Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom News

Stop Adding Cancer-Causing Chemicals To Bacon, Experts Tell Meat Industry (theguardian.com) 302

The reputation of the meat industry will sink to that of big tobacco unless it removes cancer-causing chemicals from processed products such as bacon and ham, a coalition of experts and politicians in UK warn this week. From a report: Led by Professor Chris Elliott, the food scientist who ran the UK government's investigation into the horse-meat scandal, and Dr Aseem Malhotra, a cardiologist, the coalition claims there is a "consensus of scientific opinion" that the nitrites used to cure meats produce carcinogens called nitrosamines when ingested. It says there is evidence that consumption of processed meats containing these chemicals results in 6,600 bowel cancer cases every year in the UK -- four times the fatalities on British roads -- and is campaigning for the issue to be taken as seriously as sugar levels in food.

"Government action to remove nitrites from processed meats should not be far away," Malhotra said. "Nor can a day of reckoning for those who dispute the incontrovertible facts. The meat industry must act fast, act now -- or be condemned to a similar reputational blow to that dealt to tobacco." [...] In a statement issued today, the coalition warns "that not enough is being done to raise awareness of nitrites in our processed meat and their health risks, in stark contrast to warnings regularly issued regarding sugar and fattening foods."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stop Adding Cancer-Causing Chemicals To Bacon, Experts Tell Meat Industry

Comments Filter:
  • by walterbyrd ( 182728 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:09PM (#57882182)

    Not sure if this is breaking news.

    • I was taught this in second year Organic Chemistry...in 1978.

      We were told you needed two things: beer and meat pizza.
      The nitrites were in the meat in the pizza.
      The beer provided the amines.
      Combine the two and you get the nitrosamines.

      Pretty unforgettable lesson.

      BTW, it is not really surprising this is only coming out now. Chicken feed contained an arsenic compound...for forty years.

      Come to think of it, 1978+40=2018.

      • by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) * on Monday December 31, 2018 @07:29AM (#57883284) Homepage Journal

        You also learned that ascorbic acid will bind up most of it in the stomach too, then. Which is why most meat manufacturers add Vitamin C to their products.

        But that makes for a boring headline in The DaIly Anecdote.

        • Horse shit, you're an idiot if you think they're adding shit for health reasons, as if food processors are Mother Teresa.

          They add ascorbic acid as a preservative. They're required to add stuff to prevent spoilage. They use ascorbic acid because it is cheap and people don't complain.

          Also, it is well established that Americans who eat processed meat have a higher rate of colon cancer. It isn't a theoretical harm that might not exist, because [some stupid theory that doesn't explain the increased cancer rate].

  • Sugar... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by js290 ( 697670 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:11PM (#57882188)
    Sugar is the most carcinogenic ingredient in cured bacon. Some butchers will have sugarless bacon. Cancer from a physicist's perspective: a new theory of cancer [bit.ly]
    • When you read the words "new theory" and you're not an academic researching in the same field, you should ignore it, because that means it isn't yet well-established.

      When you see words like "new theory" next to words that talk about the speaker's qualifications, you should understand that you're being sold something. If there was something newly considered proven, the appeal would be to a published study and the published studies that verified it, not to the letters next to a speaker's name.

      Don't be credulo

  • by Presence Eternal ( 56763 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:12PM (#57882198)

    IS there any alternative to nitrates/ites? My understanding is the alternative to nitrates is botulism.

    Either that or lying about nitrate content. I've NEVER seen "nitrate free" meat that wasn't lying with fine print: "..except that which naturally occurs in celery powder" is the same thing as "contains no salt, except that which naturally occurs in seawater."

    • by Anonymous Coward
      yes, you can just naturally smoke or cure your bacon without them. They are by no means necessary, they do simplify the process. Plenty of good butchers provide naturally cured/smoked meats.
    • by Misagon ( 1135 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:58PM (#57882318)

      Modern meat-processing is clean and cold enough that there is no longer any case for using sodium-nitrite to prevent botulism.

      The real reason for using nitrite is that it makes the meat products red -- making meat look like how consumers are used to.
      Meat without nitrite is more grey, which looks less appetising.

