Introduction
Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the leading causes of death in both women and men. Just like other malignancies, the source of this condition is not understood correctly. However, the heterogeneity of CRC could explain why it results from the complex interrelationship between the environment and someone’s genes.
Experts indicate that red meat, a common source of protein in human beings, remains a possible cause or trigger of CRC (Turesky, 2018). However, the existing evidence remains unconvincing or incapable of guiding more people to protect themselves against this terminal condition. By completing the intended argumentative essay, it is possible to guide more people to make the right choices regarding red meat.
Common misconceptions include that meat is a source of protein, that cancers could have genetic sources only, and that CRC is still a medical problem affecting many vegetarians. Around 5.25 million individuals live with this globally, while the number is expected to rise (American Cancer Society, 2020). Men are affected the most at around 4.4 percent, while the prevalence rate for women is 4.1 percent (American Cancer Society, 2020).
In the US, the latest statistics reveal that around 52,500 deaths die from CRC annually (American Cancer Society, 2020). In a UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey poll, around 43 percent of the respondents consumed over 70grams/d of red meat (Hobbs-Grimmer et al., 2021). The exact number of people who did not identify red meat as a risk factor for a higher body mass index (BMI) and CRC (Hobbs-Grimmer et al., 2021). Red meat is a risk factor for CRC since it contains carcinogenic elements, triggers the condition when consumed in large quantities, and remains a primary food source in developed countries.
Evidence from the Developing World
High CRC incident rates are reported in the developing world, where more people have access to red and processed meat. In different nations associated with successful economies, more citizens consume different types of red meat, such as pork, mutton, and beef (Hobbs-Grimmer et al., 2021). For instance, Rahadiani et al. (2022) observed that many young people in Indonesia were eating more red meat due to the improving economic situation. Such a trend was directly linked to the increasing cases of CRC.
In another analysis, Klusek et al. (2019) observed that the developing world presented additional opportunities for producing and marketing processed animal products. This trend will encourage more people to purchase and consume processed red meat. The recorded observations could show a robust correlation between red meat and CRC in developed economies or countries (Rahadiani et al., 2022).
However, some scholars have presented additional arguments to support the idea that red meat might not be the primary cause of CRC. For example, Klusek et al. (2019) revealed that CRC could emerge from numerous bodily synergistic factors, such as gender, age, smoking, genes, and diet. In some of the developing countries, many people have access to different addictive substances and lead sedentary lifestyles (Rahadiani et al., 2022).
Consequently, the move to identify red meat as the leading reason for the increasing cases of CRC in different nations could be erroneous. Diet remains an environmental factor capable of dictating the outcomes of a person’s health and the subsequent development of CRC. Despite the counterarguments, red meat remains a leading culprit since its availability in the developing world could explain CRC’s current statistics.
Carcinogenic Red Meat
Red meat is identified as carcinogenic and capable of causing different cancers in human beings, including CRC. The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies red meat under Group 2A, meaning that it is toxic and capable of causing various health challenges (IARC, n.d.). Other substances listed as dangerous to humans included tobacco and pollutants (Turesky, 2018).
The possible cancer types directly linked to the consumption of red meat included stomach tumors and CRC (Saliba et al., 2019). While these evidences reveal that red meat is a risk factor for the development of cancer cells, it remains impossible to understand the mechanisms associated with the development of CRC. However, past scholars have presented various insights focusing on the carcinogenic properties of red meat (Turesky, 2018).
For example, Yiannakou et al. (2022) indicate that red meat contains PAHs, infectious agents, heme iron, and HCAs. These compounds could affect the normal functioning of the colon, thereby triggering the development of CRC. Most of the past studies have shown conclusively that different forms of processed and red meat could increase the risk of CRC by 2030 percent (Saliba et al., 2019). Women were observed to be at risk of developing additional health challenges due to their continued intake of lamp and pork meat (Turesky, 2018).
Despite the strong evidence associated with these arguments, some scholars have opposed them in favor of genetics and dietary intakes. For instance, Yiannakou et al. (2022) identified smoking and consumption of roasted meat as possible triggers of CRC. This observation would support the idea that red meat could not be the leading cause of this medical condition.
Klusek et al. (2019) further indicated that exposure to hazardous chemicals and toxic gases in the environment could increase a person’s risk for CRC. Despite the strength of these opposing arguments, scholars should not ignore the dangers associated with red meat (IARC, 2022). The toxins and chemicals found in red meat are non-human element that predisposes humans to carcinogens that predispose them to CRC.
Quantity of Red Meat and CRC
Individuals who consume large quantities of red meat daily will have increased chances of developing colorectal cancer. For instance, Saliba et al. (2019) revealed that people who consumed around 90g or more of cooked red meat in a given day increased their risk for developing CRC. Ramírez-Díaz et al. (2021) went further to indicate that excess red meat could trigger the development of malignant cells, thereby maximizing the risk for both prostate and pancreatic cancers. Nutritionists have supported this idea by revealing that patients diagnosed with CRC and other chronic conditions could minimize their intake of red or processed meat (Veettil et al., 2021).
