Just 2 rashers of bacon a day raises your risk of cancer

Health chiefs put processed meat at same level as cigarettes

JUST two rashers of bacon a day or half a burger increase the risk of cancer by a fifth, World Health Organisation officials warned yesterday.

In a major announcement, the WHO said processed meat had the same cancer- causing threat level as cigarettes, asbestos and the deadly poison arsenic.

It pointed to research showing how eating just 50g of processed meat a day increases the risks of tumours of the bowel by 18 per cent.

This is equivalent to just one sausage, half a burger, two meatballs, or two slices of ham or bacon.

As the Mail revealed last week, the WHO said it was now ranking processed meat on its list of ‘group 1’ carcinogens because of a causal link with bowel cancer. Red meat was classified one grade below as ‘probably’ causes cancer, although officials said the evidence was less clear.

But the Government last night said it would not be changing national guidelines which state it is safe to eat 70g of processed or red meat a day. Figures show the majority of adults in Britain eat at least this amount, including a third who have more than 100g. Other experts are now urging the public to cut down by swapping a BLT with a bean salad for lunch, or sausages with fish for dinner.

A traditional English breakfast of two sausages and two rashers of bacon is equivalent to 150g of processed meat – three times the daily amount linked to cancer.

One quarter-pounder burger is about 200g – four times this level.

Processed meat describes any red meat that has been cured, smoked or had preservatives added to increase its shelf-life. Scientists believe that it is these chemicals – including nitrates and salt – which trigger tumour growth. In addition, the pigment haem in red meat is also thought to cause cancer by destroying the DNA of cells in the digestive system.

So far, red and processed meat have been linked to cancers affecting the bowel, stomach and pancreas. Professor Tim Key, Cancer Research UK’s epidemiologist at the University of Oxford, said: ‘ We’ve known for some time about the probable link between red and processed meat and bowel cancer, which is backed by substantial evidence.

‘This decision doesn’t mean you need to stop eating any red and processed meat. But you may want to think about cutting down. You could try having fish for your dinner rather than sausages, or choosing to have a bean salad for lunch over a BLT.

‘Eating a bacon bap every once in a while isn’t going to do much harm. Having a healthy diet is all about moderation.’

The WHO published its guidelines after taking advice from a panel of 22 scientists on its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). They examined more than 800 studies looking at the link between tumour growth and red and processed meat.

Although they classified processed meat as having a grade 1 cancer-threat, this does not mean sausages and bacon are as lethal as cigarettes. Figures show about 34,000 cancer cases a year are triggered by processed meat compared to one million from tobacco.

Red meat was classified as having the same threat level as UV radiation, but officials also pointed out that red meat provides many nutritional benefits and is a rich source of vitamins which help muscle growth and protect the immune system.

The WHO is expected to publish a more detailed report on the links between red and processed meat and cancer over the coming months. A spokesman for Public Health England, the Government agency tasked with preventing illness, said they would wait for this evidence before deciding whether to change national guidelines

The meat industry was quick to downplay the WHO’s report, saying it was based on ‘weak’ evidence. Professor Robert Pickard, from the Meat Advisory Panel, which is funded by British meat producers, said: ‘I am very surprised by IARC’s strong conclusion on categorising processed red meat as definitely and red meat as being probably carcinogenic, given the lack of consensus within the scientific community and the very weak evidence regarding the causal relationship between red meat and cancer.’