    • by larryjoe ( 135075 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @11:04PM (#57882340)

      IS there any alternative to nitrates/ites? My understanding is the alternative to nitrates is botulism.

      From Wikipedia: "While meat-preservation processes like curing were mainly developed in order to prevent disease and to increase food security, the advent of modern preservation methods mean that in most developed countries today curing is instead mainly practised for its cultural value and desirable impact on the texture and taste of food. For lesser-developed countries, curing remains a key process in the production, transport and availability of meat."

      Curing in the developed world is not needed for safe food. It is used purely for taste and aesthetics. Of course, this is obvious. The same cuts of meat are commonly eaten in non-cured forms (either with artificial nitrate of celery-based nitrate) with no fears of botulism or other illnesses.

      The big question is whether people are willing to eat gray hot dogs. Maybe we can swap out the nitrates with red food coloring ...

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • by kqc7011 ( 525426 )
      I have eaten lots of "nitrate free" meat, it was and is venison from deer that we have taken. Some of the venison sausage from those same deer, curing salt (sodium nitrate) is added. It all depends on the recipe. If someone objects to the nitrates, just tell then that pink salt is added. They probably are thinking Himalayan salt when it is Pink curing salt #1 or #2.
  • I'm a bit surprised this study didn't blow up social media when it came out. I mean, bacon, cats, and the Kardashians are 90% of the interwebs.

    • by mentil ( 1748130 )

      I thought porn was 90% of the interwebs. Unless there's some overlap with bacon, cats, and/or the Kardashians. I reject your reality and substitute my own!

      • Religion actually ties them together. You know, the story about the beast with two back bacons.

      • by drewsup ( 990717 )

        Mmmm...bacon porn.....

      • by gtall ( 79522 )

        Leave the Kardashians and their large butts out of this...although personally I think they've bellied up to the bacon bar more often than is good for them.

        • by burhop ( 2883223 )

          Wow, no up votes for this quippy thread on bacon. I guess we will all be looking at Slashdot ads this week.

  • No real evidence (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    There's no real evidence that nitrate cause cancer, if anything it's useful to prevent foodborn illness like botulism.
    Most studies that link nitrate to cancer have been disproved by other studies.
    This isn't a clear open and shut case like cigarettes were.

    To me, this is like people trying to convince us that GMOs are bad when there's hundreds of studies that prove they aren't but a handful that says "well maybe it could cause cancer in a very specific and unrealistic scenario on mice and human cells samples

    • Re:No real evidence (Score:5, Informative)

      by jma05 ( 897351 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @03:19AM (#57882870)

      GMO activists aren't telling you that nitrites cause cancer, the scientists are.
      Show me a scientific body that says nitrites are safe, not some health magazine or a "nutritionist".
      The link isn't new and the concerns haven't abated at all.
      There are always studies that go both ways in everything. An average Joe isn't equipped to weigh the evidence and understand the scientific consensus.
      The industry also frequently tries to muddy the waters saying that the evidence is a wash.

    • Re:No real evidence (Score:5, Informative)

      by Deef ( 162646 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @03:55AM (#57882928)

      There's no real evidence that nitrate cause cancer, if anything it's useful to prevent foodborn illness like botulism.
      Most studies that link nitrate to cancer have been disproved by other studies.

      A number of consensus studies recently, such as those cited in the paper that the article is about, claim that there IS substantial evidence that nitrates cause cancer.

      What is your evidence for your claim that "There's no real evidence that nitrate causes cancer."? Are you an expert in the field?

      It appears to me that the experts claiming that there IS evidence have so far provided substantially more evidence for their point of view than you have.

      Saying there's "no real evidence" sounds a lot like the No true scotsman [wikipedia.org] fallacy.

      Disregarding the consensus view of experts in a scientific field is something that should be done with great caution, and preferably with strong evidence of some kind, not just skepticism.

      • Re: No real evidence (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Might want to read that article, because the studies were talking about processed meats, with only a suspicion that it was due to nitrates. The only study that was specifically looking at nitrates was looking at mental health issues. The studies are weak in that they largely rely on self-reporting consumption and exercise. High levels of salt and sugar are other possible issues, as is a correlation between high processed food in the diet and generally poor diet and exercise.

