Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
PUBLICATION OF THE SUPERIOR HEALTH COUNCIL No. 8858 Red meat, processed red meats and the prevention of colorectal cancer. In this science-policy advisory report, the Superior Health Council provides an assessment of the risk of developing bowel (colorectal) cancer attributed to the consumption of red meat and of processed red meats; based on this evidence recommendations are given to prevent this disease. 4 December 2013 SUMMARY 1. Introduction The potential for the prevention of different non-communicable chronic diseases through the consumption of a healthy well-balanced diet is overwhelming and should complement the health gains that are efficiently achieved through food safety measures. The latter have reached a high degree of security because of legally compelled and efficient control. The former has received unfortunately insufficient attention. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world and in Belgium. Its incidence is highest in the developed world and differences in incidence rates are much larger than differences in mortality rates. The differences in incidence rates are mainly related to dietary factors. Key references: Pacolet et al, 2011; Ferlay et al, 2010; van Leeuwen, 2006; European Commission, 2010; Anand et al, 2008. 2. Research evidence Since 1975, epidemiological evidence has been accumulating linking the consumption of red meat to the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC), a disease that is more common in developed countries. This association has been observed for home prepared and cooked fresh meat as well as for processed red meat products. Although the literature is not always clear, the term “red meat” in this report refers to fresh red meats (mainly beef, pork, sheep or lamb but also other meats except poultry meat) that have not been subjected to other treatments than cooling, freezing and/or comminution for mixing with other red meats and salt (e.g. ground meat). Processed red meat products are defined as “meat preserved by smoking, curing or salting or by addition of chemical preservatives” by the “World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research“ (WCRF/AICR) and are here more simply specified as ”red meats preserved by salting (mainly with addition of nitrite and/or nitrate) and one or more other treatments”. Very convincing evidence on this association was obtained in the “European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition“ (EPIC) study and in work summarized and evaluated in the WCRF/AICR report, updated in 2011. − 1− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be The quality of the latter report has been strengthened by a multidisciplinary task force of independent experts for collection and review of the literature and by using stringent criteria to retain studies for review, including: - only data published in recognized peer reviewed journals (see key references) were selected; - testing for heterogeneity of data, the adjustment for co-variates including age, total energy intake, body mass index, smoking, physical activity, alcohol and other possible confounders; - the retention of cohort studies only in order to avoid bias more frequently observed in case-control studies. Up to May 2010, 13 cohort studies from 18 publications involving more than 1.500.000 subjects were available and generated a dose-response relationship in meta-analyses of the association between red meat and processed red meat consumption and the incidence of CRC. Some criticisms on the observed results in these previous reports are not convincing mainly because of questions regarding possible conflicts of interest of the authors, lack of completeness of data used and lack of precise and coherent definition of processed red meats used. Three large prospective studies involving a total of about 220.000 subjects did not observe a relation between red and/or processed red meat consumption and CRC risk. This lack of confirmation could be linked to the low intake range of red and/or processed red meat involved, the unexpected all-cause mortality rates in the cohorts, the special social status (health consciousness) and age range and the different ethnicities in the populations studied. Relevant approximate summary relative risk (RR) of CRC from the WCRF/AICR report is: 1,20 for the consumption of 50 g/d of processed red meat and of 100 g/d of red meat. Such increase in risk has a meaningful population effect on public health, though limited when considered for the individual. Both French and UK official guidelines have been published advocating a reduction of both red and processed red meat consumption in reference to a recognized increased risk of CRC. It should be realized that the reversibility of the risk related to red and processed red meat consumption has never been tested. Indeed, this would require randomized controlled clinical trials with the incidence of CRC as outcome measure involving exacting experimental requirements in terms of individuals, duration as well as control and specification of food consumption. Such trials are very hard to achieve although intervention trials are feasible and showed that a low-fat dietary pattern did not reduce the risk of colorectal cancer in postmenopausal women. Key references: Chan et al, 2001; Norat et al, 2002; Demeyer et al, 2008; WCRF/AICR, 2011; Programme National Nutrition Santé, France, 2009; Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, UK, 2010. 3. Situating the risk within the context of other risk factors CRC incidence is predominantly related to environmental risks mainly involving diet. Genetic variants of genes associated with xenobiotic absorption and metabolism probably contribute to the confounding factors affecting epidemiology but have not been clearly associated with CRC development. The modifiable risk factors physical activity, obesity (increased body mass index and waist circumference), diet (red and processed red meat, fibre), smoking and alcohol are the five main modifiable factors associated with CRC incidence. Their individual relative risks range − 2− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be between 1.20 and 1.30. Although factors are interrelated, their individual contributions are assumed to be additive. Key references: Corpet, 2011; Huxley et al, 2009; Kirkegaard et al, 2010. 4. Possible impact on prevention in Belgium The lowering of average red and processed red meat consumption in Belgium from 95 to 50 g/d might save about 1200 cases of CRC (~ 15 % of total) through primary prevention. Such effect is in line with the European action against colon cancer (http://www.stopcoloncancer.info/) and can be considered as complementary to preventive screening programs planned e.g. in Flanders and Wallonia. Key references: Atkin, 1999; De Vriese et al, 2006; Pacolet et al, 2011. 5. The importance of meat in nutrition In Belgium, the actual and recommended daily consumption of the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/meat substitutes is 161 g and < 100 g respectively according to the information of the food consumption survey (2004) and of the dietary recommendations of the Superior Health Council of 2009. Estimates of actual consumption of red meat and processed red meats within this group amount to 61 and 32 g/d respectively and at the national government level the recommended consumption of the food group “meats/fish/eggs/legumes/substitutes” is 75-100 g/d (in “Nationaal voedingsplan voor een betere gezondheid“ - “Plan National Nutrition pour une meilleure santé” at http://www.belgium.be/nl/gezondheid/gezond_leven/voeding/nationaal_plan/ or http://www.belgium.be/fr/sante/vie_saine/alimentation/plan_national/). Red and processed red meats, are main sources of high quality protein, the minerals iron and zinc and the vitamins B12 and D. More specifically, moderate amounts of red meat (~ 100 g/d) were recently shown to be valuable sources for protein synthesis in the elderly. Based on both health and environmental arguments it can however be expected that lowered amounts of red meat and processed red meats will be advocated in the food group concerned. It is shown that considerable lowering or even excluding meat intake should not harm nutritional adequacy in industrial countries. Specifically it is now clear that iron intakes below the WHO recommended intakes also prevalent in Belgian women, far exceed the levels that induce anemia. Strong evidence suggests that recommended intakes should be reviewed taking into account the tightly regulated iron absorption mechanisms varying with the iron content of the food and the regulation of relevant gene expression mediated by inflammation associated cytokine activity. As there is now an explicitly recognized equivalence between iron from meat and non-meat sources and since meat and meat products account for ~ 20 % of total iron intake, a considerable lower intake of meat and meat products is not expected to result in “iron deficiency”. Similar arguments relate to Zn, vitamin B12 and vitamin D where homeostatic control of absorption and/or supply by other animal foods or enriched foods allow for a lowering of meat intake. A similar argument can be made in relation to protein quality shown to be adequate for both high and low animal sourced foods in Western diets. An additional argument can be made for the lowering of processed red meat intake, a food group second in line in accounting for about 18 % of sodium intake, an issue clearly subject to considerable lowering. Key references: De Vriese et al, 2006; Vandevijvere et al, 2009; Millward & Garnet, 2010; Geissler & Singh, 2011;Van Winckel et al, 2011. − 3− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be 6. Carcinogenic mechanisms Apart from those induced by inherited genetic mutations, the majority of CRC cases are sporadic and thus caused by environmental factors mainly involving diet. CRC arises as a benign adenomatous polyp that is finally transformed into an invasive cancer associated with genomic instability. Today, three distinct molecular pathways of genomic instability in CRC have been recognized: the chromosomal instability pathway, the microsatellite instability pathway and the CpG island methylator phenotype pathway. Like for other types of cancer, inflammation has been suggested to be involved in the development of CRC. Within this context, inflammatory bowel disease (including both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s colitis) has been identified as an important risk factor for developing CRC. Also in the other sporadic CRC cases, chronic inflammation is likely to be involved. Furthermore, the intestinal microflora and the activity of Toll-like receptors on intestinal epithelial cells have been associated with the development of CRC. In order to explain the link between the intake of red and processed red meat and the increased risk of CRC, several hypotheses have been proposed. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and heterocyclic amines (HCA) have both been related to CRC incidence in epidemiology. Meat and processed red meats significantly contribute to their intake. PAH and HCA may be present as contaminants in the fresh meat and/or formed during cooking by contact with open flames (PAH) or by high temperature treatments to the “well done” state (HCA). Both groups of compounds are however not specific for red meat and processed red meats. They are indeed also present in fish and poultry products, foods not found to increase or even lower (fish) the risk for CRC. Nevertheless recommendations for meat cooking in order to minimize production of PAH and HCA should be considered, for household cooking as well as for cooking in restaurants and in catering. At present, N-nitroso compounds (NOCs) and/or lipid oxidation products (LOPs) are considered to be the compounds most probably responsible for the increased risk for CRC. NOCs are DNA alkylating agents that may be present in meat products, especially in processed red meat, but can also be formed endogenously. Intervention studies in human volunteers and experimental animals both showed an increase in the intestinal production of NOCs, measured as apparent total NOCs. However, until now, the carcinogenicity of the ATNC (apparent total N-nitroso compounds) formed in the gut remains unknown. LOPs on the other hand are formed during lipid peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids. The formation of LOPs and NOCs including nitrosamines has been shown to occur during nitrite (and/or nitrate) curing of red meat and subsequent digestion. Compounds of these groups, yet to be precisely identified, ingested with processed red meats may consequently be the culprits of the clearly more important cancer promoting effects of processed red meats. The presence and formation of these compounds in processed red (nitrite cured) meats deserves extensive additional research in relation to the justification of nitrite use in meat processing. Evidence from both epidemiologic and experimental studies suggests that heme plays a crucial role in the link between the risk of CRC and red and processed red meat intake. A different promoting effect of heme and nitrosyl heme on the production of NOCs and LOPS during both processing {nitrite (and/or nitrate) curing followed or not by cooking} and digestion may be involved. However, the observation that pig and poultry, two meat products with similar heme contents have different CRC promoting activities suggests that the presence of (nitrosyl)heme alone cannot explain the increased risk for CRC. The production of circulating anti-N-glycolylneuraminic acid antibodies in response to red and processed red meat ingestion, leading to local chronic inflammation and a propensity to develop dietrelated carcinomas seems to offer a more plausible explanation. Indeed, this mammalian − 4− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be cell surface sialic acid is not produced by bacteria or plants, is low or absent in poultry and fish, but abundant in red meats (mainly beef, pork, sheep but also meats from other species) and metabolically accumulated by humans, all genetically deficient in its production. Considering all the different hazardous compounds present in red and processed red meat, the increased risk for CRC may not be associated with one unique causative agent, but with the presence of different compounds, acting on multiple stages of CRC. Key references: Hedlund et al, 2008; Hogg, 2007; IJssennagger et al, 2012; Joosen et al, 2009; Loh et al, 011; Lombardi-Boccia et al, 2002; Mirvish et al, 2008; Rohrmann et al, 2009; Sinha et al, 2005; Terzic et al, 2010; Westbrook et al, 2010. 7. Possibilities for mitigation Epidemiology indicates that dietary changes may alleviate the carcinogenic effects of red meat and processed red meats and involve a “healthy eating pattern” characterized by increased dietary fiber and fish, confirming the WCRF/AICR and EPIC findings. Very clear evidence pointing to a protective effect of dairy products (yogurt) and calcium supplements and, to a somewhat less extent, of vegetables and fruits is also available. Experimental work with volunteers has shown that replacement of red meat with fatty fish reduces the formation of mutagenic compounds whereas addition of cruciferous vegetables (cauliflower, cabbage, broccoli, …), yogurt and chlorophyllin tablets to fried meat diets and of calcium supplements or α-tocopherol to cured meat diets reduce indicators of mutagenesis and DNA damage. Existing knowledge on the alleviating effect of resistant starch through promotion of a butyrate type fermentation in the large intestine has been confirmed in rats fed with red meat. Optimization of processing technology has shown the lowering of HCA production by addition of spices to meat cooking. The addition of α-tocopherol to meat curing solutions and packaging of processed red meats to prevent oxidation has lowered CRC biomarkers in volunteers. Methods are described that may potentially alleviate the CRC promoting activity of processed red meats by the use of lower nitrite levels or nitrite alternatives. Some evidence suggests that the introduction of “functional components” such as (long chain) omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids and plant antioxidants in processed red meats through processing and/or animal feeding may also mitigate the CRC promoting activity. Special attention should be given to the possibility of promoting the formation of Zn-protoporphyrin, a compound present in Mediterranean raw cured ham, known to inhibit hemin-induced DNA damage and formed involving an iron-removal reaction inhibited by nitrite. Key references: Pala et al, 2011; Corpet, 2011; Shaughnessy et al, 2011; Demeyer et al, 2008. 8. The types of processed red meats involved No systematic epidemiological studies have compared different processed red meats (mainly all kinds of nitrite cured meats) in relation to CRC incidence. The larger incidence of CRC in Northern Europe compared to Mediterranean countries was associated with an almost double intake of processed red meats and a much larger proportion of cooked and cured sausages and “minced” hamburger type products, known to be high in fat content. This finding is in line with the established relation of lipid oxidation to the promotion of CRC by processed red meats and with the presence of Zn-protoporphyrin in many Mediterranean raw cured ham types. Key reference: Demeyer & De Smet (2011). − 5− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be 9. Conclusions For the benefit of the Spanish Governments, Bejar et al (2010) stated that “a minimal time span of ten-fifteen years is necessary for changes in exposure to risk factors” to be able to modify the incidence of CRC. This report confirms their conclusion that implementation of “legislative and educational measures in the field of Health Promotion regarding the diet can therefore be considered urgent”. Such measures should inform the consumer how to make healthy food choices based on scientific evidence in a clear and straightforward manner not drawn in the actual confusing information cloud (Perez-Cuero & Verbeke, 2012). Discussing guidelines for a healthy diet from an ecological perspective, the Dutch Health Council (Health Council of the Netherlands, 2011) concluded that “the average consumption of red meat at the population level and the combined intake of red and processed red meat exceeded the norms set by the World Cancer Research Fund and the British Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition”. Based on one reference only (not covered by the ISI Web of Science nor by PubMed) it considers that “the significance of this fact for questions of health is uncertain”. Nevertheless, its recommendations for other reasons involve only “occasional consumption” of “mince, rolled beef and sausage” (meat) and of “raw ham, smoked meat, frankfurter, shoulder of ham, sausage, bacon, pâté and pork fricandeau” (meat products). Evaluating the “New Nordic diet”, Adamsson et al (2012) refer to “a primarily plant-based diet ... associated with decreased morbidity and mortality”. In analogy with more evidence based and explicit French (Programme National Nutrition Santé, France, 2009) and UK (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, UK, 2010) guidelines this report justifies a proposal to amend the existing recommendation at the federal Government level (“Nationaal voedingsplan voor een betere gezondheid - “Plan National Nutrition pour une meilleure santé” at http://www.belgium.be/nl/gezondheid/gezond_leven/voeding/nationaal_plan/ or http://www.belgium.be/fr/sante/vie_saine/alimentation/plan_national/). The epidemiological evidence is less clear when higher upper levels of intake (up to about 200 g/d) are absent and is not apparent with populations of older and health conscious individuals (see under 2.2.2.4). Also, it has been shown that moderate amounts of red meat (~ 100 g/d for adults ) remain valuable sources for net protein synthesis for the elderly (see under 2.2.5.2). It is therefore proposed to maintain the actual recommended maximal intake of 100 g/d of the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/meat substitutes and the adapted proposal reads : “It is recommended to consume not more than 100 g per day (amount before preparation) of the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/meat substitutes. A high consumption of red meat (mainly beef, pork, sheep, horse, goat, …), mixed meats (with added fat and salt) and even more, of processed red meats (mainly cured using nitrite) slightly increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Therefore, choose preferably poultry, limit red and mixed meats and avoid processed red meats, in particular fatty meat products of the cooked sausage type, paté and salami. When preparing red meat (baking, roasting and cooking) make full use of vegetable spices, do not overheat the meat to a dark brown colour but, when present, remove such parts on the plate before consumption. Eating fish, including fat fish, once or twice a week is recommended as well as the occasional use of vegetable meat alternatives.” It should be remembered that “red meat” and “mixed meats” refer to fresh red meats that have not been subjected to other treatments than cooling, freezing and or comminution for mixing with other red meats and salt (e.g. ground meat and hamburger type products). Processed red meat is defined as ”red meats preserved by salting (mainly with addition of nitrite and/or nitrate) and one or more other treatments”. In quantitative terms and in accordance with the WCRF/AICR (2007) this means that at the level of the individual who eats red meat, the recommendation is not to exceed the consumption of 500 g/week, very little if any of which to be processed. This should be in accordance with a public health goal for a population average consumption of less than 300 g/week of red meat, very little if any of which to be processed; a goal aimed at effects complementary to the screening effort planned in Flanders. In addition and in comparison to the messages related to the abstention of smoking and excessive alcohol use, an − 6− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be alternative/additional and more straightforward and simple message for the consumer as inspired by Perez-Cuero & Verbeke (2012) might be: “The best prevention of colorectal cancer is the combination of higher physical activity with a fiber-rich diet, limiting red meat and minimizing processed red meat products.” 