Natural Ways to Beat Spring Allergies
(Health Secrets) Yet another wrong-minded study condemns red meat as a cancer cause. Researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) found that feeding a non-human sugar compound (Neu5Gc) found in other mammals to mice that were engineered to be deficient in the sugar greatly increased cancer risk.
The research team had hypothesized that eating red meat triggers the immune system to fight Neu5Gc, causing inflammation and identified chronic inflammation as a major risk factor for cancer. To test their hypothesis, the researchers engineered mice to be lacking in Neu5Gc like humans are. When the mice were fed the sugar, they developed inflammation. Tumor formation increased five times over and the Neu5Gc gathered in the tumors.
At the conclusion of the study, the scientists reported that “This is the first time we have directly shown that mimicking the exact situation in humans – feeding non-human Neu5Gc and inducing anti-Neu5Gc antibodies – increases spontaneous cancers in mice.
Where does one even begin to address such bologna? Earth to medical scientists: toxins and the inflammation they cause are what causes cancer, not red meat and that is likely what your study just proved once again. And yes, sugar does gather in cancer cells – after all, it is part of the cancer process for cells to stop taking in oxygen and begin taking in sugar as the cells revert to a primitive form of respiration which uses sugar instead of oxygen to produce energy.
Imagine that – feeding excess sugar to mice engineered to have very little sugar resulted in cancer. And from THAT they condemn red meat as a cancer culprit in humans? Humans have been eating meat, including red meat, for many, many millennia – so where were all the cancers until the last century or so? They were pretty much non-existent, the same as all the manmade toxins.
Could it be that if you engineer mice to have very little of a sugar compound, the mice may be intolerant of the compound much the same as some people are intolerant to gluten and lactose? And then on top of that, once the inflammation developed the mice were getting fed all that cancer-feeding sugar.
How does this rodent study explain the recent study of actual humans which found that people who ate no meat were likely to be less healthy in several key health categories compared to meat eaters – and one category was cancer.
Despite what the folks who worship the China Study may think, the fact is that over all the millennia, we have adapted to and utilized eating meat for key nutritional benefits, the same as is the case with vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds and tubers. If you leave meat out, you are setting yourself up for some serious long term health issues unless you plan to supplement very carefully.
One has to wonder what is up with all the bogus red meat studies in recent years. Typically, such studies have lumped all meat products, including processed toxin-laden meat and feedlot meat given antibiotics and growth hormones and given feed which often contains pesticides and herbicides together with healthy meats such as organic, pastured grass-fed beef. And now this study which ignores all the millennia that we have eaten meat without getting cancer!
Could it be that mainstream medicine, whose only marketplace is our bodies, realizes that scaring people away from red meat altogether will result in more sick people and thus more patients? Whereas actually healing people and helping people be healthy in the first place will COST mainstream medicine untold billions of dollars?
What the study actually confirmed is that items the body finds toxic and the resultant inflammation are indeed cancer causing culprits. In addition, people who fail to eat at least some healthy red meat and other healthy meats do so at their own peril. Of course that red meat should be of highest quality from grass-fed animals, the kind our ancestors ate before feedlots came along.
