thousands of years, had little clue about hygiene or healthy eating for thousands of years, and for thousands of years we've been dying at an average age of about 40, with massive infant mortality and ill health. Don't imagine that thousands of years ago everyone lived a fabulously happy and perfect life because everything was pure and natural.

These kind of things matter if you want to stay healthy and live long and avoid miserable diseases like cancer and diabetes, which is a very modern obsession really, but I reckon most of us do.

I am also of the moderation in all things persuasion - the more you cut out, the more you narrow down your diet to things which will all have their own downsides anyway. Just don't eat ham and bacon all the time and a pepperami for pudding.

lazylion It's to do with the saturated fats found in meat, so Quorn doesn't count.

Don't let this get blown out of proportion. The numbers here are tiny - a diet heavy in red processed meat will increase your chances of getting certain cancers from about 0.05% to 0.06%. Balance this risk against the benefits of a healthy balanced diet!

Bacon wins every time ...

I read only the other day that the cases of bowel and stomach cancer have actually reduced hugely, due to the increased amount of fresh fruit/veg available now.

I think the key to understanding and dealing with most of the research that states that such and such a food causes cancer is an understnding of statistics. I.e. if the risk of getting bowel cancer in the population at large is 1 in 10000 (and I'm plucking numbers out of the air here) and eating a lot of salty food doubles your risk then your risk is now 2 in 10000. That isn't actually a huge difference in risk. Many of these stories are picked up and reported by journalists who do not really understand the science or the statistics. Can I recommend a radio4 programme called 'more or less'? Very helpful on this subject. Its podcast.

oh for goodness sake - everything in moderation and a bit of what you fancy and if you live on processed meat then it's not helpful but it's not helpful to live on cream cakes either or white wine - so some fool told me.

This thread is making me want a ham sandwich.

I suppose I should be feeling lucky as that choice is taken away from me. I live most of the time in the Middle East where pork is banned!

what pissed me off was that the expert said low fat cheese was a good alternative.

Children should not be fed low fat anything, there is nothing wrong with ordinary cheese.

good point, humph