10. Recommendations for research Short of inconceivable randomized controlled clinical trials with colo-rectal cancer incidence as outcome, the colorectal carcinogenic effect of red meat and processed red meats has been demonstrated beyond doubt, both in epidemiology as well as in experimental work with both animals and humans. It seems clear that the major carcinogen involved is heme although considerable evidence points to the negative effect of heterocyclic amines formed by overheating red meat and apparent from an extreme brown/charred appearance. It is not clear however why the carcinogenic effect of fresh red meats is only about half that of processed (cured) meats. In Belgium, cured meats are almost exclusively derived from pig meat and both the higher fat and salt content compared to fresh meat may be involved. Further research on the issue is clearly required. Also, in view of the newer insights: contrasting health effects of individual foods vs. those of a dietary pattern both in intervention trials with animals or, preferably, humans using CRC markers and using in vitro digestive systems; the possibilities for animal production, meat processing and domestic food preparation to incorporate cancer mitigating components and /or processes (applied) research in these areas should be promoted. Work should preferably involve: the development of « functional meat products » incorporating components mitigating carcinogenesis through animal (pig) feeding (e.g. plant derived antioxidants) and/or meat processing (e.g. Calcium salts, fibrous components, minor plant components, etc.); experiments testing such diets/products fed to animals (e.g. rodents, pigs) or to in vitro digestive systems evaluating colon epithelial changes and/or oxidative status of digestive contents; intervention experiments with humans involving testing of processed red meats, analogous to e.g. the recent work described in Windey et al (2012a). Also in Belgium, research along these lines has recently been initiated by the Federal Public Service (FPS) Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment: RF 11/6250 MEATNOX “Vorming en (geno)toxische activiteit van nitros(yl)atie- en oxidatieproducten in het gastrointestinaal stelsel: rol van nitrietgepekelde vleesproducten en preventie.” − 7− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be Keywords Keywords meat Processed red meats colorectal cancer nitrite processing curing cooking prevention Mesh terms* meat meat products Sleutelwoorden vlees vleeswaren Mots clés viandes charcuterie colorectal neoplasms nitrites food handling darmkanker cancer intestinal Stichwörter fleisch verarbeitete fleischprodukte darmkrebs nitriet verwerking pekelen koken preventie nitrite transformation saumurage chauffer prévention nitrit verarbeitung pökeln kochen vorbeugung health promotion * MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) is the NLM controlled vocabulary thesaurus used for indexing articles for PubMed. − 8− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be CONTENTS SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1 INTRODUCTION AND ISSUES ........................................................................................................... 11 2 FURTHER DETAILS AND ARGUMENTATION ..................................................................................... 13 2.1 METHODS......................................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 ARGUMENTATION .............................................................................................................................. 13 2.2.1 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1.1 2.2.2.1 2.2.2.2 2.2.2.3 2.2.2.4 Colorectal Cancer ............................................................................................................................ 13 Earlier evidence............................................................................................................................... 15 More recent evidence ..................................................................................................................... 15 Lack of evidence and criticisms ....................................................................................................... 18 Recognition ..................................................................................................................................... 23 2.2.3 Importance of the risk associated with (processed) meat intake within the context of other risk factors .................................................................................................................................................. 23 2.2.3.1 2.2.3.2 2.2.4 2.2.5 Possible impact on prevention in Belgium ................................................................................ 26 The importance of meat in nutrition ......................................................................................... 27 2.2.5.1 2.2.5.2 2.2.5.3 2.2.6 Consumption and recommendations.............................................................................................. 27 Sustainable meat consumption meeting dietary requirements for health ..................................... 29 Meat in essential nutrient supply ................................................................................................... 30 Carcinogenic mechanisms ......................................................................................................... 35 2.2.6.1 2.2.6.2 2.2.6.3 2.2.6.4 2.2.6.5 2.2.6.6 2.2.6.7 2.2.7 2.2.8 Genetics .......................................................................................................................................... 23 Other modifiable risk factors .......................................................................................................... 25 Unlikely hypotheses: fat, protein and thermoresistant oncogenic bovine viruses ......................... 37 Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic amines ........................................................... 38 Nitrosamines and other N-Nitroso compounds .............................................................................. 44 Heme ............................................................................................................................................... 48 The “white meat” controversy. ....................................................................................................... 55 Effect of processing on the carcinogenic effect of red meat........................................................... 56 Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 62 Possibilities for mitigation ......................................................................................................... 64 The types of processed red meats involved ............................................................................... 67 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 70 4 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 72 5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH .............................................................................. 96 6 COMPOSITION OF THE WORKING GROUP ....................................................................................... 97 ABOUT THE SUPERIOR HEALTH COUNCIL (SHC) ....................................................................................... 98 − 9− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 4-HNE (4-hydroxynonenal) ACF (aberrant crypt foci) AICR (American Institute for Cancer Research) ATNC (apparent total N-nitroso compounds) BaP (benzo[a]pyrene) BMI (body mass index) CAC (colitis-associated cancer) CI (confidence interval) CRC (colorectal cancer) CVD (cardiovascular diseases) DAFNE (Dose Adjustment For Normal Eating) DHN-MA (1,4-dihydroxynonane mercapturic acid) DME (drug metabolizing enzymes) EPIC (The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition) EU (European Union) FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization) FFQ (food frequency questionnaire) HCA (heterocyclic amines) IBD (inflammatory bowel disease) iNOS (inducible nitric oxide synthases) IQ ( 2-Amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline) MDA (malondialdehyde) MDF (mucin-depleted foci) MeIQ (2-Amino-3,4-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline) MeIQx (2-Amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline) mi-RNAs (micro RNAs) MP (myeloperoxidase) NAT (N-acetyltransferases) NDEA (N-nitrosodiethylamine) NDBA (N-nitrosodibutylamine) NDMA (N-nitrosodimethylamine) Neu5Gc (N-glycolylneuraminic acid) NOCs (N-nitroso compounds) NPIP (N- nitrosopiperidine ) NPYR (N-nitrosopyrrolidine) PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) PhIP (2-Amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine) PPAR-alpha (peroxisome proliferative activated receptor, alpha) RSNOs (S-nitrosothiols) SNP (single-nucleotide polymorphism) SULT (sulfotransferases) TBARS (Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances) WCRF (World Cancer Research Fund) WHO (World Health Organization) − 10− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.css -hgr.be 1 INTRODUCTION AND ISSUES The nutritional value of meat and processed red meats has been overshadowed for some time now in the eye of consumers by various media reports that also point to the increased risk of cancer associated with consuming these foodstuffs. Some of these reports have been issued by renowned experts, others are pure fantasy but often refer to international reports that indicate that there is a link between eating meat and processed red meats and the risk of bowel cancer, such as e.g. the reports of the “European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)” (http://epic.iarc.fr/keyfindings.php) project and the “World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research” (WCRF) (www.dietandcancerreport.org/?p=ER). Popular reports and recommendations often ignore the complexity of other environmental and genetic factors that determine the risk of cancer. Moreover, insufficient attention is paid to the diverse natures, amounts and means of preparing not only meat and processed red meats, but also other foodstuffs. This concerns e.g. nutrients that have a protective effect (antioxidants, vitamins, micronutrients) or other substances that are potentially harmful as a result of the manner in which they are prepared (presence of certain additives, substances that are released when grilled, salted foodstuffs, fried food, ...) and/or contaminated with carcinogenic substances (environmental pollution, pesticide residues, ...). It therefore seemed useful that the SHC should assess the scientifically based recommendations that have been made on this issue and formulate them in such a way as to make them understandable to the general public and easy to implement on a daily basis. Given the complexity of foodstuffs and the numerous factors that play a part in the appearance of cancer, the decision was made to start with a case study: “Assessment of the risk of developing bowel (colorectal) cancer attributed to eating meat and processed red meats". Although the literature is not always clear, the term “red meat” in this report refers to fresh red meat products (such as beef, pork, sheep or lamb but also other meats except poultry meat) that have not been subjected to other treatments than cooling, freezing and or comminution for mixing with other red meats and salt (e.g. ground meat). Processed red meat defined as “meat preserved by smoking, curing or salting or by addition of chemical preservatives” in the “World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research“ (WCRF/AICR) is here more simply specified as ”red meats preserved by salting (mainly with addition of nitrite and/or nitrate) and one or more other treatments ”. In order to do so, the following approaches have been suggested: 1) Assess the updated results of the WCRF and EPIC regarding the risk of developing bowel cancer from eating meat and processed red meats, with attention paid to the following issues: are the results convincing enough for this risk to be acknowledged? assess and situate the risk from eating meat and processed red meats as opposed to their nutritional value and the other risk factors; assess the different carcinogenic mechanisms that have been suggested; assess the possible means of reducing the risk both when preparing and processing meat as well as the amount and place of meat and processed red meats in a full meal. The information from the WCRF and EPIC was updated on the basis of the Web of Science. 2) In addition, specific attention was devoted to the following: compare the risks posed by the different types of fresh meat (red meat, i.e. mainly beef, pork, sheep, horse, goat, … and white meat, i.e. poultry) with those posed by processed red meats; compare the risks posed by the various types of processed red meat depending on the methods used to produce them (curing, fermenting, drying and smoking of (minced) meat that is mixed with fat and may subsequently undergo heating); − 11− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be the effects of the means of preparing fresh meat (frying, broiling, barbecuing, hamburgers,...); the effects of the simultaneous intake of other foodstuffs [that are rich in antioxidants (vegetables, red wine, spices, dairy products,...) and calcium (dairy products)]. 3) Finally, an attempt was made to propose adjustments to the current guidelines for healthy diets, especially as regards meat and processed red meats, with the focus on the specification of meat products, processed red meats, etc. 4) The manner in which the project will affect public health: It has been estimated that around 30% of all cases of cancer have a dietary cause. The nature and composition of the diet are believed to play a more important role than the effect of it being contaminated by residues or harmful organisms. Cancer, which affects a great number of people, is looked upon as one of the most serious diseases, next to cardiovascular conditions and diabetes. There is no doubt that maintaining a healthy and balanced diet plays an important part in preventing disease. Over the past few decades, the scientific knowledge on cancer has increased significantly. This knowledge can certainly be used to formulate reliable dietary recommendations that should ultimately lead to a considerable drop in certain types of cancer. An example would be a reduction in the incidence of colorectal cancer by some 10 to 20% as a result of recommendations regarding the nature, the means of preparing the meat and the amounts consumed. It is therefore clear that recommendations can be proposed that maintain the intake of meat within an optimally balanced diet, as is also the case for e.g. the fat intake. In order to provide an answer to the question, an ad hoc working group was set up which included experts from the following fields: meat technology, nutrition, toxicology, pathology, oncology, biochemistry, analytical chemistry, food technology, food composition, epidemiology and statistics. − 12− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2 FURTHER DETAILS AND ARGUMENTATION 2.1 Methods The document is an advice of the Superior Health Council of Belgium. For collection, evaluation and interpretation of information, official statistical data and health recommendations issued by international and national governments or industrial organizations were used. Other information was limited to scientific papers published in peer reviewed journals as traced in the major databases Web of Science and, to a less extent, PubMed and electronically available on line or as reprint. Quality of published research was evaluated based on a combination of journal impact factors, frequency of citation and authority (experience/credibility) of institutes and authors. The report uses a holistic review approach covering a diversity of expertise ranging from epidemiology top/down to meat technology and including statistics, nutrition, toxicology, pathology, oncology, biochemistry, analytical chemistry, food technology, food composition and nutrition. 2.2 Argumentation 2.2.1 Introduction It has been recognized for years that “healthy food” makes an important contribution to the prevention of chronic non-communicable disease. Based mainly on epidemiological evidence, it is generally accepted that a diet high in saturated fat and energy-dense foods (those with high fat and/or sugar content), and low in fruit and vegetables - along with a sedentary lifestyle and smoking - is the major cause of cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and of certain types of cancer, the top two causes of death in developed countries (WHO, 2003). Accordingly, it has been stated that much greater health gains could be made through promoting a healthy diet than through improving the high level of food safety, guaranteed by efficient and legally compelled control (Wadge, 2004)(van Leeuwen, 2006). Estimates suggest that better diets could prevent around 30-40% of cancer cases and that poor nutrition accounts for 4.6% of all disability-adjusted lifeyears lost in the EU, with obesity and physical inactivity accounting for an additional 3.7% and 1.4%, respectively (Pomerleau et al, 2003). These findings have been translated into simple foodbased rather than nutrient based recommendations on healthy eating aimed at the general public to provide a basic framework for planning meals or daily menus (http://www.eufic.org/article/en/expid/food-based-dietary-guidelines-in-europe/) (De Henauw & De Backer, 1999). It should be emphasized that these recommendations, that may be considered complementary to efforts of screening for the diseases referred to, are almost exclusively based on epidemiology, showing biologically plausible associations between food intake and chronic disease, consistently found in both prospective observational and case-control studies. Such studies are selected using criteria for adequate collection and treatment of data involving e.g. length of observation period, numbers of participants and adjustment for confounding factors as well as for the presence of dose-response relations (WHO, 2003)(Navia et al, 2010). 2.2.1.1 Colorectal Cancer Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world (1.23 million or 9.7% of all cancers diagnosed in 2008) with a higher incidence in the developed world (Ferlay et al, 2010). It is remarkable that country differences in incidence rates are much larger than differences in mortality rates (Fig.1). In Europe, CRC is the second leading cause of cancer deaths and in Belgium 3609 and 4378 colorectal invasive tumours were reported in 2010 for females and males respectively, equivalent to 11,8 and 12,3 % respectively of all newly diagnosed malignant tumours (European Commission, 2010). Age-standardised 2008 incidence rates per 100 000 in Belgium are relatively high when compared to other European data : 42,3 for females and 66,3 for males vs. respective minimum values of 17,1 and 24,7 and maximum values of 52,6 and 93,8 (European Commission, 2010). More than 95% of CRCs arise in − 13− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be individuals without a significant hereditary risk and are related to environmental risks as clearly reflected by the changes in incidence after migration that occur rather rapidly, even among the first generation of migrants (Parkin, 2004)(Watson & Collins 2011)(Lund et al, 2011). It is also generally recognized that the strongest contribution to environmental risk for CRC is diet; its contribution has been estimated as 70 % of incidence (Anand et al, 2008). It has also been observed that within developing countries, increasing levels of urbanization and increased consumption of meat, dairy products and processed foods have coincided with a dramatic increase in incidence of CRC (Parkin, 2004). Fig. 1. Estimated age-standardized incidence and mortality rates (number per 100.000) of colorectal cancer in 2008 (Ferlay et al, 2010) − 14− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.2 Research evidence linking red and processed red meat consumption to an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) 2.2.2.1 Earlier evidence It is noteworthy that a significant link was observed between high meat consumption and CRC mortality in the earlier household budget studies of the EU DAFNE projects, also involving Belgian data (Lagiou et al, 1999). At a later date specific recommendations for the prevention of cancer included moderation in the consumption of preserved meat, such as sausages, salami, bacon and ham (meaning cured, smoked and nitrite treated meat products) (WHO, 2003). Using the same research methodology, 5 CRC risk factors were deemed "convincing" by the World Cancer Research Fund (obesity, physical inactivity, intake of red meat, processed meat, alcohol) and the recommendations were strengthened into ‘‘limit consumption of red meats (such as beef, pork, sheep, horse, goat, …) and avoid processed meat” (WCRF/AICR, 2007). The latter more severe recommendation defined “processed meats” as “meats preserved by smoking, curing or salting or by the addition of chemical preservatives” and was based on an extensive metaanalysis of cohort and case-control studies including e.g. work from “The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)” grouping 23 research institutes and following about 500,000 people in 10 EU member states since 1992 (Norat et al, 2002). The studies supporting the recommendation were criticized because of the lack of precision in defining processed meats and in the assessment of food intake by the questionnaires used as well as in accounting for the large variability in the nature of meat and meat products and the possible remaining confounding of the results. Nevertheless, after reviewing the available information, including the replies to criticism, it was concluded that the link between red and processed meat consumption and the incidence of colo-rectal cancer should be recognized and that it is warranted to take action (Demeyer et al, 2008). Reports and recommendations refer to processed meats but do clearly (although tacitly) not cover poultry. To prevent possible confusion with definitions of meat covering poultry (as in Belgium) the term “processed meats” is replaced by “processed red meats” further in this report. 