Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat: What about environmental contaminants?

Domingo, José L.; Nadal, Martí

doi:10.1016/j.envres.2015.11.031

Cited by 61 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Red meat has been described as a potential cause of BC by several mechanistic hypotheses: the generation of carcinogenic by-products (HCAs and PAHs) due to cooking meat at high temperatures [7], animal fat [13], heme iron [4] and the animal sugar molecule Nglycolyneuraminic acid [26], which could promote inflammation, oxidative stress, and tumour formation; hormone residues of the exogenous hormones for growth stimulation in beef cattle, which have high affinity for estrogen or androgen receptors [7], and carcinogenic environmental pollutants present in raw or unprocessed meat, such as heavy metals [27]. Potent human carcinogens present in red meat-rich diets, but not white meat [28], are the N-nitroso compounds (NOCs) [7] -N-nitrosamines or N-nitrosoamides-formed in processed meat…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meat intake, methods and degrees of cooking and breast cancer risk in the MCC-Spain study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meat intake, methods and degrees of cooking and breast cancer risk in the MCC-Spain study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Red meat also contains contaminating inorganic toxins, such as arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), mercury (Hg), lead (Pb), pesticides among many others (Domingo and Nadal, 2016). These toxins can be derived from cooking processes, or from industrial sources during meat processing.…”

Section: Existing Theories To Explain Increased Disease Risks Of Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human risk of diseases associated with red meat intake: Analysis of current theories and proposed role for metabolic incorporation of a non-human sialic acid

Alisson-Silva

Kawanishi

Varki

2016

Molecular Aspects of Medicine

130

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most consistent epidemiological associations between diet and human disease risk is the impact of red meat consumption (beef, pork, and lamb, particularly in processed forms). While risk estimates vary, associations are reported with all-cause mortality, colorectal and other carcinomas, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, and possibly other inflammatory processes. There are many proposed explanations for these associations, some long discussed in the literature. Attempts to explain the effects of red meat consumption have invoked various red meat-associated agents, including saturated fat, high salt intake, Trimethylamine–N-oxide (TMAO) generation by microbiota, and environmental pollutants contaminating red meat, none of which are specific for red meat. Even the frequently mentioned polycyclic aromatic carcinogens arising from high temperature cooking methods are not red meat specific, as these are also generated by grilling poultry or fish, as well as by other forms of cooking. The traditional explanations that appear to be more red meat specific invoke the impact of N-nitroso compounds, heme iron, and the potential of heme to catalyze endogenous nitrosation. However, heme can be denatured by cooking, high levels of plasma hemopexin will block its tissue delivery, and much higher amounts of heme likely originate from red blood cell breakdown in vivo. Therefore, red meat-derived heme could only contribute to colorectal carcinoma risk, via direct local effects. Also, none of these mechanisms explain the apparent human propensity i.e., other carnivores have not been reported at high risk for all these diseases. A more recently proposed hypothesis involves infectious agents in beef from specific dairy cattle as agents of colorectal cancer. We have also described another mechanistic explanation for the human propensity for risk of red-meat associated diseases that is consistent with most observations: metabolic incorporation of a non-human sialic acid N-glycolylneuraminic acid (Neu5Gc) into the tissues of red meat consumers and the subsequent interaction with inflammation-provoking antibodies against this “xenoautoantigen”. Overall, we conclude that while multiple mechanisms are likely operative, many proposed theories to date are not specific for red meat, and that the viral and xenoautoantigen theories deserve further consideration. Importantly, there are potential non-toxic dietary antidotes, if the xenoautoantigen is indeed correct.

show abstract

“…At the present time, much investigative research is being carried out to replace carcinogenic antioxidants, mainly in processed meat. A recent study suggested that processed meats could be carcinogenic [4] or that chemical contaminants could be added to meat products [5]. Kumar et al [6] confirmed this in the review "Toxicological and Carcinogenic Effects of Synthetic Antioxidants."…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

The Antioxidant Capacity of Rosemary and Green Tea Extracts to Replace the Carcinogenic Antioxidant (BHA) in Chicken Burgers

Pires

Munekata

Villanueva

et al. 2017

Journal of Food Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of natural extracts (rosemary and green tea extracts) in frozen storage of chicken burgers. Chicken burger treatments were prepared as follows: control (CON), 20 mg BHA/kg (BHA20), 10 mg green tea extract/kg (GT10), 38 mg green tea extract/kg (GT38), 18.6 mg rosemary extract/kg (RO18), and 480 mg rosemary extract/kg (RO480). Analysis of physicochemical parameters, color, TBAR index, and sensory acceptance were performed at 0, 30, 60, and 120 days of storage at −18°C in burgers packaged in LDPE plastic bags. The addition of natural antioxidants did not affect (p>0.05) the color and physicochemical parameters of the chicken burgers. After 120 days at −18°C, the RO480 sample showed a TBAR index similar (p>0.05) to BHA20 (0.423 and 0.369 mg, resp.). Sensory acceptance did not differ (p>0.05) among the treatments throughout the storage period (p>0.05).

show abstract

Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat: What about environmental contaminants?

Cited by 61 publications

References 53 publications

Meat intake, methods and degrees of cooking and breast cancer risk in the MCC-Spain study

Meat intake, methods and degrees of cooking and breast cancer risk in the MCC-Spain study

Human risk of diseases associated with red meat intake: Analysis of current theories and proposed role for metabolic incorporation of a non-human sialic acid

The Antioxidant Capacity of Rosemary and Green Tea Extracts to Replace the Carcinogenic Antioxidant (BHA) in Chicken Burgers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About