        If we were to take their studies

      • by Aighearach ( 97333 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @01:46PM (#57884842)

        When you threaten the source of toxins, the neckbeard takes control of the host and releases chemicals into their brain that makes them feel as if the toxin is the mother they wished they had. They'll fight to the death for whatever cause their neckbeard tells them to support.

        There is no reliable cure, even if there are anecdotal examples of somebody overcoming a neckbeard infection.

  • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:21PM (#57882220)
    Because nitrites are a natural component of certain vegetables - mainly celery extract. If you ban nitrites, you ban celery and most green vegetables. If you ban artificial nitrites, processed meat packagers will simply use celery extract as a preservative. That's what the "nitrite-free bacon" products do - if you read their list of ingredients, you'll find celery extract listed prominently. Because the natural nitrites in it are used to preserve the cured meat in lieu of artificially produced nitrites. The only difference is the former can be labeled "celery extract" while the latter must be labeled as "nitrties."

    At some point you have to accept that lots of naturally-occurring substances can kill you. And stop going on witch hunts against things just because they have a scary name that you don't recognize even though you've been eating, breathing, or rolling around in it all your life.

    The only way I can see this working is like how we recommend how much fish you should eat because of the different amounts of mercury they contain. Come up with a list of the maximum amount of a food you should eat in a week due to the nitrites they contain. Bacon, hot dogs, celery, cabbage, carrots, spinach, beets, etc. And publish those as health advisories.
    • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @10:29PM (#57882244)
      why nitrates in vegetables aren't really a problem [healthline.com]

      TL;DR; cooking a high protein food at high heat is what makes them cancerous.
      • what made me give up processed meats was finding out how it was we figured out nitrates caused cancer: a bunch of cows were being fed expired herring and getting liver cancer at abnormally high rates. Now, to be fair those cows ate a _lot_ more nitrates than what's expected in a day, but then again so do a lot of Americans...

        To be fair I don't care much for meat (I've got a weak sense of taste and mostly pick up on texture in foods so meat's kinda bleah to me).
        • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

          So let's make this clear, having read that study. Cows were being fed rancid herring, which not only has higher nitrate levels, but also a variety of toxins produced by the meat going rancid. But it's the nitrates that caused liver cancer, and not the liver processing the high levels of toxins that were also present and in turn killing the liver. Especially since it showed that the liver had no problems processing the levels and simply passing it directly into the kidney's and intestines.

          Does this make a

      • That was interesting. So boiling a hot dog would be fine, carbonizing the outside over a campfire not so much. And the Christmas ham roasted at 325 F in a covered pan should be fine too.

        A possible nitrosamine is still better than botulism though.

      • by mentil ( 1748130 )

        If we tried to ban grilled/seared steak, New York would secede!

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        When you use celery juice in natural cured bacon, you are not adding any nitrates. However when celery juice interacts with the meat over time,. it breaks down into a concentration of nitrates that is 4 times the legal limit of just adding nitrates. However since this is "naturally occurring" as part of celery, it's not banned or regulated.

    • At some point you have to accept that lots of naturally-occurring substances can kill you. And stop going on witch hunts against things just because they have a scary name that you don't recognize even though you've been eating, breathing, or rolling around in it all your life.

      We should go back to putting radium in chocolate. https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com] to give you an inner glow. After all it's naturally-occurring right?