2.2.2.2 More recent evidence A search of the Web of Science since June 2008 produced the published results of 6 new large prospective cohort studies convincingly linking red and/or processed red meat consumption to the incidence of CRC. The sites and types of tumors investigated and the nature as well as the measure of meat consumption varied between reports but studies involving a total of 1,707,840 individuals followed for at least 5 and up to 9 years clearly indicated that the incidence of colorectal adenoma or cancer increases with the frequency and/or amounts of meat or diets high in meat consumed in Korea (Shin et al, 2011) and in the US (Reedy et al, 2010; Fung et al, 2010; Cross et al, 2010; Ferrucci et al, 2012), including intakes a decade before diagnosis (Ruder et al, 2011). Although less reliable, large scale case-control studies in the US (Fu et al, 2011), Canada (Squires et al, 2010; Hu et al, 2008; also reported in Hu et al, 2011) and Uruguay (De Stefani et al, 2009) involving a total of 33,140 cases and 15,179 controls yielded the same conclusion with special emphasis on the increased risk associated with cooking temperature (Cotterchio et al, 2008; Fu et al, 2011) and with intake of processed (salted, pickled) meats. The latter was also found to be related to an increased risk of several other cancers (Hu et al, 2011; Squires et al, 2010; De Stefani et al, 2009) in line with the findings of two large cohort studies involving 37 698 men and 83 644 women followed for more than 20 years involving dietary assessment updated every 4 years (Pan et al, 2012). After multivariate adjustment for other major lifestyle and dietary risk factors, the pooled hazard ratio risk for total cancer mortality (HR) (95% CI) for a 1-serving per-day increase was 1.13 (1.07-1.20) for unprocessed red meat and 1.20 (1.15-1.24) for processed red meat. Apart from these epidemiological observations, reviews of the literature point to modest relative risk estimates ranging from 1.0 to 1.3 for highest vs lowest consumption − 15− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be categories of meat or per 100 g of meat/day (Baghurst, 2007), from 1.02 to 1.35 for diets high in meat and meat products (Randi et al, 2010) and from 1.09-1.71 for high vs low frequency of meat consumption (Smolinska & Katarzyna, 2010) as well as suggesting a 20-50 % higher risk associated with the highest levels of processed red meat consumption compared to non meat eaters (Santarelli et al, 2008). A recent meta-analysis of eight cohort and eight case-control studies addressing the association between dietary patterns and CRC concluded : “the risk of colon cancer was increased with patterns characterized by high intake of red and processed red meat and decreased with those labeled as ‘healthy’ ” (Magalhaes et al, 2011). This finding is in line with a very convincing and recent meta-analysis focusing on ten prospective studies and involving linear dose-response analyses concluding “High intake of red and processed red meat is associated with significant increased risk of colorectal, colon and rectal cancers. The overall evidence of prospective studies supports limiting red and processed red meat consumption as one of the dietary recommendations for the prevention of CRC” (Chan et al, 2011). This paper emanates from the continuous update project report on CRC (WCRF/AICR, 2011) on the evidence relating food, nutrition and physical activity to the prevention of CRC updated in 2010. The review added 263 papers and updated meta-analyses for whole grains, fruits and vegetables, meat and fish, dairy foods, alcohol, dietary fiber, glycaemic index, folate, vitamin D, heme iron, calcium, physical activity, body mass index, abdominal fatness and adult attained height; apart from alcoholic drinks, the only foods confirmed to be associated with a “convincing” increased risk of CRC were red meat and processed red meat. The evidence for a protective effect of foods containing dietary fiber had strengthened and was upgraded from probable to convincing. The search, study selection, and data extraction was conducted by several reviewers and the work followed the earlier established stringent protocol and search strategy for selection and evaluation of studies (WCRF/AICR, 2007a; WCRF/AICR, 2012) covering: The independence of the systematic literature review centers and the evaluation by a 21 member expert panel was assured by the separation of the collection of evidence from assessing and judging it. The use of stringent criteria for categorizing associations as convincing or probable (Table 1) Testing for heterogeneity due to Gender, geographic area, unit of meat intake used in the report (grams or times/servings), year of publication and length of follow-up. - Variable adjustment for co-variates involving age and total energy intake and in many cases BMI, smoking, physical activity, alcohol and other potential confounders. It was found that adjustment for larger number of co-variates was more likely to yield weaker relative risks than adjustment for smaller numbers of co-variates. Several potential confounders were not included in the final statistical models in some studies because, as the authors reported, their inclusion in the model did not substantially modify the relative risk estimates. Table 1. Criteria used to characterize associations between life-style variables and cancer (WCRF/AICR, 2007a) (WCRF AICR, 2012) − 16− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Recognizing the variability in the definition of red and processed red meats between the studies. In general, the meat item was a combination of red meat, such as beef, pork, sheep, horse, goat, … and processed red meat was generally described as processed red meat, preserved meat or cured meat, but individual items included in the meat group could vary between the studies including e.g. hotdogs, luncheon meat and bacon. Limiting the evidence for exposures graded as convincing, probable or suggestive in the 2nd Expert Report, to results of cohort studies only. These are considered more reliable than case-control studies, obviously more prone to selection and recall bias, difficulties in remembering past behavior and changes in that behavior with time and also because of the high number of cohort studies existing. Thirteen cohort studies on cancer incidence were published on red and processed red meat intake and CRC risk up to May 2010. All 13 studies were used in dose-response meta-analyses of red and processed red meat intake and the risk of colon, rectal and colorectal cancer. Reports on meta-analysis (e.g. a weighted analysis of several research results) and pooled analysis (similar to meta-analysis, but pooled data from multiple studies are analyzed as a single dataset) were identified in the search, were not included in the database but were used for support in the preparation of the report. No studies focusing on pre-malignant colorectal conditions (for example colorectal adenomas) were retained and results on incidence and mortality are presented separately. The search, study selection, and data extraction was conducted by several reviewers. The reported summary relative risks were: for each 100 g/day increase in red and processed red meat consumption, 1.16 (95% CI = 1.04-1.30, I2 = 47%, P heterogeneity = 0.06, nine studies) for CRC, 1.21 (95% CI = 1.061.39, I2 = 56%, P heterogeneity = 0.04, seven studies) for colon cancer and 1.31 (95% CI = 1.13-1.52, I2 = 18%, P heterogeneity = 0.30, five studies) for rectal cancer. for each 50 g/day increase in processed red meat consumption, 1.18 (95% CI = 1.101.28, I2 = 12%, P heterogeneity = 0.33, nine studies) for CRC, 1.24 (95% CI = 1.13-1.36, I2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.55, nine studies) for colon cancer and 1.12 (95% CI = 0.991.28, I2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.56, eight studies) for rectal cancer. for each 100 g/day increase in red meat consumption, 1.17 (95% CI = 1.05-1.31, I2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.48, eight studies) for CRC, 1.12 (95% CI = 0.97-1.29, I2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.89, nine studies) for colon cancer and 1.18 (95% CI = 0.98-1.42, I2 = 0%, P heterogeneity = 0.67, seven studies) for rectal cancer. An important finding of the work as reported by Chan et al (2011), was the nearly linear relation obtained from non-linear dose-response meta-analyses: CRC risk increased with red and processed red meat intake up to approximately 140 g/day, where the curve approaches its plateau (Fig. 2). The “key findings” of the EPIC project confirm these findings adding however that the EPIC results strongly support that intake of fish decreases risk (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, 2012). Although the dangers of residual confounding in interpreting small effects (hazard ratios between 0.6 and 1.6) calculated from observational studies have recently been clearly presented (Sainani, 2012), publication of scientific and convincing reports of similar and consistent effects continues. An association of red meat consumption with colon and/or colo-rectal cancer (CRC) was confirmed in limited case-control studies reporting that meat based diets were associated with an increased risk in both Uruguay (De Stefani et al, 2012) and Argentina (Pou et al, 2012) whereas a plant based or “prudent” diet respectively was protective. Danish work indicated that maternal intake of meats with dark surface increases the bulky DNA adduct levels in both maternal and umbilical cord blood (Pedersen et al, 2012). Increased serum C-peptide concentrations, indicative of an increased − 17− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be CRC risk, were found to be associated with a higher meat dietary pattern in overweight female participants in a large cohort US study (Fung et al, 2012). A meta-analysis showed that vegetarians had a significantly lower cancer incidence than nonvegetarians (Huang et al, 2012). In comparisons of statistical data on both food consumption and disease incidence or mortality, Bejar et al (2012) found that increases in CRC incidence (1971-2002) paralleled increases in red meat consumption in 8 EU countries. Zhang et al (2012) clearly related increases in colon and other cancer mortalities over the past 40 years in several East-Asian countries to nutritional transitions also involving increases in red meat consumption. They also noted that “these changes in cancer mortality lagged similar to 10 years behind the inception of the nutrition transition toward a westernized diet in selected countries or regions”. Recent work supports the hypothesis that high consumption of red and processed red meat may also increase the risk of colo-rectal adenoma, a benign tumor often leading to CRC (Xu et al, 2013; Aune et al, 2013) as well as showing that a processed red meat dietary pattern prior to diagnosis is associated with higher risk of tumour recurrence, metastasis and death among patients with CRC (Zhu et al, 2013). Rosato et al (2013) reported that high processed red meat intake increased the risk for young-onset of CRC and even in patients with a genetically determined higher risk for developing CRC a high meat dietary pattern was recently shown to increase colorectal adenoma incidence, corroborating with the results for sporadic colorectal cancer (Botma et al, 2013). Van Meer et al. (2013) recently concluded from a literature survey that meat intake also has a negative effect on survival and mortality of CRC patients. All results clearly support the general recognition of the problem as reflected e.g. in the statement of Lecerf (2011): “a link between high meat consumption and cancer, particularly colorectal cancer, has been observed in nearly all epidemiological studies”. 2.2.2.3 Lack of evidence and criticisms The Web of Science search since June 2008 also produced a more limited number of papers rejecting a link between red and/or processed red meat consumption and the incidence of CRC. Observational studies. - A pooled analysis of food diet diary data obtained from the UK Dietary Cohort Consortium did not find evidence of an association between red and/or processed red meat consumption (disaggregated from composite foods) and CRC risk (Spencer et al., 2010). Apart from the limited numbers of individuals studied (2,575), the authors themselves stated that the null results might be due to the relatively low intake of both red (~ 30 g/d) and processed (~ 15 g/d) meats estimated by diet disaggregation. More surprisingly, a lower incidence of colo-rectal cancer was reported for meat eaters than vegetarians in a large prospective study (61,566 individuals) characterized as “descriptive” (Key et al, 2009), a finding possibly related to meat intakes below the national average. Also, the standardized all-cause mortality rate in the population studied was lower than that of the general UK population, reflecting that in surveys comparing meat-eating controls with vegetarians, individuals are usually selected from similar population groups with generally healthy lifestyles involving moderate average meat intakes and relatively high intakes of fruit and vegetables (Millward & Garnett, 2010). Furthermore, available evidence also suggests that self-defined vegetarians do consume red meat and self-identification may indicate more than double the incidence of vegetarianism than the operationalized definition (Vinnari et al, 2009). − 18− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig. 2. Non-linear dose-response of red and processed red meats consumption and the risk of CRC (from a meta-analysis by Chan et al, 2011). - In a multiethnic large scale cohort study involving 165,717 participants over 13.6 years, Ollberding et al (2012) concluded that in basic models adjusting for age at cohort entry, sex and race/ethnicity, there was an increased risk of CRC for participants in the highest quintile for a dietary pattern consisting of high energy density-adjusted red meat and energy density-adjusted total processed red meat when compared with those in the lowest quintile. This effect disappeared however when multivariable models were used. The contrast between this finding and “convincing” increasing risk of CRC of red and processed red meat intake as discussed above can be explained by: The old age range of individuals enrolled in the study (45 – 75 years), reflected in a much higher CRC incidence rate of 151 per 100,000 as compared to 58 (in Norat et al, 2005) and 33, the highest value reported for 2008 by Ferlay et al (2010). The total red meat intake in the highest quintile (108.9 g/d) is in the lower range of the mean values of the highest category of red and processed red meats intake in the studies used by Chan et al (2011) (46 to 211 g/d ). Construction of the food frequency questionnaire was complicated by the presence of different food items traditionally consumed by the different populations represented, including African Americans, Japanese Americans, Latinos, Native Hawaiians and whites. Different dietary patterns are associated with the different ethnicities (Park et al, 2005) that may probably differ in their genetic susceptibility to compounds in meat − 19− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be products (Girard et al, 2008)(Satia et al, 2009)(Williams et al, 2009) (Ollberding et al, 2011). - In a recent follow-up study involving 53,988 participants followed over 13.4 y, no associations were found between intake of red meat, processed red meat, fish, or poultry and risk for colon cancer or rectal cancer (Egeberg et al ,2013). Surprisingly however, specific associations with increased risks were found for lamb and colon cancer and for pork and rectal cancer. The authors limit the relevance of their results and the representative adequacy of their population however because of the low participation rate of the population invited (35.5%) and the higher socioeconomic position of participants than nonparticipants. - The lack of a significant relationship between red and/or processed red meat intake and CRC risk reported in prospective studies from Japan (Takachi et al, 2011) and in Singapore Chinese (Butler et al, 2008) may also be related to relatively low intakes and/or intake differences compared to Western standards (Sato et al, 2006) as well as limited numbers of subjects studied (Saebo et al, 2011). Apart from intake levels and differences in meal preparation, gender differences are obviously also to be considered when interpreting the absence of a relation of red meat intake to CRC incidence in a prospective study of Chinese women (Lee et al, 2009). Reviews - Two recent reviews of prospective studies conclude that the available epidemiologic evidence is not sufficient to support an independent positive association between red meat and processed red meat consumption and CRC, because of the likely influence of confounding by other dietary and lifestyle factors, the weak magnitude of the observed association, and its variability by gender and cancer subsite (Alexander et al, 2011)(Alexander & Cushing, 2011). The same authors reached a similar conclusion for processed red meat (Alexander et al, 2010) although a significant summary relative risk estimate for high (vs. low) processed red meat intake and CRC of 1.16 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10–1.23] for all studies reviewed was obtained. However, these papers are not very convincing as some bias in the authority/credibility of the papers and/or their peer review can be suspected because: The work was partially funded by the Beef Checkoff, through the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA-US), by the National Pork Board (NPB- US) and by the Danish Agriculture & Food Council and only Alexander & Cushing (2011) clearly disclosed ‘no conflict of interest’. The convincing power of the papers might suffer from the specialized activities of the senior author. He is indeed very active in refuting rather convincing evidence for dietary factors affecting cancer and disease and published seven papers in 2010 refuting evidence for the relation of prostate, breast and colo-rectal carcinogenesis as well as atopic dermatitis risk to consumption of red and processed red meat, animal fat and partially hydrolyzed 100% whey protein respectively (references available on request). From the prospective studies retained by Chan et al (2011), three studies, dating between 2006 and 2010 were not cited by Alexander & Cushing (2011) or Alexander et al (2011). This may be related to the absence of a clear dose–response trend in their work in contrast to the finding of Chan et al (2011). Also, three reports dating between 1998 and 2009 related to processed red meats were cited by Chan et al (2011) but not by Alexander et al (2010). − 20− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be - The definitions of red meat as used by Alexander & Cushing (2011) and by Alexander et al (2011) may have included some processed red meat items. Also, Alexander et al (2010) define processed red meats as “predominantly red meat (although poultry and fish are sometimes included as well) that undergoes preservation methods other than freezing” thereby including a series of non-cured hamburger type products. In the earlier comprehensive reports however processed red meat was clearly defined as “cured, smoked and nitrite treated meat products” (WHO, 2003) or “meats preserved by smoking, curing or salting or by the addition of chemical preservatives” (WCRF/AICR). In an authoritative recent review Lund et al (2011) nevertheless refer to Alexander et al (2010) and Alexander & Cushing (2011) as casting doubts on the WCRF findings. In a further line of criticism they erroneously specify a limited case-control study (954 cases and 959 controls) (Williams et al, 2010) as a cohort study and contrast it with a large scale cohort study (300.948 individuals) (Cross et al, 2010). Such comparison is not in line with the rigid quality criteria for data use as specified by WCRF (WCRF/AICR, 2007a; WCRF/AICR, 2011). It may be significant that the senior author has acted as consultant for the British Pork and Beef executive. Similar criticism can be formulated in