Diet and nutritionProcessed meat and meat products — everyday food or slow poison?
- Paul Clayton — Dieta a nasze przeznaczenie
- Michał Tombak — Lekarz leczy, natura uzdrawia
- Jerzy Zięba — Co Cię nie zabije, to Cię wzmocni
- Grażyna Cichosz — Kwasy tłuszczowe izomerii trans w diecie człowieka (Bromatologia i Chemia Toksykologiczna 2012)
- Association between red and processed meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: a comprehensive meta-analysis of prospective studies. · Geroscience 2025
- Red and processed meat and colorectal cancer incidence: meta-analysis of prospective studies. · PLoS One 2011
- Red and processed meat consumption and cancer outcomes: Umbrella review. · Food Chem 2021
- Diet and colorectal cancer in UK Biobank: a prospective study. · Int J Epidemiol 2020
- Consumption of red meat and processed meat and cancer incidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. · Eur J Epidemiol 2021
- Orthomolecular Medicine News Service — Red Meat, Processed Meat, or No Meat?
- Orthomolecular Medicine News Service — Another Reader's Digest Absurdity: Red meat is bad - no, wait - good for you!
- Orthomolecular Medicine News Service — Pass the Mustard, or Just Pass on the Hot Dog?
Paul Clayton describes crispy bacon as carcinogenic.
- Jerzy Zięba describes pork loin with additives, including wheat gluten, and calls it toxic.
- Michał Tombak claims that highly processed foods eaten with meat and sausage are difficult to digest, and that their residue is said to produce toxins.
- Grażyna Cichosz believes that moderate consumption of meat from ruminants and dairy products containing natural trans fats poses no health risk.
What the authors write
Paul Clayton describes crispy bacon as carcinogenic.
Michał Tombak says that highly processed foods eaten with meat and sausage are difficult to digest, and that their residue is said to produce toxins.
Jerzy Zięba describes pork loin with additives, including wheat gluten, and calls it toxic.
According to Grażyna Cichosz, moderate consumption of meat from ruminants and dairy products containing natural trans fats poses no health risk.
Research from PubMed · Europe PMC
We selected 5 studies with the best, positive results. This is a selection, not a full review of all research.
Total number of studies on this topic in PubMed: 677.
A meta-analysis of prospective studies found that higher processed meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of colorectal, colon, and rectal cancer.
Aim of the study: Increasing evidence suggests that red and processed meat consumption may elevate the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), yet the magnitude and consistency of this association remain debated. This meta-analysis aims to quantify the relationship between red and processed meat intake and the risk of CRC, colon cancer, and rectal cancer using the most comprehensive set of prospective studies to date.
Results: Processed meat consumption showed similar associations with increased risk for colon cancer (HR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.20), colorectal cancer (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.14-1.28), and rectal cancer (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30). Total meat consumption also correlated with an elevated risk of colon cancer (HR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.11-1.35), colorectal cancer (HR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.22), and rectal cancer (HR = 1.28, 95% CI 1.10-1.48). This meta-analysis provides robust evidence that high consumption of red and processed meats is significantly associated with an increased risk of colorectal, colon, and rectal cancers. These findings reinforce current dietary recommendations advocating for the limitation of red and processed meat intake as part of cancer prevention strategies.
“Not stated” does not mean nobody paid — the database does not always record it.
A meta-analysis of prospective studies found an association between higher red and processed meat consumption and increased colorectal cancer risk.
Aim of the study: The evidence that red and processed meat influences colorectal carcinogenesis was judged convincing in the 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute of Cancer Research report. Since then, ten prospective studies have published new results. Here we update the evidence from prospective studies and explore whether there is a non-linear association of red and processed meats with colorectal cancer risk.
Results: Relevant prospective studies were identified in PubMed until March 2011. For each study, relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were extracted and pooled with a random-effects model, weighting for the inverse of the variance, in highest versus lowest intake comparison, and dose-response meta-analyses. Red and processed meats intake was associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. The summary relative risk (RR) of colorectal cancer for the highest versus the lowest intake was 1.22 (95% CI = 1.11-1.34) and the RR for every 100 g/day increase was 1.14 (95% CI = 1.04-1.24). Non-linear dose-response meta-analyses revealed that colorectal cancer risk increases approximately linearly with increasing intake of red and processed meats up to approximately 140 g/day, where the curve approaches its plateau. The associations were similar for colon and rectal cancer risk.