      The point is not a witch hunt. It's a continuously evolving understanding. It's an industry adapting. it's the present adapting to new information. Nitrites are NOT needed to process meat, celery extract or otherwise. Just because some people eat celery doesn't mean you shouldn't also ban this entirely preventable and nonsensical ingredient being put into me

    • by Rutulian ( 171771 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @12:03PM (#57884400)

      Agree with your general point, but this whole discussion seems to be a little confused about nitrates vs nitrites vs nitrosamines, so a quick chemistry overview for some clarity:

      Nitrates (most oxidized form) -> nitrites (two-electron reduction of nitrate. Outside of industrial processes only occurs biologically by the bacterial enzyme nitrate reductase) -> Nitrosamines (reaction of nitrites with secondary amines. Requires heat and/or acidic conditions. These are generally stable compounds.) -> Hydroxylated nitrosamines (Unstable intermediate formed by enzymatic processes that mostly occur in the liver) -> Nitronium cation (spontaneous breakdown of the hydroxylated nitrosamine. Cation is an alkylating agent that can modify DNA.) -> DNA damage -> DNA repair or cancer

      The basic gist here is to illustrate that there is clear mechanistic reasoning behind the notion that nitrates have a cancer risk associated with them. But it also illustrates that the transformation is complex and there are multiple ways for harm to be mitigated long before a cancer risk is ever truly a risk.

      For example,
          Sodium nitrite in food cooked at high temperature with high protein content -> skips step 1 and facilitates direct production of nitrosamines that get ingested and transformed in the liver
          Sodium nitrate plus antioxidants -> hinders production of both nitrites and nitrosamines -> lower risk of being transformed in the liver
          Nitrates in vegetables -> typically have low protein content and lots of antioxidants, so low risk of producing nitrites or nitrosamines
          Celery juice -> naturally occurring nitrates -> no intrinsic risk of being converted to nitrites, especially if antioxidants are also present
          Celery powder -> evaporated celery juice (same as above)
          Cultured celery powder -> celery juice that is treated with bacteria and then evaporated -> this causes the nitrates to be converted to nitrites (by the bacteria) and presents a direct path to nitrosamine production if used to treat high protein content foods (aka meats)
          Bacon -> depending on above may have varying levels of nitrites or nitrosamines present after cooking, but generally low levels overall -> likely a low cancer risk, but may present a higher risk depending on frequency of consumption and other dietary factors
          Celery, arugula, beets -> high in nitrates, but no nitrites or nitrosamines present, even when cooked in the presence of meats (ex: stews) -> low, probably non-existent, cancer risk
          Cigarette smoke -> high concentration of nitrosamines inhaled directly into the lungs -> the nitrosamines still have to make their way to the liver, but represents a moderately high risk of cancer, especially considering the often habitual and frequent nature of smoking

         

  • I wish more companies sold frozen bacon, it freezes really well and there's no need to add nitrates.
    • That would likely be frozen pork belly without any nitrates or nitrates. What do you think curing is? You can use just salt but it takes a lot longer.

      • They already sell uncured bacon, and I've frozen it myself for later use. It keeps more than long enough that the only benefit to buying it already frozen is that you don't have to spend the energy to do so at home. It would cost more to ship frozen, though, so you'd pay anyway.

        The bellies are smoked and then cured with only time, then sliced into "uncured" bacon.

        • No such thing as uncured bacon - that's just pork belly. It's a misnomer that the FDA forces on companies who sell meat cured with celery juice or other forms of nitrate that don't come directly from a mineral salt. One that's used to intentionally mislead consumers too, but since it's forced by law there is no recourse.

  • More FUD (Score:4, Insightful)

    by crmarvin42 ( 652893 ) on Sunday December 30, 2018 @11:26PM (#57882426)
    Second /. Article today based on an entirely flawed premise (the one claiming that concer crops are somehow new or experimental being the other one).

    Back when the UNs IARC labelled processed meats as carcinogenic the good Dr Carroll (professor at IU Medical School) pointed out that the actual risk of eating significantly more bacon than you used to is rather small. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
  • Nitrates and nitrites have been used to cure meats since antiquity. Where did the nitrates and nitrites come from? Natural sources. Yes, that's right. It occurs in deposits in the ground and can be easily refined from nitrate-rich organic materials using technology thousands of years old.

  • Alternative? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by reanjr ( 588767 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @12:13AM (#57882510) Homepage

    Is there an alternative to curing the meat with nitrites? Because if there isn't, this is just an academic conversation. We're not going to ban cured meats, and everyone already knows meat causes cancer. No one cares. Pigs are fucking delicious. Cows are fucking delicious. We've already decided it's worth it.