relation to a more recent review (McNeill & Van Elswyk, 2012) where the senior author is employed by the US National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the argument questioning the validity of the WCRF findings is based on an extensively cited reference only available as Meeting abstract (Cho & Smith-Warner, 2004). The main criticisms formulated in the review papers relate to: The possible confounding of meat intake with other determining factors. It has indeed been shown that persons with the highest intake of red meat compared with the lowest consumed more total daily calories (Cross et al, 2007), were more likely to smoke, had a higher body mass index, consumed lower amounts of fruits, vegetables, fiber and calcium, engaged less frequently in physical activity, were less educated (reviewed by Alexander & Cushing, 2011) and consumed more alcohol (Valencia-Martin et al, 2011). It is however abundantly clear that the data used in the preparation of the reports cited earlier have been corrected for such co-variates (see above). Furthermore, the use of epidemiological data corrected for similar confoundings have led to other generally accepted conclusions and recommendations. These include e.g. a greater intake of fruits to five or more servings/day, the twofold increase of lung and other cancers when smoking frequency increases from 2 cigarettes/day to between 10 and 16 cigarettes/day, the lower cardiovascular mortality with recommended fruit and vegetable intake and the lower mortality with recommended dietary behavior as pointed out by Demeyer & De Smet (2010). The low relative risk measurements obtained. The often cited criterion of relative risks <2.0 being low however does not apply to nutritional epidemiology where such values are common. The excess risk in the highest category of processed red meat-eaters is comprised between 20 and 50% compared with non-eaters, which is indeed modest as e.g. Santarelli et al (2008) attributes a relative risk value of 20 to established risk factors for lung cancer like cigarette smoking. A change of 50% in risk (e.g. a relative risk of 1.5) may however be considered strong in nutritional epidemiology and a food associated with a 20% increase in risk has a meaningful population effect on public health, though limited when considered for the individual.The accurate documentation of present-day meat intake of an individual is not easy because of the lack of precision of the dietary assessment methods that are used in epidemiological studies. Such imprecision systematically reduces the strength of association of determinants with the disease and is referred to as attenuation or regression dilution bias. − 21− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be A more reliable estimate of such “weak associations” may require estimates of the “probability of an effect” rather than the use of statistical significance (Navia et al, 2010). The probability of subtle bias or poor control of confounding factors. Apart from the known confounding factors, it is possible or even likely that consumption of red and/or processed red meats is associated with other important unknown lifestyle behaviors and environmental factors affecting disease incidence and/or mortality not fully accounted for in the analysis. The latter may include a limited final acceptability of individuals and questionnaires (e.g. 47 % of the cohort approached in Ruder et al, 2011). The importance of such confounding affecting mortality is reflected in the relation of a higher intake of red meat to increased general mortality (cfr. “inverse causality” !) as discussed by Mozzafarian (2009), de Abreu Silva & Marcadenti (2009) and Sinha et al (2009). In agreement with Mozzafarian (2009), the importance of such residual confounding in causing erroneous estimation of associations may be less than that of other errors, such as random error in intake and outcome assessments. The latter may include the site and type of tumor registered as molecular mechanisms underlying tumours in the colon and rectum may be different (Li & Lai, 2009) and the former may include e.g. the adequacy of the dietary questionnaires used and the precise identification and measurement of meat in the diet involving e.g the transformation of “servings/d” into g/d and the disaggregation of meat dishes (Prynne et al, 2009). Correction based on validation of dietary food questionnaire results by comparison with 24-hr dietary recall values may indeed attenuate the statistical significance of relative risk values (Parr et al, 2013). Last but possibly not least, residual confounding may be related to the large variability in composition and processing of “processed red meats”, reflecting the cultural characteristics of the study population, within or between geographic locations. Finally it may be worthwhile to remark that some papers are available not supporting the hypothesis that meat consumption is a risk factor for CRC mainly based on case/control studies however subject to effects of recall and selection bias because of a limited number of participants studied over brief periods (e.g. in Tabatei et al, 2011; Williams et al, 2010). It is of course clear that a definite proof based on a reversibility of the risk related to red and processed red meat consumption has never been tested. Randomized controlled clinical trials with colo-rectal cancer incidence as outcome measure indeed involve experimental requirements in terms of individuals, duration as well as control and specification of food consumption. Such trials are very hard to achieve although intervention trials are feasible and have shown that a low-fat dietary pattern intervention can be maintained (Lanza et al, 2001) and did not reduce the risk of colorectal cancer in postmenopausal women (Beresford et al, 2006). Good alternatives for more reliable experimental evidence correctly refer to the need for the development of meaningful biomarkers to more precisely reflect the nutritional factors relevant to carcinogenesis (Boyle et al, 2008) (Altorf-van der Kuil et al., 2013). It is difficult to follow the authors’ arguments however using the lack of a “convincing” association between fruit and vegetables with cancer incidence and their covering of all cancers and carcinogenic factors in a single discussion in rejecting recognition of an increased risk of colo-rectal cancer because of red and processed red meat consumption (Ferguson, 2010). It is also striking and really not acceptable that a limited number of recent review reports were published on meat and/or diet and cancer or health not only without any reference to WCRF/AICR (2007) (e.g. Wicki & Hagmann, 2011; McAfee et al, 2010) but also lacking precision and completeness in the presentation and discussion of data as pointed out elsewhere (Demeyer, 2010). − 22− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.2.4 Recognition Although it is clear from these arguments that residual confounding and methodological error cannot be completely excluded in the 13 observational studies used (WCRF/AICR, 2011), it should be reconfirmed that they are the only ones available allowing exploration of the complex links between diet, physical activity and the development of cancer in free-living human populations. They used a methodological framework to evaluate causality of the associations found by exploration of key characteristics such as the effect size, the presence of a biological gradient, the consistency of the effect, or the biological plausibility (WCRF/AICR, 2007a; Navia et al, 2010). To cite Mann (2010) the WCRF “recommendations are based on clearly defined 'convincing' or 'probable' relationships between nutritional variables and disease outcomes”. Also, because of the analogy with the evidence underlying the generally accepted recommendation for an increased consumption of fruit and vegetables, it can be concluded that recognition of an increased risk of colo-rectal cancer associated with red and processed red meat consumption is based on “evidence based nutrition” and is therefore justified. It should also be recognized however that: accumulated evidence for a significantly increased CRC risk is without discussion only when comparing relatively wide differences in intake with high upper levels (up to about 200 g/d); evidence has been presented suggesting that other factors may be more important in an elderly and ethnically diverse population (Ollberding et al, 2012). Whether and to what extent this should lead to nutritional recommendations requires further evaluation related to the nutritional and socio-economic importance of meat and meat products and the nature of meat and meat products involved on the one hand and the magnitude and position of the recognized risk within the overall risk pattern and the health costs of colo-rectal cancer on the other hand. The epidemiological evidence presented has sofar inspired the publication of both French (Programme National Nutrition Santé, France, 2009) and UK (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, UK, 2010) official guidelines advocating a reduction of both red and processed red meat consumption in reference to the increased risk of colorectal cancer. Accordingly, a recent “position statement” of “The EU Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS)” (Lambrinoudaki et al, 2013) providing “guidance concerning the effect of diet on morbidity and mortality of the most frequent diseases prevalent in midlife and beyond” clearly states that “The consumption of red or processed red meat is associated with an increase of colorectal cancer.” 2.2.3 Importance of the risk associated with (processed) meat intake within the context of other risk factors 2.2.3.1 Genetics Although it is recognized that the incidence of CRC is predominantly related to environmental/dietary factors it is also accepted that the genetic background plays a role in modulating individual CRC risk factors. Genetic variants of the many genes investigated involved in xenobiotic absorption and metabolism, DNA repair, insulin resistance, obesity and glucose levels and inflammation may interact with the association of intake of meat and/or meat-related carcinogens and the increased CRC risk (Landi et al, 2008). Genetic variants of drug metabolizing enzymes (DME) (Fig. 3) involved in general pathways that bring about activation and detoxification of carcinogens are often involved and cover at least 15 xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes including cytochrome P450, glutathione S-transferase, UDP-glucuronosyltransferases, sulfotransferases (SULT) and N-acetyltransferases (NAT). − 23− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig.3. Schematic representation of the phase I and phase II drug-metabolizing enzymes (DMEs) and the receptors that sometimes up or down regulate DME levels (From Nebert et al, 1999). There is evidence of possible interactions between intake of meat and/or meat-related heterocyclic amines (HCA) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and genetic variants of these enzymes with risk of CRC or advanced colorectal adenoma (Yoshida et al, 2008). Morita et al (2009) from data obtained in a Japanese case-control study stated that colon cancer risk was increased in relation to red meat intake only in individuals carrying a specific polymorphism of the cytochrome P450 2E1 gene. Significant interactions between gene polymorphisms of enzymes controlling intestinal absorption of HCA and tumor suppressor protein driving multiple cellular responses to oxidative stress are associated with 50-60 % of CRC cases. The pattern of CRCassociated TP53 mutations was found to be geographically clustered as well as related to availabilities of the Western energy-dense foods meat, milk, sweeteners and animal fats, in a study involving 2,572 CRC-associated mutations from 12 countries/geographic areas (Verginelli et al, 2009). Inherited polymorphisms of key genes may be involved but more commonly spontaneously arising mutations affecting genetic control of all processes determining cellular growth induce CRC. More intricate relationships involving such epigenetics were recently demonstrated between CRC incidence and polymorphisms of both untranslated regions of messenger RNAs and the small endogenous micro-RNA molecules binding to these regions thereby regulating mRNA cleavage or repression of protein synthesis (Landi et al, 2008; Landi et al, 2011). It is clear that geographic and individual differences in exposure to and repair of DNA damage due to foods relate to the extreme complexity and variability of food production, processing, preservation, and preparation. Citing Verginelli et al (2009) the latter add to “the complexity of interactions determining intestinal mutagenesis modified by nutrient/nutrient, nutrient/microflora, nutrient/cell metabolism, nutrient/gene and nutrient/DNA repair interactions, and affected by epigenetic modifications, transit time of dietary residue, inflammatory and endocrine responses, body mass and energy consumption through physical activity” underlying the variability and inconsistency of the reported (epi)genetic interactions with the association of meat(products) with CRC risk. Limited and inconsistent relationships of metabolic gene polymorphisms with the meat associated CRC risk have been reported. (Ferrucci et al, 2010) (Zhao et al, 2012) and epigenetics contribute undoubtedly to the complexity of interactions involved and underlying the many possible errors and confounding factors affecting epidemiology. Nevertheless, Hutter et al (2012) recently concluded from a survey of nine cohort and case control studies that single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) at 10 loci associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) were not associated with other risk factors. A similar study concluded that NAcetyltransferase 2 phenotypes may not be associated with colorectal cancer development (Zhang et al, 2012a). Meta-analysis suggests a lack of association between N-acetyltransferase 1 NAT1 polymorphisms and individual risk to CRC (Cai et al, 2012). Only a NAT1 polymorphism modified the association between MeIQx intake and colorectal adenoma (precursor of CRC) risk. − 24− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be By the same token, the results of a Swiss case-control study (Barbir et al, 2012) indicated that HCA intake is positively associated with colorectal adenoma risk, regardless of phenotypes involved in the xenobiotic metabolizing enzyme genes. Cytochrome P450 2E1 (CYP2E1) is a natural enzyme involved in the metabolic activation of many carcinogens and meta-analyses have shown association between some cytochrome P450 polymorphisms and CRC risk (Qian et al, 2013) but not with others (Mei et al, 2012) (Zhao et al, 2013) (Peng et al, 2013). Another metaanalysis confirmed that the NAT1 genotype was not significantly associated with an elevated CRC risk but suggests that individuals with NAT2 genotype had an elevated risk of CRC (Liu et al, 2012), confirmed by the higher susceptibility for CRC of NAT2 carriers with high HCA intake (Voutsinas et al, 2013). Meta-analysis also showed that a polymorphism of a microsomal epoxide hydrolase may have a potential protective effect on CRC (Liu et al, 2012a) whereas from a limited case-control study involving 264 individuals, Bajro et al (2012) suggest that a polymorphism involved in the promotion of the uridine diphosphoglucuronate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 gene, a key hepatic detoxification enzyme, is a risk factor for colorectal cancer in a Macedonian male population. It can be concluded that in spite of some inconsistency, the majority of recent reports suggest that gene polymorphisms of major detoxifying enzymes do not modify meat consumption related CRC incidence: in a large and comprehensive study relating xenobiotic metabolizing enzyme gene polymorphisms, meat mutagens and the risk of colorectal tumors Gilsing et al (2012) could not find modifying effects of gene polymorphisms on CRC incidence and only limited suggestions for diet-gene interactions and CRC risk were obtained in a recent meta-analysis (Andersen et al, 2013). In an analogous consideration Yarnall et al (2013) have suggested that modification of behaviour, including consumption of red and processed red meat, alleviates genetic risks. It should be realized however that genetic investigations into meat induced increased susceptibility to CRC may need studies of combined rather than indidual SNPs. Indeed, although Küry et al (2007) confirmed that such increase was not affected by individual SNPs of cytochrome P450 genes, three allelic variant combinations however, present in around 4% of the population studied, were associated with a 50-fold increased CRC risk because of red meat consumption over five times per week. Also, newer cell structure related gene polymorphisms associated with CRC risk warranting further research were recently identified in a large genome-wide metaanalysis (Colon Cancer Family Registry and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium, 2013). 2.2.3.2 Other modifiable risk factors WCRF/AICR (2007, 2011) studied diet (food and nutrition) and physical activity but also recognized that (cigarette) smoking is an important established carcinogenic factor, also for CRC (Liang et al, 2009). Socio-economic status, another confounding factor possibly affecting the relation diet~CRC has been ruled out by Major et al (2011). This may be associated however with eating behavior and it has been shown that “eating anything at anytime” increases risk of CRC incidence in another large American prospective cohort study, independent of other potential risk factors (Bao et al, 2012). In line with the effects of “Westernization”, physical activity, obesity {using BMI (body mass index), waist circumference or other indices of body fat}, diet, smoking and alcohol intake are the main five factors that have been associated with the development of CRC. In an extensive review, Huxley et al (2009) used reports identified between 1966 and January 2008 through EMBASE and MEDLINE including 103 cohort studies. They concluded that individuals consuming the most alcohol (> 60 g/d) had a 60% greater risk of CRC compared with non- or light drinkers whereas smoking, diabetes, obesity and high meat intakes were each associated with a significant 20% increased risk (comparison of individuals in the highest and lowest categories for each). Relative risk factors, recently estimated and compared from metaanalyses involving studies on 12 established CRC risk factors suggested that the consumption of red meat is associated with a much lower risk than inflammatory bowel disease and a history of CRC in first-degree relatives. The risk is similar to increased BMI, cigarette smoking, low physical activity and low vegetable and fruit consumption (Johnson et al, 2013). Such data are in line with − 25− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be estimates shown in Table 2 illustrating e.g. that the convincing risks associated with alcohol use and processed red meat consumption are similar. The independent relative importance of these factors has been estimated using multivariate statistical models but this has limitations because of the interrelationships between these factors: a high meat intake is associated with high alcohol consumption (Valencia-Martin et al, 2011) whereas animal protein consumption, mainly from red and processed red meat and poultry, is associated with body weight gain both in Europe (Halkjaer et al, 2011; Romaguera et al, 2011) and the US (Wang & Beydoun, 2009), a finding corroborated in Belgium where “plant protein could offer a protective effect in the prevention of overweight and obesity” (Lin et al, 2011). However, it should again be realized that these findings require a specification of “meat” as differential effects on BMI were observed for several subtypes of meat (Gilsing et al, 2012a). The need for specification of meat and meat products is perhaps best illustrated by the recent consideration of “meat” as “a low-fat food” associated with lowered BMI values (Mullie et al, 2012). In spite of these limits, Parkin et al (2009) proposed potential contributions of separate individual lifestyle recommendations for prevention of CRC in the UK. Their results as reported for males indicate that a lowering of the consumption of meat and meat products from 90 g/d to 80 g/d would save 2129 cases equivalent to an 8 % lowering of the incidence, compared to an overall lowering of 31.5 % when all recommendations are met. A similar conclusion was reached by Kirkegaard et al (2010): in a Danish prospective cohort study involving 55 487 men and women 13% of CRC cases were attributable to lack of adherence to only one recommendation of five proposed: physical activity, waist circumference, smoking, alcohol intake and diet. The latter involved a “dietary index” covering consumption of fruit, vegetables, fat and fiber as well as consumption of ≤500 g of red and processed red meat per week. Table 2. Summary estimates of convincing relative risks of CRC from cohort studies (adapted from Corpet, 2011 and WCRF/AICR , 2011). Factor % changea Relative risk Per Waist to hip ratio Red meat Alcohol Smoking Processed red meat Body mass index Dietary fiber Adult attained height 30 29 27 25 21 15 10 9 1.30 1.29 1.27 1.25 1.21 1.15 0.90 1.09 0.1 increase 100 g/d 30 g/d Ever vs never 50 g/d 5 kg/m2 10 g/d 5 cm a 100 times the absolute value of (relative risk – 1) 2.2.4 Possible impact on prevention in Belgium A conservative and rough application of these estimates to the Belgian situation suggests that the lowering of average fresh red and processed red meat consumption from 95 g/d (Data in table 5 estimated from De Vriese et al, 2006) to 50 g/d might save about 1200 cases (~ 15 %) out of the total of 7790 (for 2006 from Pacolet et al, 2011). Such intervention agrees with the aims of a European action against colon cancer (http://www.stopcoloncancer.info/) and with similar effectiveness as the saving (~ 20 %) associated with preventive screening for the disease as discussed by Atkin (1999) and Frew et al (1999). It is of course clear that primary prevention through nutritional strategy cannot be an alternative to the latter secundary prevention. At least one argument is: the latter immediately detects unrecognized disease whereas the preventive effect of the former may require a minimal time span of ten to fifteen years (Bejar et al, 2010). It has been suggested that justified and efficient official recommendations for dietary interventions − 26− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be should involve cost-benefit analyses based on cost estimates of disease treatments as well as the disability-adjusted life years lost and their impact on workforce participation and productivity (Lenoir-Wijnkoop et al, 2013). Such approach within “nutrition economics” could even incorporate genetic and ethnic differences in disease susceptibility of target populations (Bhopal et al, 2012) (Lang & Barley, 2013) but is considered to exceed the available expertise of the authors as well as lacking justification because of the limited precision of the information and importance of the possible impact. 