“Not stated” does not mean nobody paid — the database does not always record it.
An umbrella review found that processed meat consumption may be associated with an increased risk of several cancers, including colorectal cancer.
Aim of the study: The purpose of this umbrella review was to evaluate the quality of evidence, validity and biases of the associations between red and processed meat consumption and multiple cancer outcomes according to existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The umbrella review identified 72 meta-analyses with 20 unique outcomes for red meat and 19 unique outcomes for processed meat.
Results: The umbrella review identified 72 meta-analyses with 20 unique outcomes for red meat and 19 unique outcomes for processed meat. Red meat consumption was associated with increased risk of overall cancer mortality, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), bladder, breast, colorectal, endometrial, esophageal, gastric, lung and nasopharyngeal cancer. Processed meat consumption might increase the risk of overall cancer mortality, NHL, bladder, breast, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, nasopharyngeal, oral cavity and oropharynx and prostate cancer. Dose-response analyses revealed that 100 g/d increment of red meat and 50 g/d increment of processed meat consumption were associated with 11%-51% and 8%-72% higher risk of multiple cancer outcomes, respectively, and seemed to be not correlated with any benefit.
“Not stated” does not mean nobody paid — the database does not always record it.
In the UK Biobank study, people who ate more red and processed meat had a higher risk of colorectal cancer.
Aim of the study: Most of the previous studies on diet and colorectal cancer were based on diets consumed during the 1990s.
Results: During an average of 5.7 years of follow-up, 2609 cases of colorectal cancer occurred. Participants who reported consuming an average of 76 g/day of red and processed meat compared with 21 g/day had a 20% [95% confidence interval (CI): 4-37] higher risk of colorectal cancer. Participants in the highest fifth of intake of fibre from bread and breakfast cereals had a 14% (95% CI: 2-24) lower risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was associated with an 8% (95% CI: 4-12) higher risk per 10 g/day higher intake. Fish, poultry, cheese, fruit, vegetables, tea and coffee were not associated with colorectal-cancer risk. Consumption of red and processed meat at an average level of 76 g/d that meets the current UK government recommendation (≤90 g/day) was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Alcohol was also associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer, whereas fibre from bread and breakfast cereals was associated with a reduced risk.
“Not stated” does not mean nobody paid — the database does not always record it.
A meta-analysis found an association between processed meat consumption and an increased risk of several cancers, including colorectal cancer.
Aim of the study: Red meat and processed meat consumption has been hypothesized to increase risk of cancer, but the evidence is inconsistent. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies to summarize the evidence of associations between consumption of red meat (unprocessed), processed meat, and total red and processed meat with the incidence of various cancer types.
Results: Processed meat consumption was significantly associated with a 6% greater breast cancer risk, an 18% greater colorectal cancer risk, a 21% greater colon cancer risk, a 22% greater rectal cancer risk, and a 12% greater lung cancer risk. Total red and processed meat consumption was significantly associated with greater risk of colorectal cancer (RR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.08-1.26), colon cancer (RR = 1.21; 95% CI = 1.09-1.34), rectal cancer (RR = 1.26; 95% CI = 1.09-1.45), lung cancer (RR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.09-1.33), and renal cell cancer (RR = 1.19; 95% CI = 1.04-1.37). This comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis study showed that high red meat intake was positively associated with risk of breast cancer, endometrial cancer, colorectal cancer, colon cancer, rectal cancer, lung cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma, and high processed meat intake was positively associated with risk of breast, colorectal, colon, rectal, and lung cancers.
“Not stated” does not mean nobody paid — the database does not always record it.
Perspectives and opinion materials
The content below presents the authors’ opinions, interpretations and hypotheses. It is not treated as equal to scientific studies and systematic reviews.
Pisaczek does not judge who is right. It shows what was written and where to read it. Every sentence above has its source.