    • Is there an alternative to curing the meat with nitrites?

      Yeah, not curing them. I mean there's no reason to anymore. It was done in the past for food safety reasons that are not really relevant with today's processing methods. Just like they used to bury meat in salt before refrigeration was invented.

      and everyone already knows meat causes cancer.

      But does it? Or do the things we do to it make it cause cancer.

      No one cares. Pigs are fucking delicious. Cows are fucking delicious. We've already decided it's worth it.

      We've decided given the option of eating or not eating it's worth it. We have not had a discussion on the topic of eating meat which causes cancer vs that which does not. I think you'll find less people t

      • But like you say, we don't cure meat for food safety reasons anymore. We cure meat because the curing process makes delicious animals even more delicious.

        No one's going to ban smoked salmon, so what's the endgame here besides whining about health?

  • Gimme nitrites over botulism any day. What about nitrates? can they be used w/o cancer?

  • Celery, arugular (aka rocket) and a number of other plants have far higher amounts of nitrite than bacon. If nitrites caused cancer, then celery should be banned before bacon. The fact that celery hasn't been associated with cancer completely undermines the hypothesis that nitrites in bacon cause cancer.
     

  • Nitrites don't cause cancer, but nitrosamines do. One gets converted into the other but it depends on how you prepare your breakfast. You should be an informed breakfast preparer.
  • Stay the course, meat industry. Stay the course.

  • Hot dogs use it as a preservative but it's allowed because adding vitamin C to the mix prevents the chemical reaction from happening, in theory and in a controlled lab environment, but more recent studies have shown that the human stomach does still form the carcinogen no matter how much vitamin C is added.
  • by N_Piper ( 940061 ) on Monday December 31, 2018 @02:09AM (#57882726)
    So that puts Nitrates on the same list ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]) as Vapors from frying
    Hot beverages
    Earl Grey Tea (Bergapten)
    Coffee (Acrylamide)
    Red Meat (Which already includes bacon)
    Charred Meat (2-Amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline)
    All cooked and smoked meat (N-Nitrosodimethylamine)
    and last but not least
    Shift work that disrupts the circadian rhythm
    Yeah all we need now is wheat and beans and Everything in British and American breakfasts will be cancerous...
    On a more serious note:
    I would like to reach across all the demographics of Slashdot commenters and try to get a thread going here telling the Admins that we are more critical thinkers than most and really don't appreciate this kind of clickbait alarmist fad science being posted here.
    Everyone here knows that applying the linear no threshold model to anything that causes genetic damage is bull shit
    You want a statistic bigger than 6600 cases of bowel cancer here's a statistic for you
    In the United States alone 10,000 people die a year due to stress and hysteria over Radiation and Nuclear Energy ( https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12... [nap.edu] )
    Now Imagine how many cases of stomach and bowel cancer are caused by undereducated over read people getting their stomach in knots and their panties in a twist over bullshit overstated cancer headlines.
    Right, Left, Others let's all say as one "Shut the fuck up!"
    • An important clarification on the subject of IARC Groups classification is that being in any group, like 2A Probable Carcinogens, means how strong is the EVIDENCE of such agent to be a risk of causing cancer, it has nothing to do with amount of risk related to the agent, i.e., if we had an agent that caused cancer on 100% of people it came in contact with, but there are no studies about it because it is extremely rare or unlikely to be in contact with a human would be in Group 3 (not classifiable as to its
  • *slowly raises hand* (Score:5, Informative)

    by magusxxx ( 751600 ) <magusxxx_2000NO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday December 31, 2018 @02:30AM (#57882796)

    "What about making bacon in the microwave?"

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]

    Yeah, I went there. ;)

  • Are the carcinogens the things that make bacon taste good but smell really bad while being cooked?
    Or is that simply a response I've developed from wanting to sleep while others were awake making noise while cooking bacon?

  • Look at the scary list of natural pesticides found in cabbage [wordpress.com] - among them both carcinogenic and mutagenic substances.

"I've finally learned what `upward compatible' means. It means we get to keep all our old mistakes." -- Dennie van Tassel

Working...