2.2.5 The importance of meat in nutrition 2.2.5.1 Consumption and recommendations Meat and processed red meat products are important dietary components in Western industrialized countries and represent on average about 11 and 5 % of total dietary energy intake respectively (Table 3). Table 3. The contribution of meat to total dietary energy intake (Linseisen et al, 2002) Greece Spain Italy France Germany The Netherlands UK Denmark Sweden Norway Total meat (% of total energy) Women Men 7.0 8.1 13.5 16.0 10.4 10.7 11.4 10.8 14.9 11.4 14.5 8.5 9.3 9.5 11.9 10.8 12.8 10.5 - Processed red meat (% of total energy) Women 1.0 6.2 3.6 3.9 6.2 5.3 2.8 3.3 5.3 5.9 Men 1.2 7.5 4.4 9.4 7.5 3.7 5.2 6.4 - EU 10.4 4.4 5.7 12.3 Similar data can be calculated from the results of the 2004 Belgian National Food Consumption Survey (Food Consumption Survey, Belgium, 2004) discussed in terms of energy and macronutrient intake by Temme et al (2010) and Lin et al (2011) (Table 4). − 27− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 4. Contribution of fat and protein in meat products and processed red meats to total energy intake in Belgium [approximate estimates calculated from Temme et al (2010) and Lin et al (2011)]. Contribution to total energy intakea Fat Protein Carbohydrates Total Macronutrients 37 % 16 % 47% 100 % Meat Products (Processed red meats) 6.9 (2.6) 5.2 (1.6) NE (low)b 12.1 (4.2) Dairy and butter 8.7 5.3 NE (low) 14.0 Plant products 8.8 (margarine;oils)c 5.5 (cereals) 25 (cereals) 39.3 12.6 NE (low) 22 (drinks, sugar) 34.6 37% 16% 47% 100.0 % Contribution of food groups Energy-dense micronutrient poor foodsd a b 8560 kj/d (value corrected for underreporting = 9496 kJ/d) value considered to be low and not c d estimated () = main food groups involved groups cakes; condiments; sauces; sugar; drinks From the arguments presented above, it is clear that recommendations on eating for prevention of CRC require a food-based formulation based on nutrient intake and reference values, in analogy with the development of dietary guidelines for healthy eating. The latter values are described by the national health authorities (Hoge Gezondheidsraad – Conseil Supérieur de la Santé, 2009) and have been translated in largely similar food-based dietary guidelines developed by the regional health authorities. From a comparison of food consumption data with the Flemish food-based dietary guidelines (Vanhauwaert, 2012) (Vandevijvere et al, 2009), it can be calculated that the average consumption of meat and meat products (including poultry) exceeds the recommended value of 100g (Table 5), a value recommended for the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/substitutes. Table 5. Recommended and actual consumption of food groups in Belgium for 2004 (From Vandevijvere et al, 2009) Food group Recommended (g/d) Consumed (g/d) Meats/fish/eggs/legumes/substitutes Meats and meat productsa fresh beef, veal, pork, sheep, horse and goat processed red meats poultry <100 161 121b 61b Nutrient-poor foods (alcohol excluded) <100c Nutrient-poor foods (alcohol included) <100c a 32b 19b b 295 529 c including poultry From Food Consumption Survey, Belgium (2004) According to the recommendations, this intake should be 0. − 28− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be The excess (61 %) is not as high as for nutrient-poor foods (195 or 529 % without or with inclusion of alcohol) indicating that the latter food group may be more important in relation to energy intake and obesity incidence than meat and meat products as discussed elsewhere (Demeyer, 2008). The estimated consumption of 121 g/d meat and meat products (for 2004, including poultry) compares with consumption data calculated from data provided by the meat industry and agricultural organizations (http://archive-be.com/page/49027/2012-0611/http://www.vlam.be/facts/info_nl.phtml?id=7) : ca. 134 g/d including ca. 90 g/d total fresh red meat (data for 2010 excluding poultry) and 44 g/d for processed red meat (“charcuterie” consumption over the last decade). It is however lower than the data reported earlier for 19801985 (Dehenauw & De Backer, 1999): 178 g/d including 157 g/d of fresh meat and 21 g/d of processed red meat, illustrating a shift towards processed red meat consumption. There is a clear regional government support for the recommended maximal value of 100 g/d “total meat” consumption although the difference between “total meat” and the food group “meats/fish/eggs/legumes/substitutes” is not consistently present in the arguments (http://www.vilt.be/index.php/nl_BE/news/show/id/108094) and at the national government level the value is lowered to 75-100 g/d (in “Nationaal voedingsplan voor een betere gezondheid“ “Plan National Nutrition pour une meilleure santé” at http://www.belgium.be/nl/gezondheid/gezond_leven/voeding/nationaal_plan/ or http://www.belgium.be/fr/sante/vie_saine/alimentation/plan_national/)). 2.2.5.2 Sustainable meat consumption meeting dietary requirements for health An important part of the industrialized population has lowered or considers to lower meat consumption, to a large extent based on legislations limiting meat production to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (see e.g. Mithril et al, 2012) as discussed in detail by Millward & Garnett (2010). Recent evaluation of the water footprint of EU food consumption has led to a similar intention (Vanham et al, 2013). Nevertheless, apart from ecological considerations, healthiness was the most salient stated reason for the intention of 52 % of the Finnish consumers to lower meat consumption (Latvala et al, 2012). de Boer et al (2013) recently concluded that for motivation of consumer food choices it is preferable not to isolate the meat-climate issue but to develop an approach combining multiple values, including health. Combining health and environmental arguments McMichael et al (2007) e.g. recommended a global lowering of red meat intake coming from ruminants to 50 g/d. In authoritative approaches covering all meat related disease effects, detailed modeling by both epidemiologists and ecologists (Scarborough et al, 2012) (Powell & Lenten, 2012)( Macdiarmid et al, 2012) has integrated and evaluated harmful effects of Western high meat diets and the trend to higher meat diets in e.g. East-Asia and India for both human health and climate change. Scarborough et al (2012) conclude a 50% reduction in meat and dairy replaced by fruit, vegetables and cereals would result in a 19% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as well as in the delay or aversion of about 37000 deaths. Recently, Aston et al (2012) estimated that moving from the higher to the lower fifth of existing red and processed red meat consumption level in the UK would lower CRC risk by about 16 and 25 % for women and men respectively, associated with a 3 % reduction in the current GHG emission level. Even in the US, environmental considerations generated a USDA proposal for a “Meatless Monday” similar to and even inspired by an initiative in Flanders (e.g. http://www.vilt.be/Gentse_Veggiedag_krijgt_navolging_in_wereldsteden). This proposal was withdrawn however after vigorous protest by the US National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (http://www.beefusa.org/newsreleases1.aspx?newsid=2560) also stating that health concerns of meat “are not based on facts but statistics and rhetoric generated by anti-animal agriculture organizations”. From a public health perspective it is hard to accept such statements and it has been argued that reactions to the situation should be based on science based education on health of the consumer, highlighting ample scientific research indicating that red meat can be consumed daily (Schonfeldt & Hall, 2012). It should also be recognized however that the need to “feed more people better, with less environmental impact“ does not only pose challenges to production and consumption but also involves socio-economic challenges, requiring “changes in − 29− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be how the food system is governed” (Garnett, 2013). Similar considerations, involving both moderation of meat consumption and production balanced by a “fair price“ policy for the farmer were recently also proposed by the Flemish farmers organization (http://www.vilt.be/Matiging_vleesconsumptie_en_correcte_voedselprijzen). It has been authoritatively confirmed that “appropriately planned” vegetarian and even vegan diets “are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases” (Craig & Mangels, 2009) whereas a “well-balanced lacto-ovovegetarian diet, including dairy products, can satisfy all nutritional needs of the growing child” (Van Winckel et al, 2011). Camilleri et al. (2013) recently demonstrated that plant protein is a robust marker of a healthy diet, different subtypes of animal protein largely vary in their relationschip with diet quality. It should be realized however that such statements refer to effectively controlled diets in industrialized countries and it has also been shown that moderate amounts of red meat (~ 100 g/d for adults) remain valuable sources for net protein synthesis for the elderly (Symons et al, 2009) and improve development of breast fed infants (Krebs & Hambidge, 2006), toddlers (Krebs et al., 2011) and children in developing countries (Mills et al, 2007). Recently, McEvoy et al (2012) recognized the convincing link between red meat and particularly processed red meat intake and disease, in support for a plant-based diet. They also concluded however that prudent plant-based dietary patterns that allow small intakes of red meat besides fish and dairy products have demonstrated significant improvements in health status. It should therefore be accepted that a sustainable diet lowering greenhouse gas emissions and meeting dietary requirements for health can be achieved without complete elimination of meat (Macdiarmid et al, 2012). In addition, practical dietary and culinary recommendations should be made for cancer prevention involving e.g. practices to lower heterocyclic amine formation during cooking (Lecerf, 2012). Extreme reactions from the “meat world” may generate and conflict with more science based arguments in favor e.g. of a tax on meat consumption to reach significant mitigation of climate change (Nordgren, 2012). It is therefore appropriate to briefly review how a lowered red meat intake may affect the intake of the major energy dense essential nutrients present in red meat and processed red meats. 2.2.5.3 Meat in essential nutrient supply Iron (Fe): Apart from protein, Fe is probably the nutrient most discussed in relation to red meat intake focusing on iron deficiency-anemia and the difference in absorption of heme-Fe and non-heme plant Fe as e.g. in Hoge Gezondheidsraad – Conseil Superieur de la Santé (2009). Both items are however subject of reconsideration because recent newer insights have made clear that: - The incidence of Fe deficiency as reflected in low circulatory Fe values (e.g. transferrin saturation) or iron intakes below the WHO recommended intakes (20 and 9 mg/d for women and men respectively) far exceeds the incidence of anemia (Stoltzfus, 2001): only 50% of anemia is associated with Fe deficiency. It has recently been reported that borderline levels of circulatory iron may be related to brain iron deficiency, as reflected in fatigue of nonanemic menstruating women (Vaucher et al, 2012) and in ADHD of children (Cortese et al, 2012). However neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation also occurs (Schipper, 2012). Nevertheless it has been reported that no clear functional disabilities have been associated with Fe intakes below the recommended values (Millward & Garnett, 2010) whereas it has been suggested that UK dietary iron requirements may be too high and should be reviewed (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, UK, 2010). In this respect, it is quite striking that in the 2004 consumption survey Fe consumption was below recommended values in 70 % of the female population (Food Consumption Survey, Belgium, 2004) whereas Huybrechts et al (2012) found that “almost half of the Flemish preschoolers do not comply with the dietary iron recommendations”. − 30− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be - The above may be related to the single value of Fe availability (15%) used in the development of recommended intake values for Western countries whereas it is now clear that intestinal absorption of Fe and its further metabolism is tightly regulated by very complicated mechanisms related to the Fe and general metabolic state of the individual. From the average adult intake of 10-15 mg/d, 1-2 mg is absorbed in the enterocyte involving reduction of Fe3+ to Fe2+ and facilitated transport by metal and heme (?) transporter proteins to be stored as ferritin or transferred across the cell membrane involving the transporter protein ferroportin and bound to transferrin in plasma. The synthesis of ferritin and transferrin varies with the size of Fe stores through the variable binding of Fe regulatory proteins to Fe responsive elements in the mRNA’s controlling expression of proteins such as ferritin and transferrin (Hentze et al, 2010). The synthesis of ferroportin and transporter proteins is controlled by hepcidin, a key peptide in Fe homeostasis, synthesized in the liver. Its synthesis and that of other interacting Fe metabolism proteins such as hephaestin, a Cu containing ferroxidase, is itself controlled by complex modulation of the relevant gene expressions mediated by cytokines (Interleukin-6) and Fe homeostasis related formation of labile radicals formation (Crichton et al, 2002; Andrews, 2005; Weiss, 2009; Tussing-Humphreys et al, 2012) (see e.g. Fig. 4). Hepcidin expression is increased in chronic inflammation and obesity and is associated with Fe deficiency observed in overweight children, irrespective of Fe intake and availability of supply (Hurrell & Egli, 2010). Another process necessitating effective control of Fe absorption as well as inter- and intracellular transport is the potential toxicity of Fe2+ mediated through hydroxyl radical formation via the Fenton reaction. It has therefore been proposed to develop a range of iron bioavailability factors based not only on diet composition but also on subject characteristics, such as iron status and prevalence of obesity (Hurrell & Egli, 2010). - As discussed by Millward & Garnett (2010) and Hurrell & Egli (2010) hepcidin is mainly involved in the up-regulation of non-heme Fe absorption at low heme Fe (meat) intakes associated with low iron stores (ferritin) compared to higher meat intakes. Apart from dietary Fe absorption effectors inhibiting (phytate, polyphenols and Ca) or stimulating (ascorbic acid) Fe absorption, this is obviously an effective mechanism as vegetarians in developed countries do not have a greater incidence of Fe-deficiency anemia, reflecting the existence of another but effective Fe homeostatic equilibrium. The above reasoning has been developed in evidence-based detail by Geissler & Singh (2011) and supports the conclusion of the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (2010) that even at zero meat intake the impact on Fe intake is very little, with the implicit equivalence of Fe from meat and from non-meat sources (Millward & Garnett, 2010). In line with this, a meat consumption effect on iron absorption was not supported by the absence of an effect of meat intake on anemia in children and/or adolescents in Japan (Kunitsugu et al, 2012) and in developing countries (Krebs et al, 2012a). According to Food Consumption Survey, Belgium (2004), meat and meat products account for 20 % of total Fe intake and the above reasoning allows for the conclusion that the intake of meat and meat products can be lowered considerably without negative effect on the incidence of anemia. Some consideration should perhaps be given to consumers at higher risk for iron deficiency: children, women of reproductive age and adults aged over 65 y. − 31− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig. 4. Regulation of body iron homeostasis by hepcidin (From Collins et al, 2008). Protein: The population daily total protein intake as recently reported for Belgium (Lin et al, 2011) amounts to 85 and 50 g/d for males and females respectively, representing about 15 % of energy intake, in line with the upper levels of recommendations (10-15%). As shown in Table 6 fresh and processed red meat represent 22 and 10 % of total protein intake respectively. Although it is recognized that protein quality expressed as the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS) is lower for plant than for meat proteins, mainly because of a lower digestibility, it has been established that essential amino acid content (mg/g protein) for both high- and low animal sourced foods exceeds the requirement pattern in Western diets (Fig.5). Soy protein in particular approaches the PDCAAS of lean meat, in contrast to cereal proteins. For all practical purposes plant and animal proteins can thus be considered equivalent at the total intakes and food diversities observed in developed countries. This is indeed reflected in the Flemish food-based dietary recommendations where meat, fish, eggs and alternatives (soy products) are grouped in the same recommended daily intake of 100 g (Vanhauwaert, 2012) (Vandevijvere et al, 2009). Nevertheless, convincing evidence has been presented for a superior effect of beef compared to soy protein on protein turnover in the prevention of sarcopenia, e.g. the age related gradual loss of skeletal muscle mass (Phillips, 2012). It has indeed been shown that the fast speed of meat protein digestion, affected by cooking temperature (Bax et al, 2013) or mincing (Pennings et al, 2013), stimulates protein synthesis more efficiently than slow proteins after exercise or in the elderly (Rémond et al, 2007). Such higher rate of digestion may contribute to the need for adequate meat intake to ensure appropriate supply of high quality protein as well as of other key micronutrients especially for individuals most at risk of malnutrition. These include adolescents, women of childbearing age, pregnant women, the elderly, and those individuals with a high level sport activity (Bourre, 2011) as well as populations with deficient nutritional status in developing nations (McNeill & Van Elswyk, 2012). In this respect it can e.g. be mentioned that in Belgium, meat − 32− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be and meat products are major sources (31%) of a selenium intake considered to be at the lower end of the recommended value (Waegeneers et al, 2013). Table 6. Intake of protein (g/d) from different foods in Belgium for 2004 (Lin et al, 2011) Protein Sources Males Age (years) 15-18 >75 15-18 >75 Animal 56 15 36 19 8 8 4 1 29 22 58 13 36 19 10 8 7 2 28 18 33 10 19 10 5 5 3 1 18 13 35 9 22 12 5 6 4 1 15 9 85 86 51 50 Dairy Meat & Meat Products Fresh Processed Poultry Fish & Shellfish Eggs & Egg products Plant Cereals Total Females Fig.5. Amino acid pattern (mg/g protein) of high ( ) and low ( ) animal sourced food diets and the requirement patterns for adults ( ) and children (1-2 years old) ( ) (From Millward & Garnett, 2010). Zinc (Zn) : In a typical Western diet, red meat makes a greater contribution to total Zn than to total Fe intake indicating that a lowered intake of red meat and processed red meats may be more critical for Zn than for Fe supply. Regular consumption of either meats or zinc-fortified foods was shown to meet required zinc absorption (Krebs et al, 2012) and a positive relationship between red meat intake and hair zinc levels was observed (Ozden et al, 2012). Both Zn and Fe are ‘‘problem nutrients’’ for breastfed infants in developing countries and supplementation with beef compared to a Fe fortified cereal (Krebs & Hambidge, 2006) or Zn sulfate (Kumar & Ramji, 2012) have improved infant development. Overt Zn deficiencies have − 33− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be however not been observed in developed countries and, analogous to Fe, plasma Zn concentrations are not consistently or significantly correlated with Zn intake, indicating that an efficient