They could substitute their protein sources with other foods, such as chicken, fish, and beans. In their investigation, Saliba et al. (2019) revealed that the risk of CRC in people above 18 could be minimized by reducing daily intake of red meat to around 70 g or less. The effort could improve the body’s response against the developing malignant cells. To support this observation, Yiannakou et al. (2022) completed a study that indicated that most people who relied on vegetarian diets had reduced chances of developing cancer.
However, most of these insights have received unique opposition from different investigators. For example, Veettil et al. (2021) indicated that human beings could record positive health outcomes after consuming meat since it was a good source of protein. Saliba et al. (2019) advance the idea by encouraging people to strike a balance between animal-based and plant-based food sources to prevent various medical complications.
Some skeptics argue that reducing red meat consumption could be self-defeating since the product would have already entered the body system (Veettil et al., 2021). More studies are still being completed to understand the complexities surrounding the issue. While some of these opposing arguments could be valid, people should consider most of the completed epidemiological studies since they could disclose the health implications of red meat (Cancer.org, n.d.). By reducing the quantities of consumed red meat or avoiding it altogether, more people can get rid of CRC.
Conclusion
The completed discussion has relied on scientific information to reveal that red meat consumed in large quantities contains carcinogenic compounds that trigger the development of CRC. Citizens should be aware of this correlation since it contributes to a significant health epidemic capable of claiming lives. Individuals should be informed about this topic to minimize their intake of red meat, consider vegetarian diets, and transform their lifestyles. The effort can reverse the challenges attributed to CRC and other chronic diseases. If more members of society misunderstand this issue, chances are high that CRC will continue to claim lives.
Despite the nature of these arguments, more studies are necessary to address the gaps in the literature regarding the risk factors associated with red meat. Current research has numerous limitations, including conflicting interests among medical scholars, cancer research, health, nutrition, and international corporations. Based on these issues, the available information regarding the development of CRC, its causes, and the role of red meat remains scanty.
The study has, therefore, begun in an effort to address the issue from an informed perspective. Future scholars should focus more on the quantity that people should consume and some of the carcinogenic elements in meat. Additional genetic studies would be recommended to link diet, quantity, and family background to CRC.
References
American Cancer Society. (2020). Colorectal cancer facts & figures 2020-2022. American Cancer Society.
Cancer.org. (n.d.). Key statistics for colorectal cancer. Web.
Hobbs-Grimmer, D. A., Givens, D. I., & Lovegrove, J. A. (2021). Associations between red meat, processed red meat and total red and processed red meat consumption, nutritional adequacy and markers of health and cardio-metabolic diseases in British adults: A cross-sectional analysis using data from UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey. European Journal of Nutrition, 60(6), 2979-2997. Web.
IARC. (2022). International Agency for Research on Cancer. Web.
IARC. (n.d.). IARC monographs on the identification of carcinogenic hazards to humans. Web.
Klusek, J., Nasierowska-Guttmejer, A., Kowalik, A., Wawrzycka, I., Chrapek, M., Lewitowicz, P., Radowicz-Chil, A., Klusek, J., & Głuszek, S. (2019). The influence of red meat on colorectal cancer occurrence is dependent on the genetic polymorphisms of s-glutathione transferase genes. Nutrients, 11(7), 1682-1689. Web.
Rahadiani, N., Habiburrahman, M., Abdullah, M., Jeo, W. S., Stephanie, M., Handjari, D. R., & Krisnuhoni, E. (2022). Analysing 11 years of incidence trends, clinicopathological characteristics, and forecasts of colorectal cancer in young and old patients: A retrospective cross-sectional study in an Indonesian national referral hospital. BMJ Open, 12(9), 1-21. Web.
Ramírez-Díaz, M. D. P., Alvarez-Bañuelos, M. T., Robaina-Castellanos, M. S., Castro-Enríquez, P. P., & Guzmán-García, R. E. (2021). Association of family history and life habits in the development of colorectal cancer: A matched case-control study in Mexico. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8633-8643. Web.
Saliba, W., Rennert, H. S., Gronich, N., Gruber, S. B., & Rennert, G. (2019). Red meat and processed meat intake and risk of colorectal cancer: A population-based case control study. European Journal of Cancer and Prevention, 28(4), 287-293. Web.
Turesky, R. J. (2018). Mechanistic evidence for red meat and processed meat intake and cancer risk: A follow-up on the International Agency for Research on Cancer Evaluation of 2015.Chimia (Aarau), 72(10), 718-724. Web.
Veettil, S. K., Wong, T. Y., Loo, Y. S., Playdon, M. C., Lai, N. M., Giovannucci, E. L., & Chaiyakunapruk, N. (2021). Role of diet in colorectal cancer incidence. JAMA Network Open, 4(2), e2037341. Web.
Yiannakou, I., Barber, L. E., Li, S., Adams-Campbell, L. L., Palmer, J. R., Rosenberg, L., & Petrick, J. L. (2022). A prospective analysis of red and processed meat intake in relation to colorectal cancer in the black women’s health study. The Journal of Nutrition, 152(5), 1254-1262. Web.