Posted on 05/20/2021 6:47:42 AM PDT by Red Badger
A new paper in JNCI Cancer Spectrum, published by Oxford University Press, indicates that several non-genetic factors — including greater red meat intake, lower educational attainment, and heavier alcohol use — are associated with an increase in colorectal cancer in people under 50.
In the United States, incidence rates of early-onset colorectal cancer have nearly doubled between 1992 and 2013 (from 8.6 to 13.1 per 100,000), with most of this increase due to early-onset cancers of the rectum. Approximately 1 in 10 diagnoses of colorectal cancer in this country occur in people under 50.
Researchers have observed the rise particularly among people born since the 1960s in studies from the United States, Canada, Australia, and Japan. During the same period there have been major changes in diets among younger generations across the developing world. Such changes include decreases in consumption of fruits, non-potato vegetables, and calcium-rich dairy sources. This is coupled with an increase in processed foods (e.g., meats, pizza, macaroni, and cheese, etc.) and soft drinks. Average nutrient intakes of fiber, folate, and calcium among the U.S. population are also lower than recommended.
The increase in early onset colorectal cancer is concerning to researchers because these cancers often have worse outcomes than those diagnosed in older people. It has led to recommendations that colorectal cancer screening begin at younger ages.
Previous research has outlined potential risk factors for early-onset colorectal cancer including greater consumption of processed meat, reduced consumption of vegetables and citrus fruit, greater body mass index, sedentary lifestyles, greater alcohol use, smoking, reduced aspirin use, and diabetes. However, researchers have yet to perform a comprehensive, large-scale evaluation that compares the magnitude of these risks with those for late-onset colorectal cancer and assesses whether the risks for early-onset colorectal cancer correlate with specific types of colorectal cancer.
Using data pooled from 13 population-based studies, researchers here studied 3,767 colorectal cancer cases and 4,049 controls in people under 50 and 23,437 colorectal cancer cases and 35,311 controls in people 50 or above years.
Early-onset colorectal cancer was associated with not regularly using aspirins, greater red meat intake, lower educational attainment, heavier alcohol use, and (interestingly enough) also alcohol abstinence. Researchers also found that lower total fiber intake was linked more strongly to rectal than colon cancer.
Several other colorectal cancer risk factors trended toward an association with early-onset colorectal cancer, including history of diabetes and lower folate, dietary fiber, and calcium intake. However, neither BMI nor smoking were risk factors in the early-onset group, in contrast to the late-onset group.
According to Richard Hayes, the senior investigator for this research: “this first large-scale study of non-genetic risk factors for early-onset colorectal cancer is providing the initial basis for targeted identification of those most at risk, which is imperative in mitigating the rising burden of this disease.”
Reference: 20 May 2021, JNCI Cancer Spectrum. DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkab029
This work was funded by the National Cancer Institute under R03-CA215775-02, awarded to Dr Richard Hayes, and through the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium (GECCO) funded by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Human Services (U01 CA164930, R01 CA201407), awarded to Dr Ulrike Peters. This research was funded in part through the NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA015704 and training grant T32HS026120, from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The Colon Cancer Family Registry (CCFR, www.coloncfr.org) is supported in part by funding from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH) (award U01 CA167551). The CCFR Set-1 (Illumina 1M/1M-Duo) and Set-2 (Illumina Omni1-Quad) scans were supported by NIH awards U01 CA122839 and R01 CA143247 (to GC). The CCFR Set-3 (Affymetrix Axiom CORECT Set array) was supported by NIH award U19 CA148107 and R01 CA81488 (to SBG). The CCFR Set-4 (Illumina OncoArray 600K SNP array) was supported by NIH award U19 CA148107 (to SBG) and by the Center for Table 3.
I eat plenty of red meat. 1 out of 3 ain’t bad.
And glowbull warming/detruction of the planet. Don’t forget that part. Evil meateaters.
I suspect it’s not so much the “Red Meat”, but what’s in it that they fed the animal........................
Good thing I went to a top ten rated engineering school and received an excellent education! I’m sure that school selection is greatly reducing my cancer risk!
Uh-huh.
Funny how these are the same things that also cause global warming…
“However, researchers have yet to perform a comprehensive, large-scale evaluation that compares the magnitude of these risks with those for late-onset colorectal cancer and assesses whether the risks for early-onset colorectal cancer correlate with specific types of colorectal cancer”
Please allow me to translate:
We really don’t know.
I only eat cows that drink a lot of alcohol and never went to college.
OK, McDonald's Bad, Filet Mignon Good.
Please allow me to translate:
WE NEED MORE GRANT MONEY, ASAP!........................
Hey, Laz! We can be the control group!
I drank with a few cows. I didn’t think they were at the time but the next morning, oh boy. One of the defects of sobriety.
Beyond Meat?
It’s not red meat. It’s sugar and high carbohydrate obesity.
Daily aspirin use, starting while young, is strong protection against several cancers.
That too!........................
“...but what is in it that they fed the animal......”
Other than Mad Cows being fed other cows, they get grass & grain.
Note the term “greater” meat intake. The word “too” comes into play. Too much too little by definition means normal limits have been crossed. Everything is a poison, it’s just the dosing that kills.
Balanced diet.
Correlation does not equal causation. For example, I didn’t find any indication of sex in subjects studied. Is it possible that the correlation exists mostly for males? And, if so, could it not be another causative factor, like testosterone or anal sexual activity?
While in college working for the professor who was their number one outside contract winner, I learned that you find whatever the person paying you expects to find. Sometimes you’d have to really delve into the data and get passed the circular wording to find that the data showed the opposite of the carefully worded conclusion “appeared” to say.
Not on my menu :)
“I only eat cows that drink a lot of alcohol and never went to college.”
If you can afford Kobe beef
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.