homeostatic control ensures “a normal range” of plasma Zn levels (Hoge Gezondheidsraad – Conseil Supérieur de la Santé, 2009)(Millward & Garnett, 2010). There is evidence of up-regulation of Zn absorption at low intakes and plasma Zn levels do usually not differ between meat eaters and vegetarians (Hunt, 2003). Nevertheless, Belgian recommendations (Hoge Gezondheidsraad – Conseil Supérieur de la Santé, 2009) refer to a 30 % average absorption of dietary Zn, to be lowered to 20 % for a diet poor in animal source foods. Recommended intake levels are therefore increased for diets low in animal sourced foods and even more for vegetarians. Millward & Garnett (2010) report that reducing the intake of red meat and processed red meats to 70 g/d would increase the percentage of the population with Zn intakes below the lower reference intake to 4-5. However, entirely plantbased dietary Zn and the presence of other animal sourced foods would “in reality” maintain near normal levels of plasma Zn because of the control of homeostasis although there may be a problem for children. Vitamin B12 (B12): It is evident that B12 has to be considered in an evaluation of nutrient supply by red meat and processed red meats as animal foods are the only source of this vitamin. The lowest B12 concentration is present in milk and dairy products (0.3–0.4 μg/100 g) a value lower than for eggs (0.9–1.4 μg/100 g) or meat and fish (3 and 33 μg/100 g) (Van Winckel et al, 2011). The B12 intake in Europe ranges between 2 and 6 µg/d compared to a recommended intake of 1.4 (Hoge Gezondheidsraad, 2009) or 2,4 (WHO/FAO, 2004) µg/d for adults, to be increased for pregnant and breast feeding women. There is therefore little evidence for symptoms of B12 deficiency (megaloblastic anemia and various neurological disorders including dementia) in Europe, apart from the elderly population because of malabsorption of food-bound B12 caused by gastritis and in some groups of vegans because of the total absence of animal sourced foods. Plasma B12 levels however are a poor indication of functional B12 deficiency and functional indicators such as plasma or urinary methylmalonic acid suggest that B12 deficiency may be more common and cognitive decline associated with methylmalonic acid has been observed in high proportions of institutionalized elderly. Plasma B12 levels do however reflect intake of supplements, fortified cereals and milk but less so intake of meat, poultry and fish suggesting a higher availability of B 12 from dairy products. The promotion of a high intake of dairy products to ensure adequate B12 intake has therefore been suggested, not able however to compensate a lowering of the overall intake in the total absence of fish and meat (Millward & Garnett, 2010). Accordingly Van Winckel et al (2011) state “all persons consuming fish or meat less than once weekly are at risk of vitamin B 12 deficiency” . The proportion of red meat and processed red meat products representing 58 % of “Meats/fish/eggs/legumes/substitutes” consumption (calculated from Table 5), the consumption of dairy products and the availability of B12 enriched soy products and cereals therefore allows for a substantial lowering of red meat and processed red meat consumption without risk for B12 deficiency. An exception should perhaps be made for vegans, that have to obtain B12 from regular use of B12-fortified foods. Vitamin D: In view of the recent report demonstrating suboptimal blood levels of 25hydroxycholecalciferol (25(OH)D) in 80 % of 1006 European adolescents (Gonzalez-Cross et al, 2012), considerable attention should also be given to the dietary supply of vitamin D by meat. Sodium (Na): Na represents a special case as a lowering of processed red meat consumption may indeed lower Na intake, a desirable effect. Indeed, evidence based nutritional recommendations do advocate a limitation of salt intake to 5 g/d ( about 2 g of Na/d) (Hoge Gezondheidsraad, 2009). Vandevijvere & Van Oyen (2008) estimated a mean Na intake of 2.7 g/d from the 2004 food consumption survey but this excluded added salt in the kitchen and on the table. A later limited study of 24 h-urinary samples showed that the − 34− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be actual salt intake amounted to about 9-12 g/d (Vandevijvere et al, 2010). A recommendation for salt reduction in foods was therefore officially issued recently by Belgian Health authorities (Advisory report SHC 8663 Reformulation of foodstuffs – salt reduction at www.css-hgr.be). Second in line after bread and cereals, meat products (processed red meats ?) were found to contribute about 20 % of total Na intake, a value close to the 18 % found for the contribution of processed red meats to Na in purchased foods in the UK (Mhurchu et al, 2011). Accordingly, Schmid et al (2011) considered the salt content of Swiss cured cooked meats high enough to recommend their “restricted” consumption. It should however be realized that the Na content of processed red meats very often exceeds that accounted for by salt (NaCl) (Vandendriessche, 2008). This issue supports a limitation of processed red meat intake quite apart from the CRC issue, parallel with initiatives of the meat industry to lower the use of salt in food technology (http://www.fenavian.be/uploads/documentenbank/b6d4e6664bfb8230d8a231c117fea823.pdf 2.2.6 Carcinogenic mechanisms Recognition of an increased risk of CRC linked to red and processed red meat consumption is based on “evidence based nutrition”. Such observational evidence however does not explain how red meat and processed red meats can increase CRC risk, a problem to be solved only using experimental evidence based on hypotheses. Excluding “inverse causality” hypotheses should obviously involve the presence of specific components in red meat and processed red meats inducing the accumulation of the typical events characterizing the development of CRC. Approximately 5% of all CRC cases are due to inherited genetic mutations, including many syndromes such as Familial Adenomatous Polyposis and Lynch syndrome (Al-Sohaily et al, 2012). However, most cases of CRC are termed sporadic and have been linked to environmental causes including the consumption of red and processed red meat rather than to heritable genetic changes. Like other types of cancer, the development of CRC is a multistep process. CRC arises in the majority of the cases as a benign adenomatous polyp, which develops into an advanced adenoma with high-grade dysplasia and finally progresses to an invasive cancer (Sanford & McPherson, 2009). Genomic instability appears to be an integral part in this transformation processs (Al-Sohaily et al., 2012). In an initial attempt to characterize multistep carcinogenesis, Fearon and Vogelstein proposed a model in which specific genetic alterations are associated with the sequential evolution of the neoplastic phenotype in the colon (Boland & Goel, 2010). According to this model (Fig. 6), a mutation of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene is the earliest genetic change in CRC leading to the initial appearance of the adenoma from normal colonic mucosa. In the absence of the functional APC protein, the Wnt signaling pathway, passing signals from receptors on the cell surface to the nucleus, will be inappropriately and constitutively activated. This pathway is normally initiated by the oncoprotein beta-catenin and results in the transcription of several genes affecting proliferation, differentiation, migration and apoptosis (Al-Sohaily et al, 2012). As the APC protein is a component of the complex that stimulates the proteasomal degradation of beta-catenin, changes in its gene will result in an unregulated production of beta-catenin stimulating proliferation of epithelial cells (Tudek & Speina, 2012). Some hereditary cases of CRC are associated with germ-line APC mutations. In carriers of the mutant gene, the risk of CRC by the age of 40 years is close to 100% (references in Markowitz Bertagnolli, 2009). During the further progression of the adenoma, Fearon and Vogelstein observed other changes in genetic regulation, such as induction of the KRAS oncogene resulting in growth of the adenoma and loss of function of tumor suppressor genes on chromosome 18q inducing further adenoma growth and progression. In the model of Fearon and Vogelstein, loss or inactivation of p53 gene function takes place in a late stage and is believed to be the defining event that drives the adenoma to carcinoma (Itzkowitz & Yio, 2004). Although this model has been useful, combination of mutations of these genes in the same cancer is uncommon and CRC pathways beyond the Fearon and Vogelstein model have been identified (Al-Sohaily et al, 2012). Today, three distinct molecular pathways of genomic instability in colon − 35− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be carcinogenesis have been recognized: the chromosomal instability pathway, the microsatellite instability pathway and the CpG island methylator phenotype pathway (Itzkowitz & Yio, 2004). Tumors can occasionally display features of several of those pathways. Fig. 6. Sequence of mutational events that characterize the transition from normal colonic mucosa to colonic adenocarcinoma first described by Vogelstein. In this model, the APC and KRAS gene mutations are suggested to play a key role in the development of colorectal cancers (From Hasan et al, 2010) The following factors have been linked to the development of CRC: Inflammation Like for other types of cancer, inflammation has been suggested to play a role in the development of CRC. Not only has epidemiologic observation identified inflammatory bowel disease (IBD, including both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s colitis) as an important risk factor for developing CRC (Itzkowitz & Yio, 2004), also in other forms of sporadic as well as heritable CRC, inflammation is likely to be involved (Terzic et al, 2010). Indeed, robust inflammatory infiltration and increased expression of proinflammatory cytokines have been reported in colorectal tumors that are not associated with clinically detectable IBD (Clevers, 2004; Terzic et al, 2010). The development of colitis-associated cancer (CAC), the CRC subtype associated with IBD, displays many similarities with other types of CRC although some different pathogenic sequences have been proposed including chronic inflammation and injury-dysplasia carcinoma, which arises without the formation of well-defined adenomas (Terzic et al, 2010). Nonetheless, the three main molecular pathways involved in sporadic CRC have also been identified in CAC. The presence of chronic inflammation however, appears to alter the timing and the frequency of these pathways (Hartnett & Egan, 2012). Chronic intestinal inflammation is characterized by dysfunction of multiple pathways, including innate and regulatory functions of the immune response, epithelial-barrier function, signal transduction, and stress response/DNA repair in response to persistent antigens derived from food and the luminal bacteria (Westbrook et al, 2010). Considering the large number of pathways disturbed, chronic inflammation has been proposed to affect the three stages of cancer: tumor initiation, tumor promotion and tumor progression. Tumor initiation, the process by which a normal cell becomes malignant, is associated with accumulation of genetic alterations (Grivennikov et al, 2010; Westbrook et al,2010). Research data indicate that inflammation can induce genetic alterations through several mechanisms. Activated inflammatory cells (macrophages) for example trigger oxidant-generating enzymes such as NADPH oxidase and myeloperoxidase to produce high concentrations of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and reactive nitrogen species (RNS). While these ROS and RNS are important for execution of physiological functions, excessive production can disturb the delicate balance between ROS/RNS and antioxidant defense mechanisms inducing oxidative and nitrative base damage as well as DNA single- and double-strand breaks (Coussens & Werb, 2002; Murata et al, 2012). Nonetheless, it is rather unlikely that ROS produced by immune cells diffuse and induce mutations in adjacent epithelial cells. A more plausible hypothesis is that the cytokines and other factors released by activated immune cells stimulate ROS production within epithelial cells. − 36− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be In CAC, chronic inflammation precedes colitis-associated tumor development and therefore oxidative damage to DNA, due to chronic inflammation, may be responsible for tumor initiation. However, in sporadic CRC, it is rather unlikely that inflammation triggers tumor initiation because most intratumoral immune cells are recruited after the tumor is formed. Consequently, chronic inflammation does not precede but follows tumor development. After tumor formation however, the localized inflammatory microenvironment can promote accumulation of additional mutations and epigenetic changes (Terzic et al, 2010). Also during tumor promotion and progression, cytokines released by activated immune cells can play a role by stimulating angiogenesis and suppressing immune-mediated tumor elimination (Karin, 2006; Yu et al, 2009; Grivennikov et al, 2010). Intestinal microbiota Results of animal studies indicate that the intestinal microflora influences the development of both sporadic CRC and CAC. In normal conditions, the intestinal microflora has important homeostatic immune and metabolic functions, affects the proliferation and survival of epithelial cells and provides protection against pathogens. Disruption of the homeostasis (both qualitatively and quantitatively) of the intestinal microflora could promote cancer through different ways. In case the number, diversity, and stability of commensal bacteria is altered, normal physiological processes can be disturbed and trigger disease. Furthermore, pathogens (i.e. Bacteroides fragilis) or conditional commensals can also contribute to tumorigenesis (Terzic et al, 2010). Mechanisms might include induction of inflammation or production of mutagenic toxins. However, a complex interplay between bacterial inflammation, toxin production and subsequent cellular responses exists and complicates the understanding of the different mechanisms involved (Collins et al, 2011). Toll-like receptors Toll-like receptors are single membrane-spanning, non-catalytic proteins which are mostly expressed on intestinal epithelial cells, in addition to resident innate immune cells (RakoffNahoum & Medzhitov, 2008). Like other pattern recognition receptors they become activated by components of bacteria and viruses, products of tissue damage, and necrosis, stress or other signals (Terzic et al, 2010; Hartnett & Egan, 2012). Although Toll-like receptors might be involved in the development of CRC, the overall contribution of pattern recognition receptors to epithelial cells compared with immune or inflammatory cells remains still unclear (Terzic et al, 2010). Several hypotheses underlying the link between the intake of red and processed red meat and the increased risk of CRC have been proposed and the most important ones will be discussed. It should be realized however that besides the compounds mentioned, other compounds may be important and it was e.g recently reported that smoked meat products contained high concentrations (up to 125 mg/kg wet weight) of formaldehyde, a recognized carcinogen (Zhu et al, 2012). 2.2.6.1 Unlikely hypotheses: fat, protein and thermoresistant oncogenic bovine viruses 2.2.6.1.1 Excess of protein and fat intake A diet high in red meat and/or in processed red meats potentially contains high levels of saturated fat. High fat intake increases the secretion of secondary bile acids in the gut. These bile acids can promote tumor formation by acting as aggressive surfactants for the mucosa thus increasing cell loss and proliferation (Corpet, 2011). Furthermore, a high fat diet results in an increased amount of free fatty acids in the colonic lumen. These free fatty acids may damage the colonic epithelium and increase proliferation as discussed in more detail under 2.2.6.4.2. Finally, high fat diets favor obesity, a status associated with CRC and other diseases. Meat is also a rich source of dietary protein. Fermentation of the excess of proteins in the gut yields metabolites such as NH 3 and H2S, compounds known to be toxic to the mucosa. However, neither an excess of fat nor protein − 37− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be can explain the link between consumption of red and processed red meat and CRC since these macro-nutrients are also present in dairy products, fish and poultry, foods not found to be associated with CRC incidence in epidemiology. Furthermore, human epidemiologic studies do not support an association between protein intake and CRC (Windey et al, 2012). Although Padidar et al (2012) have shown in mice that susceptibility to azoxymethane (AOM)-induced precancerous lesions is increased by high fat feeding, a meta-analysis, though subject to some criticism, showed that nor animal fat nor animal protein are CRC risk factors (Alexander et al, 2009). 2.2.6.1.2 Thermoresistant oncogenic bovine viruses An elegant hypothesis links red meat to CRC through “thermoresistant potentially oncogenic bovine viruses” (zur Hausen, 2012). The hypothesis however is not based on experimental work and does not explain a more outspoken cancer inducing effect of processed (cured) meats. The latter indeed mainly consist of pig meat, rendering such hypothesis improbable though elegant. 2.2.6.2 Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic amines Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and heterocyclic amines (HCA) can be formed when meat is cooked using high-temperature methods, such as pan frying or grilling directly over an open flame. The amount of PAH and HCA produced depends on the cooking method, the temperature used and the degree of doneness (Anderson et al, 2002). In animal studies, both types of compounds have been shown to be carcinogenic through the induction of mutations. However, before they can react with DNA, HCA and PAH require metabolic activation. The compounds can also be detoxified and excreted, thus diminishing the degree of DNA damage induced by them (Wang et al., 2012). 2.2.6.2.1 Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons PAH are ubiquitous environmental toxicants produced by incomplete combustion of organic compounds. They can be emitted during processing of coal, crude oil, petroleum, and natural gas, as by-products of industrial production, from heating in power plants and homes (oil, gas, charcoal-fired stoves, wood stoves), burning of refuse, wood fires, and from motor vehicle exhausts. Humans are exposed to PAH through different routes since they enter the body by consumption of contaminated foods or drinking water, inhalation of cigarette smoke, automobile exhausts, and contaminated air from occupational settings (Alexander et al., 2008). For nonsmoking humans, the major routes of exposure to PAH are food and to some extent inhaled air. In cigarette smokers, the contributions from smoking and food may be of a similar magnitude. Food can be contaminated both with PAH from environmental sources and PAH formed during food cooking. In case meat is grilled over a direct flame, fat/meat juices often drip onto the hot fire, yielding flames containing a number of PAH which can adhere to the surface of the food. However, PAH can also be produced during the curing and the processing of the food, for example, when smoking is used as a preservation method (Cross & Sinha, 2004). The best studied PAH is benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), recognized since 1987 as a probable human carcinogen, and recently upgraded to Group 1 based on mechanistic and other relevant data by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). In addition, three PAH have been categorized as probably and twelve PAH as possibly carcinogenic to humans (IARC, 1993). PAH are not genotoxic as such, but are activated after metabolisation. During the metabolisation process of different PAH, reactive metabolites are formed which can covalently bind to DNA (mainly to the guanine bases), inducing DNA damage. If the DNA damage is not or incorrectly repaired, mutations can be induced. Risk evaluation of long-term adverse health effects following dietary intake of PAH often considers the total of up to 8 of these compounds. In Table 7, the 4 major structures often considered together are presented (Alexander et al., 2008). Although PAH are mainly present in − 38− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be meat and meat products, they are usually not considered as a specific causal agent for the carcinogenic activity of meat and meat products as they are present in all foods as shown for a recent Italian study in Table 8. In a limited clinical based case/control study (374 subjects) and after correction for possible confounders, Sinha et al (2005) found that BaP intake was associated with colorectal adenoma incidence. Dietary BaP intakes were derived from previously established databases and from information on meat cooking methods and degrees of doneness/browning obtained in preparation as collected from the literature and illustrated by photography of the prepared meat (Augustsson et al, 1997) (Fig.7). Data should be available at http://dceg.cancer.gov/tools/design/charred developed by the U.S. National Cancer Institute (Sinha et al, 2005). The relation was stronger for BaP intake from all foods than for BaP from meat with relative risk rates (highest vs lowest intake) of 5.60 and 2.82 respectively. Meat and meat products represented 19 % of total dietary BaP intake. In line with earlier work, only grilling/barbecuing (gas barbecue unit with ceramic briquettes) but not cooking increased PAH in meat (Fig. 8) and the major source of meat associated BaP intake was grilled steak and hamburger (69 %) whereas grilled chicken represented 23 %. In related work, Gunter et al. (2005) confirmed their results and stated that “an incremental increase of 10 g of barbecued red meat per day was associated with a 29% increased risk of large adenoma” specifying that the barbecuing process involves exposure “to a naked flame”. In similar Australian work involving 1280 subjects however, a risk of CRC could not be associated with BaP intake (Tabatabaei et al., 2010). The authors relate this contradiction to the possible differences in fat content of the meat consumed. Also, in a recent case/control study, no relation was found between the urinary concentration of a biomarker of PAH exposure and CRC incidence in women (Hofmann et al, 2013). Based on this information, it would seem that concern for PAH as a clear causal agent of an increased risk of CRC through meat consumption should be limited to the “naked flame contact” during the barbecue process.This information, as well as the simple but efficient method to reduce exposure to PAH (and also HCA) by mechanical removal of charred and blackened material from the surface of broiled meat and fish on the dish, can be easily communicated to the consumers (Sugimura, 1997). It should be realized however that comparable levels of PAH (also as environmental contaminant) are found in cereal products and in grilled poultry and fish, foods not found to be associated with an increased risk for CRC. Table 7. Some major carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons (Alexander et al, 2008) Common name Chemical Structure Abbreviation Benz[a]anthracene BaA Benzo[b]fluoranthene BbFA Benzo[a]pyrene BaP Chrysene CHR − 39− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 8. Concentration means of BaP and PAH4 (BaA +BbFA + BaP + CHR) (ng/kg) in food groups (From Cirillo et al, 2010) BaP PAH4 Milk 60 870 Cereal based foods 270 – 720 980 – 1980 Fish and Fish products 580 2220 Dairy products 130 600 Fresh and cooked vegetables 180 2390 Meat and meat products 580 3970 Fig. 7. Method used to estimate intake of mutagens (Sinha et al, 2005). − 40− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig. 8. BaP content of hamburger and steak cooked by different methods to varying degrees of doneness (from Kazerouni et al, 2001). 2.2.6.2.2 Heterocyclic Amines The formation and final concentration of heterocyclic amines (HCA) formed in heated meat and fish via the Maillard reaction with creati(ni)ne, amino acids, and sugars depend on many factors including cooking method, cooking time and temperature, the concentration of precursors, and presence of water and fat in the raw product. More than 25 HCA have been isolated from different cooked muscle foods and IARC (1993) categorized eight of them [including 2-Amino-3,4dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline (MeIQ), 2-Amino-3,8-dimethyl imidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQx) and 2-Amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP)] as possibly carcinogenic to humans and 2-Amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline (IQ) as a probable human carcinogen (Fig. 9). The nitrenium ion formed during metabolization is considered the likely ultimate genotoxic compound binding to the DNA bases producing DNA adducts through the formation of N-C bonds at guanine bases (Jägerstad & Skog, 2005; Goldman & Shields, 2003). The most abundant HCA in cooked meat are PhIP and MeIQx. They are also the two major absorbed HCA after intake of a cooked meat meal (Cross & Sinha, 2004). Table 9 gives some indication on the effects of type of cooking on HCA levels. These results indicate that levels of MeIQx and PhIP, two HCA considered most relevant in relation to the risk for CRC, are similar if not lower in beef and pork compared to those found in cooked poultry and fish. For both poultry and fish, epidemiology did not show an association with CRC risk. By the same token, Viegas et al (2012) demonstrated that whereas quantitative HCA and PAH profiles were different for barbecued beef and salmon using the same type of charcoal, higher levels of HCA and PAH were found in salmon samples. Nevertheless, several studies provide some evidence for a positive association of well-done meat intake and HCA exposure with the risk of CRC. In a German EPIC observational study involving 25540 participants followed between 1998 and 2007, dietary HCA (PhIP but not MeIQx) were found to be significantly associated with the CRC incidence (relative risk: 1.47, highest vs lowest intake), even after adjustment for total red and processed red meat consumption. This suggests a − 41− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be specific effect of PhIP that cannot be completely explained by other components in red or processed red meat (Rohrmann et al, 2009). In a somewhat smaller US scale case-control study involving 6307 subjects between 2003 and 2010 (Fu et al, 2011), a significant positive association was found between exposures to all meat-derived HCA studied and risk of colorectal polyps, again after adjusting for potential confounders (relative risk: 1.3 – 1.4, highest vs lowest intake). As described above for PAH, HCA intake levels were derived in both studies from information on cooking methods and the degree of doneness/browning obtained in preparation as collected from the literature and illustrated by photography of the prepared meat (Sinha et al, 2005). For EPIC, similar data are available in relation to cooking method at European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) (2012a) and photographs illustrating “meat doneness” were developed for the European environment by e.g. Augustsson et al. (1997). It is clear that the latter concept is evaluated differently as illustrated e.g. by the range of HCA intake in the US and German observations (Table 10). Furthermore, Deziel et al. (2012) demonstrated that estimates for dietary HCA exposure obtained from food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) collections, diary collections, and measurements of urinary PhIP were not related. More consistent cancer risk estimates of dietary HCA exposure may therefore require improved HCA assessment tools. Results from animal experiments do not fully explain the role of HCA in the increased risk of CRC related to consumption of red and processed red meat either, as the well-known carcinogenic effects of HCA have been demonstrated in rodents, at levels more than 1000 times higher than HCA levels found in foods. For these reasons, HCA are generally not considered very important in relation to the carcinogenic properties of meat (Corpet, 2011a). Furthermore, as HCA require metabolic activation to function as mutagens/carcinogens, the carcinogenic potential of HCA may depend on the extent of metabolisation (Cross & Sinha, 2004). Cancer risk posed by dietary HCA was indeed shown to vary with genetic differences in the drug metabolizing enzymes involved e.g. in acetylation and sulfonation (Fig. 3) (Le Marchand et al, 2002; Zheng& Lee, 2009). Besides genetic factors, evidence is available that individual differences in the intestinal micro flora may affect HCA carcinogenic activity (Vanhaecke et al., 2008). In a comprehensive review Alaejos et al. (2008) therefore conclude that there is no sufficient scientific evidence to definitely accept that dietary HCA intake specifically causes cancer but that “Epidemiological evidence points to genetic predisposition as the main factor in meat associated HCA related cancer development”. The evidence listed above clearly indicates that both HCA and PAH intake is determined by the meat-cooking technique and doneness level. Although both types of compounds may not be the major causative agent for the CRC inducing effect of red and processed red meats, the formulation of guidelines for meat cooking could be considered appropriate. For industrially cooked meat products, a decrease of HCA content could be aimed at using processing variables that minimize HCA production as determined e.g. by Dundar et al. (2012). In this respect, the finding that the ripening time of meat affects HCA formation during heating (Szterk et al., 2012) may also be relevant. People involved in meat preparation in restaurants and catering should also consider such information as it has been shown that cooks are potentially exposed to relatively high levels of airborne HCA (Thiébaud et al, 1995). For household cooking, an efficient method to reduce exposure to PAH and HCA consists of the mechanical removal of charred and blackened material from the surface of broiled meat and fish on the dish (Sugimura, 1997). Furthermore, discouragement of “well done meat” should be considered and longer time/lower temperature treatments should be encouraged. − 42− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig. 9. Structures of heterocyclic amines categorized by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (1993) as possible (IQ, MeIQ and MeIQx) or probable human carcinogen (PhIP) (From Murkovic, 2004) Quinolines: IQ 2-Amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoline ; MeIQ 2-Amino-3,4-dimethylimidazo[4,5f]quinoline Quinoxaline: MeIQx 2-Amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline Pyridines: PhIP 2-Amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine − 43− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 9. Heterocyclic amine contents of cooked meat and fish (Puangsombat et al., 2012) Heterocyclic amines in meat (ng/g) Cooking methoda Beef MEIQx PhIP Total Fried medium rare well done 1.75 3.33 0.94 5.27 2.73 8.92 Broiled medium rare well done Baked 0.08 0.12 0.33 1.58 5.63 1.49 1.72 6.04 2.34 Pork Fried Baked 2.39 0.23 9.20 2.20 13.91 3.29 Poultry breast + skin - skin Fried 0.23 (0.31)b 0.46 2.61 (2.72) 6.06 2.89 (3.13) 7.06 Fish Baked Fried 1.27-2.95 2.31-3.11 4.40-5.67 9.11-10.89 7.85-8.70 13.09-16.29 a Frying = in a Teflon-coated frying pan without adding oil at a surface temperature of 204 °C. Meat was fried, turned once, and removed from the pan when the desired temperature was reached. Broiling = Oven (convection, top and bottom heat) was preheated to 232 °C (monitored with oven thermometer). The meat was placed on a broiler pan to keep the broiled beef out of the drippings. The meat was removed when a final internal temperature (51° C medium rare - 71 ° C well done ) was achieved Baking : Oven (convection, top and bottom heat) was preheated to 177 °C (monitored with oven thermometer). The meat was placed on a baking pan. The meat was removed when a final internal b temperature was achieved. () = in meat and skin Table 10. HCA intake in German and US observational studies 1 HCA intake (ng/d) Rohrmann et al (2009) Fu et al (2011) PhIP < 6.5 - >41.4 < 73.3 - >339.4 MeIQx <3.8 ->19.9 <12.2 - >70.1 1 Levels of lowest - highest quartiles 2.2.6.3 Nitrosamines and other N-Nitroso compounds The general term ‘N-nitroso compounds’ (NOCs) covers all substances with N-nitroso groups, including N-nitrosamines and N-nitrosamides. Twenty years ago Tricker and Preussmann (1991) referred to established carcinogenic activities of over 300 NOCs in one or more animal species including higher primates. Since NOCs are alkylating agents that can react with the DNA of the target tissue, they can induce mutations and therefore could potentially initiate carcinogenesis. Alkylation of the O6-position of guanine by NOCs may lead to G → A transitions (Saffhill et al., 1985) a common mutation in CRC found in codons 12 or 13 of ki-Ras (Bos, 1989). Nnitrosamides spontaneously form alkylating agents, and thus are more likely to cause damage at the site of exposure. In contrast, N-nitrosamines require metabolic activation to be mutagenic and − 44− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be have thus the potential to cause damage at any activation site (Jägerstad & Skog, 2005; Cross & Sinha, 2004). During food consumption, humans can be exposed to NOCs both of exogenous and endogenous origin. 2.2.6.3.1 Exposure by exogenous routes As recognized e.g. by Hebels et al (2012), meat products, and especially processed or heattreated foods, often contain pre-formed NOCs. NOCs have for example been detected in foods processed by smoking or direct fire-drying. When these production processes are performed at high temperature, molecular nitrogen can be oxidized forming nitrogen oxides, compounds able to nitrosate amines present in foods such as meat. NOCs can also be formed in meats containing nitrite. Nitrite is the common additive used in meat processing (meat curing) as an anti-bacterial agent, specifically active against Clostridium botulinum, and/or to produce the characteristic redpink color of cured meats originating from its reaction with myoglobin. In acidic conditions such as those often found in food processing operations, nitrite can be transformed to dinitrogen-, tri- or tetraoxides which are all potent nitrosating agents (Cross & Sinha, 2004). In case a nitrosonium ion NO+ is added to an amine -NH2 and nitrosamines are formed (nitrosation): NO2- + 2 H+ → NO+ + H2O and R2NH + NO+ → R2N-NO + H+ The nitrosyl ion NO− on the other hand can be added to a metal (e.g. iron) or a thiol, leading to nitrosyl iron Fe-NO (e.g., in nitrosylated heme = nitrosylheme) or S-nitrosothiols (RSNOs) (nitrosylation). The complex reactions characterizing meat curing are discussed in more detail under 2.2.6.6. An important group of NOCs in food are the volatile N-nitrosoamines including Nnitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and N-nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA), two compounds classified by IARC as probably carcinogenic to humans, and N-nitrosopyrrolidine (NPYR), N- nitrosopiperidine (NPIP), and N-nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA) which are considered as possible human carcinogens (International Agency for Research on Cancer, 1978; Jägerstad & Skog ,2005). Tricker (1997) estimated that dietary sources accounted for about 70% of exogenous human exposure to Nnitrosamines, the rest being due to occupational exposure (20%), smoking (2%) and various sources (8%). The data assembled in Table 11 illustrate that processed and heated meats (e.g. heated bacon) are indeed major dietary sources of these volatile NOCs but dairy products, fish and products such as spices may also be important contributors. Despite the fact that most information is available on volatile nitrosamines, the main forms of NOCs occurring in food are non-volatile NOC including for example N-nitrosoproline. Non-volatile NOCs have not been reported as mutagenic or carcinogenic, but they might act as precursors to volatile carcinogenic nitrosamines (Jägerstad & Skog, 2005). Although it has been clearly demonstrated that levels of volatile nitrosamines in a cured meat model increase with temperature and amounts of nitrite added during processing, they stay < 10 µg/kg as long as the nitrite level of 120 mg/kg was not surpassed (Drabik-Markiewicz et al, 2009). This observation justifies strict regulations on the use of nitrite in meat processing as well as the often used addition of ascorbate to food in order to reduce N-nitroso reactions. Indeed, according to Skibsted (2011), the addition of 500 mg/kg of sodium ascorbate or erythorbate (isoascorbate) to meat selected for good reducing capacity and appropriate low pH from non-stressed animals may prevent formation of potentially carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds as ascorbate reacts faster than secondary amines with the nitrosating agent N2O3. Furthermore, ascorbate in batters reduces the toxin production by proteolytic clostridium botulinum types A and B together with nitrite and salt (Honikel, 2008). A striking finding is the possible presence of NDMA in fresh and minced meat (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition,2012a). As almost no amines are present in − 45− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be fresh meat and its nitrite concentration is rather low, formation of nitrosamines in fresh meat has indeed been considered to be rather unlikely (Honikel, 2008). Nevertheless, values of NDMA up to 14 µg/kg have been reported for bulls but were shown to originate from contamination in meat production systems (Rywotycki, 2003). Heating of such meat (muton) further increases the levels of nitrosamines, mainly present in the fat, increasing rapidly in range from 40 to 100°C and then staying stable, indicating that formation takes place in temperatures below 100°C (Fig.10). In line with established carcinogenic activities, a significant positive association was observed between intake of NDMA and subsequent occurrence of CRC in a large scale Finnish study (Knekt et al, 1999). However, within the various sources of NOCs, intake of smoked and salted fish was significantly and intake of cured meat was non-significantly associated with risk of CRC. Table 11. Levels of Nitrosamines in foods Nitrosamines Foods Ref. (1) N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) N-Nitrosodiethylamine (NDEA) Meat Cured meats Fried Bacon Frankfurt Dried Fish (Japan) Dairy products Cheese Non fat milk Ref. (3) 0 - 4.0 1.0 - 5.0 4.0 4.5 3.0 - 38.0 1.0 - 6.0 1.9 0 - 84 0.5 - 5.0 0 - 4.5 Cured meats Ham < 2.4 Cured meats Smoked chicken Bacon 1.0 - 56.0 < 5.3 N-Nitrosopyrrolydine (NPYR) Cured meats Fried bacon Mixed spices 1.0 - 5.0 < 130.0 < 10.0 N-Nitrosopiperidine (NPIP) Cured meats Fried bacon < 20.0 < 9.2 N-Nitrosodibutylamine (NDBA) µg/kg Ref. (2) 1.5 13.6 Ref. (1) Tricker & Preussmann (1991) Ref. (2) Stuff et al (2008) Ref. (3) Jakszyn et al., (2004); European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (2012a) − 46− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig. 10. Influence of frying temperature on the content of volatile nitrosamines in mutton (Yurchenko & Mölder, 2007) NDMA=N-nitrosodimethylamine NPYR = N-nitrosopyrrolidine NPIP = N- nitrosopiperidine NDEA = N-nitrosodiethylamine NDB = N-nitrosodibutylamine 2.2.6.3.2 Endogenous production of NOCs About 45-75% of the total NOC exposure is estimated to result from endogenous production (Tricker, 1997). Besides secondary amines, other nitrosatable precursors present in food are essential nutrients such as proteins and trace compounds including urea derivatives (de Kok & van Maanen, 2000). Endogenous formation of NOCs may occur through several mechanisms including acid catalyzed, bacterial or colon cell-mediated pathways (Cross & Sinha, 2004). Acid catalyzed endogenous NOC formation is considered to occur mainly in the stomach and the nitrosating agent, nitrous acid, may be derived from the considerable intake of nitrate, mainly with vegetables. About 5% of the exogenous nitrate is absorbed in the small intestine, recirculated into the saliva and reduced to nitrite by oral bacteria. In the acidic environment of the stomach, the salivary nitrite is transformed into the nitrosating agent. In conditions where the pH is too high for nitrous acid mediated nitrosation, NOC formation may result from biological catalysis by bacterial growth (de Kok & van Maanen, 2000). Considering the neutral pH of the bowel, the bacteria mediated NOC formation is most likely. The involvement of the colonic flora in the NOC formation was supported by the observation that in germ free rats, nitrate did not stimulate endogenous ATNC formation (Massey et al, 1988). However, little is known regarding the bacterial species involved in endogenous nitrosation and different bacterial enzymes responsible for the nitrosation reaction have been described. A recent study in a pig cecum model indicated that intestinal formation of NOCs depends on the intake of nitrate and the capacity of the microbiota to reduce nitrate into nitrite (Engemann et al, 2013). In the colon cell-mediated catalysis, nitric oxide formed via the inducible form of NO synthase appears to act as the nitrosating species. Nitrosation of amines by activated macrophages has been reported (de Kok en van Maanen, 2000) and may thus occur at sites of (low-grade) inflammation. As discussed in more detail under 2.2.6.4.1., heme present in red and processed red meat has been suggested to stimulate endogenous production of NOCs. − 47− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.6.4 Heme Evidence from both epidemiologic and experimental studies suggests that heme plays a crucial role in the link between the risk of CRC and red and processed red meat intake. Heme consist of an iron atom contained in the center of a large heterocyclic organic ring called a porphyrin (Santarelli et al, 2008). It is associated with globin polypeptides, similar but different between hemoglobin, the blood oxygen carrier and myoglobin, the muscle oxygen carrier. In red meat, heme is present in high concentrations in the form of myoglobin, resulting in the red color. Due to the nitrate and nitrite present in the curing salt, heme iron occurs in its nitrosylated form in processed red meat (Bastide et al, 2011). Four large prospective studies found that a high intake of heme iron was associated with a higher risk of CRC (Lee et al, 2004; Larsson et al, 2005; Cross et al, 2010; Ferruci et al, 2012), a finding confirmed by a recent meta-analysis also reporting a significant inverse dose-response association of zinc intake with risk of CRC (Qiao et al, 2013). No evidence for an association with intake of heme iron was obtained in two other studies (Kabat et al, 2007; Zhang et al, 2011). Estimation of heme-iron from food intake is however difficult and subject to error as the proportion of heme-iron in total Fe decreases with aging in beef (Ramos et al, 2012) and with heat treatment (D’evoli et al, 2009; Purchas et al, 2004; Lombardi- Boccia et al, 2002) (Table 12). An association with a polymorphism of heme-oxygenase-1 was not found in a limited case/control study in Denmark, suggesting that heme from meat is not important in CRC development (Andersen et al, 2011). In a recent study involving 185 archival CRC samples collected from participants of the European prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC)-Norfolk study, Gay et al. (2012) found that CRC cases associated with APC gene aberrations consumed higher levels of processed red meat and iron from red meat and red meat products. A perhaps striking finding is the absence of an association between heme iron intakes and CRC risk in Japanese men or women as reported from a large population based prospective study (Hara et al, 2012). However, lower intakes and different major food sources of heme iron may explain the lack of association. Indeed, fish was the main food source of heme iron in the study, whereas maximal daily intakes of fish and red meat were 123 and 86 g respectively. As discussed by Corpet (2011), animal studies published before 2004 did not show red meat promotion of CRC because of the high calcium content of experimental diets, known to suppress heme induced colon carcinogenesis (Sesink et al, 2001). In a series of later experiments on low calcium diets however the research group of Fabrice Pierre (Toulouse, FR) linked red meat consumption to the development of aberrant crypt foci (ACF) and mucin-depleted foci (MDF), precancerous lesions, in the colon of azoxymethane sensitized rats. The development of precancerous lesions was shown to be related to red meat intake in a dose-response manner and the effect was mimicked by heme (Pierre et al, 2004). It should be noted that very large amounts of “freeze dried beef “, chicken or “black pudding” were included into the experimental diets (600 g/kg). Later, the same research group demonstrated that also processed red meat products promote colon carcinogenesis in a rodent animal model (Santarelli et al, 2010). Three mechanistic hypotheses have been proposed underlying the promotion of CRC by heme: (1) the catalytic effect of heme iron on the endogenous formation of NOC, (2) the catalytic effect of heme iron on the formation of lipid oxidation endpoints (Bastide et al, 2011) and (3) the metabolization of heme in the gut into a cytotoxic and promoting factor (Sesink et al, 1999). − 48− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 12. Total iron and heme iron (mg/100 g) in raw and cooked meats (from Lombardi-Boccia et al, 2002) Raw Cooked Total Fe Heme Fe (a) Total Fe Heme Fe (b) (b)/(a) Chicken Breast Thigh 0.40 0.70 0.12 (30)a 0.20 (28) 0.58 1.34 0.16 (28) 0.30 (22) 0.93 0.78 Turkey Breast Thigh 0.50 0.99 0.14 (28) 0.49 (49) 0.79 1.46 0.21 (26) 0.57 (39) 0.92 0.79 Pork Loin chop 0.36 0.49 0.20 (55) 0.32 (65) 0.46 0.79 0.21 (46) 0.56 (71) 0.83 1.09 Rabbit 0.45 0.25 (55) 0.60 0.31 (52) 0.94 Veal filet 0.85 0.71 (83) 1.58 1.33 (84) 1.01 Lamb chop 2.23 1.68 (75) 3.20 2.25 (70) 0.93 Horse fillet 2.21 1.75 (78) 3.03 2.16 (71) 0.91 Beef Fillet Roast beef 2.35 2.04 2.11 (90) 1.77 (87) 3.88 3.74 2.86 (74) 3.14 (84) 0.82 0.96 a as % of total Fe 2.2.6.4.1 Effect of Heme on the endogenous production of NOC In a series of human intervention studies, the research group of the late Sheila Bingham (Cambridge, UK) related the extensive fecal excretion of endogenously produced NOCs to red meat and processed red meat consumption. They demonstrated a dose-response increase in fecal excretion of NOCs with red meat intake, not observed with vegetable proteins, white meat or an Fe2+ supplement but clearly mimicked by a heme supplement (Table 13). Also in animal studies, inclusion of red or processed red meat into the diet increased the fecal concentration of ATNC (Parnaud et al, 2000)(Mirvish et al, 2003). However, the analytical method used to analyze NOCs did not differentiate between N-nitrosamines and other compounds such as S-nitrosothiols, O-nitroso compounds and nitrosyl iron. As discussed previously, certain N-nitroso species such as most of the N-nitrosamines, are known to be profoundly tumorogenic through the formation of DNA adducts, whereas such activity has not been reported for iron nitrosyls and S-nitrosothiols, compounds that are continuously formed in biological systems through the action of nitric oxide synthase (Hogg, 2007). Given the lack of specificity of the technique, the term ATNC (apparent total N-nitroso compounds) was used to describe the substances measured by this technique. Several hypotheses have been put forward to explain the effect of heme and heme-containing meat products on the fecal ATNC content. First, the increased fecal ATNC content may be related to heme-induced changes in microbiota. In a recent study, dietary heme changed the microbiota with a major increase in the ratio of Gram-negative to Gram-positive bacteria. (IJssennager et al, 2012b). However, the selective shift to gram-negative bacteria was not − 49− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be accompanied by a functional change in the mucosal sensing of the bacteria, thereby giving no support for the suggested role of microbial pathogens in colorectal carcinogenesis (Collins et al., 2011)(Jeffery & O'Toole, 2013). Recently however, it was suggested that alteration of the irontrophic luminal bacterial population by dietary heme may be associated with red meat induced CRC risk (Kato et al, 2013). Also, microbiota are mainly active in the colon whereas fecal ATNC content was comparable between healthy and ileostomized volunteers (Lunn et al, 2007), indicating endogenous formation of NOC after red meat intake occurs in the small intestine. By using an improved analysis technique, the research group was also able to show that nitrosyl heme and nitrosothiols are major constituents of both fecal and ileal ATNC (Kühnle et al, 2007). According to their hypothesis, acid-catalyzed thionitrosation in the stomach is the initial step in the endogenous formation of NOCs. Under the alkaline and reductive conditions of the small and large bowel, NO can be released from S-nitrosothiols to be taken up by heme. Both nitrosyl heme and S-nitrosothiols can act as nitrosating agents, promoting the formation of potentially carcinogenic NOCs in the gut epithelium. However, S-nitrosothiols and iron nitrosyls may also act as a protective mechanism by capturing NO thereby limiting the formation of DNA alkylating agents and facilitating excretion (Hogg, 2007). Further investigation towards the relative role of the different ATNC involved and the origin and regulation of the NO supply is thus required. 1 Table 13. Fecal excretion of total apparent N-nitroso compounds (ATNC) and red meat intake . Meat consumed (g/d) Fecal ATNC ng/g µg/d Red meata 240 None 0 60 444 + 60 54 + 7 347 + 61 52 + 11 1516 + 414* 159 + 33* 420-600 White meatb 420-640 2104 + 1524* 249 + 167* 759 + 528 87 + 55 Meat and supplements consumed (/d) 60 g Red meat Fecal ATNC ng/g µg/d 766 + 233 77 + 9 60 g Red meat + hemec 1438 + 345** 157 + 23** 60 g Red meat + Fe2+ d 852 + 393 61 + 10 1 Adapted from Steinberg (2009) using data (mean values + SD) from Hughes et al (2001), Bingham et al a (2002) and Cross et al (2003) 0-100 g roast beef at lunch, 0-320 g beef (lasagne or steak) or pork (sweet b c and sour pork) at dinner Chicken, turkey or white cod 7.8-mg heme iron, as 50-gram liver pate and 70d gram blood sausage, to match the iron content of the 420-gram red meat diet (17.7 mg/day) A daily 300mg ferrous gluconate tablet (35 mg of ferrous iron) supplement * significant differences with values of no meat or white meat ** significant differences with other groups Carcinogenicity of ATNC Despite the data from human intervention and animal studies showing an increase in ATNC after the consumption of red or processed red meat, the carcinogenicity of ATNC formed in the gut remains unknown. Fecal colon cells containing an O6-methylguanine DNA adduct, a characteristic promutagenic and toxic adduct formed by many NOCs, have been numbered and found to be significantly related to fecal excretion of ATNC in the stool of volunteers consuming meat in various diets as shown in Fig. 11 (Lewin et al, 2006). Furthermore, the mutations induced by diazoacetate, nitrosated glycine, in a yeast functional assay, are very similar to those observed in colorectal tumors, suggesting that NOCs may be involved in CRC (Gottschalg et al, 2007). However, in the dietary intervention studies of Bingham’s group (Cross et al, 2006; Joosen et al, − 50− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2009 & 2010), no difference in fecal water genotoxicity in relation to meat intake was detected despite the increased fecal ATNC concentrations. Both masking of the genotoxic effect by genoprotective compounds present in the complex mixture of the fecal water and the inability of the used Comet assay in human-derived colonocyte cell lines to detect genotoxic chemicals in fecal water have been suggested in order to explain this unexpected result (Gratz et al, 2011). In contrast, a red-meat intake-induced increase in fecal water genotoxicity which was not related to fecal ATNC content nor influenced by inflammation of the colon was observed in patients suffering from intestinal inflammation as compared to inflammatory bowel disease (Hebels et al, 2011). Based on these results, the authors suggested that the increased genotoxicity is linked to heme-catalyzed oxidative stress rather than to heme-stimulated NOC formation. Fig. 11. Correlation between fecal total ATNC concentration and percent cells staining positive for the O6-methylguanine DNA adduct in exfoliated colonic cells isolated from fecal extracts (n = 55) (from Lewin et al, 2006). In 2011, a large prospective study investigating the relation between dietary NOCs and the risk for cancer was performed (Loh, 2011). Exposure to endogenous NOCs was estimated based on the estimated iron content from meat intake considering the relationship between the fecal ATNC and iron intake observed in several human controlled-diet studies (discussed above). Dietary NDMA intake (ng/d) was calculated using a food database of potential carcinogens (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, 2012a). Whereas dietary NDMA intake was associated with a higher incidence of rectal cancer, this association could not be found neither for endogenous NOC exposure nor for dietary nitrite. Large errors associated with the various estimates calculated can explain the lack of a relationship between endogenous NOC exposure and rectal cancer. Furthermore, it cannot be excluded that although the study confirms the previously reported carcinogenic activity of exogenous exposure to NDMA, other food sources than red and processed red meats may be involved. 2.2.6.4.2 Effect of Heme on the oxidation of polyunsaturated fats In rats, carcinogenesis promotion by dietary heme was found to be associated with the urinary excretion of 1,4-dihydroxynonane mercapturic acid (DHN-MA), a fat peroxidation biomarker (Pierre et al, 2004). An increase in this biomarker was also observed in the urine of volunteers given black pudding, a heme loaded blood sausage (Pierre et al, 2006), suggesting that the consumption of red and processed red meat stimulates the fat peroxidation pathway. During lipid peroxidation, polyunsaturated fatty acids derived from the phospholipids within the intestinal contents and/or colonocyte cells are oxidized by ROS and RNS. Due to abstraction of a hydrogen − 51− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be atom from the fatty acid carbon chain, a carbon radical is formed that tends to be stabilized by production of a conjugated diene. The latter rapidly reacts with 02 to give a hydroperoxy radical that oxidizes other lipid molecules and continues the chain reaction of lipid peroxidation. Lipid peroxides are further degraded generating reactive aldehydes of three to nine carbons in length unsaturated in alpha, beta- positions which are relatively stable and can diffuse throughout the cell (Halliwell & Gutteridge, 1984; Bartsch & Lair, 2004)(Fig. 12). Reactive aldehydes, among which malondialdehyde (MDA) and 4-hydroxynonenal (4-HNE) are the two most important ones, can either interact directly with DNA and proteins, or undergo further oxidation to more reactive epoxy derivatives (Fig.12). MDA forms adducts with DNA, such as the 1,N2-malondialdehyde-deoxyguanosine adduct and increased levels of this adduct have been found in cells of colorectal biopsies from adenoma patients compared with adenoma-free subjects (Leuratti et al, 2002). 4-HNE has weak mutagenic activity but induces apoptosis killing of normal but not precancerous cells, possibly explaining tumor promotion by a selection process (Baradat et al, 2011). Heme has been demonstrated to catalyze lipid (per)oxidation in several conditions including digestion as well as processing of food. MDA levels in human plasma increase following meat consumption (Gorelik et al, 2013). A meat dietary pattern was found to be significantly associated with increased plasma levels of F-2 isoprostanes, compounds produced by the free radicalcatalyzed peroxidation of arachidonic acid and considered to be the most reliable marker of oxidative damage (Meyer et al, 2013). In a simulated gastric compartment (Lorrain et al, 2010) and in the rat stomach (Kanner et al, 2012), heme compounds such as myoglobin or metmyoglobin were found to accelerate further degradation of lipid peroxides, either ingested with the diet or formed in the stomach (Kanner, 2007). The resulting aldehydes, considered as ultimate mediators of toxic effects, may be transported to the intestines and then incorporated into the body (Kanazawa & Ashida, 1998). An analogous myoglobin-induced oxidation/peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids during the conversion of muscle to meat is also widely recognized but the very complex mechanisms involved are a matter of dispute (Baron & Andersen, 2002; Carlsen et al, 2005). An elegant model proposed by Faustman et al (2010) involves mutual activation of both membrane lipid and myoglobin oxidation (Fig. 13). Possible mechanisms have been classified into four types changing in relative importance of prooxidative capacity with low pH, high prevalence of deoxygenated heme pigment, oxidative modification of the heme pigments and proteolysis. Nitric oxide modifies and in most cases moderates the prooxidative activity of the heme pigments (Carlsen et al, 2005) as will be discussed more under 2.2.6.6. The link of lipid peroxidation with heme in relation to CRC has been further supported by the observation that hemoglobin treatment promoted DNA damage induced by linoleic acid hydroperoxide derived compounds in colon adenocarcinoma cells (Angeli et al., 2011). In a more general context, lipid hydroperoxides of dietary origin have been identified as an important driving force for liver carcinogenesis (Rohr-Udilova et al, 2008) whereas unsaturated fatty acid oxidation contributes to the inflammatory response (review in Marnett, 2012), a condition associated with CRC (Tudek & Speina, 2012). Cholesterol oxides It is striking that little attention has been given to cholesterol oxides, oxidation products of cholesterol grouping about 70-80 different compounds. Some have been linked to colon carcinogenesis producing a specific pro-apoptotic effect on human colon cancer cells and presenting possibilities for new insights on strategies in anticancer therapy (Biasi et al, 2012). A number of those were shown to be produced in processed red meats be it at very low levels (Chizzolini et al, 1999; Zanardi et al, 2004). − 52− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig.12. Summary of intermediate and end product formation during peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids (from Marnett & Plastaras, 2001 and Marnett, 2012) peroxylradicalshydroperoxides lipoxidative reactive carbonyl species detected in biological systems. − 53− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig.13. Model for mutual activation of membrane phospholipid and myoglobin oxidation in meat (from Faustman et al, 2010). 2.2.6.4.3 Metabolization of heme in the gut into a cytotoxic and promoting factor A third possible explanation for the role of heme in the increased risk for CRC involves a direct effect of heme on colonic cells and was formulated by the research group of Vandermeer. They showed that addition of hemin (a chemical derivative of myoglobin formed by removal of the protein part of the molecule, oxidation of the iron atom, and combination with an acid to form a salt (see further Fig. 14)) to a low-calcium diet in rats increased epithelial proliferation in the colonic mucosa and induced cytotoxicity of fecal water. Hyperproliferation was considered as a compensation for cytotoxicity (Sesink et al, 1999). Furthermore, hemin-fed rats excreted much less host DNA in feces compared to controls, suggesting that hemin decreased cell differentiation and exfoliation of colonocytes in the gut lumen (Van Lieshout et al, 2004). Recently, the research group investigated the role of the PPARα, a nuclear hormone receptor known to protect against oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation, in heme-induced hyperproliferation and hyperplasia. Since the five investigated PPARα target genes did not respond to heme, they concluded that probably not ROS-induced stress but cytotoxicity-induced stress initiates colonic hyperproliferation (IJssennagger et al, 2012). This hypothesis was further supported by the later observation that not ROS production but luminal cytotoxicity coincided the changes in crypt signaling and hyperproliferation in heme-fed mice (IJssennagger et al, 2013). However, it is not clear in all these studies, whether hemin or food heme was used. Furthermore, the speculated heme-based cytotoxic factor has not yet been identified (Santarelli et al, 2008). − 54− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.6.5 The “white meat” controversy Accepting heme as the major responsible carcinogenic compound in red meat (mainly beef and pork) to explain the increased incidence in CRC appears to be subject to some doubt. Indeed, it has been reported that heme contents of chicken and pork are of similar magnitude and both lower than beef (Table 12). Red meat is a culinary term indicating meat which is red when raw, and not white when cooked. It includes the meat of most adult mammals and some fowl (e.g. ducks). In a more precise manner, the terminology “red” and “white” reflects the relative proportion of red and white muscle fibers known to be more in favor of white fibers in pigs than in beef. This finding is reflected in pig meat iron contents which are more similar to poultry than to beef as e.g. also reported in Belgian nutrition advice (De Geeter, 2009). It also lead to the U.S. National Pork Board advertising campaign positioning pork as "the other white meat”, a slogan retired in 2011 (see e.g.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_meat) as pork is clearly considered as red meat by the USDA (http://askkaren.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1357/~/is-porkwhite-meat%3F) Red meat has been defined as meat derived from cattle (including calves), sheep (including lamb) and pigs (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, 2012) and from cattle, goats, sheep and pigs (WCRF/AICR - World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research, 2007). A wider literature survey nevertheless suggests that iron contents of chicken (0.40 – 5.40 mg/100g) and pig (0.30 – 4.15 mg/100g) muscle are of similar magnitude, although widely varying with the nature of muscle and the type of production. The results also suggest that the proportion of heme iron in total iron is lower in chicken (23-39 %) than in pig (23-60 %) muscle because of the more glycolytic nature of muscle (Table 14). Such difference does not seem large enough however to account for the consistent absence of a carcinogenic effect of chicken consumption in contrast to beef and pork consumption and it has to be accepted that heme contents of poultry are similar to the values for pork and, although lower than beef, still significant. Within this context, the increased risk of CRC associated with the consumption of red meat may be related to a specific component of red meat (mainly beef and pork) other than heme: the mammalian cell surface sialic acid N-glycolylneuraminic acid (Neu5Gc). This compound is not produced by bacteria or plants, is low or absent in poultry and fish, but abundant in red meats (beef, pork, sheep but also meats from other species) and in bovine milk (Byres et al, 2008). Humans however are genetically deficient in Neu5Gc production and instead metabolically accumulate it from dietary sources, particularly red meat and milk products. This metabolicallyaccumulated dietary Neu5Gc results in the production of circulating anti-Neu5Gc antibodies leading to local chronic inflammation and a propensity to develop diet-related carcinomas (Hedlund et al, 2008). The near absence of Neu5Gc in poultry and fish may explain some inconsistencies. − 55− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 14. Total iron (mg/100 g) and heme iron (% of total) in raw and cooked chicken and pig a meats . Chicken (1)b Legs Breast (5) (8) (9) (11) Pig muscle (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) a Raw Cooked Total Fe Total Fe Heme Fe (%) 1.93 + 0.22 0.65 + 0.20 0.58 - 1.34 39 26 0.65 - 1.43 23 - 39 0.40 - 0.70 0.40 - 5.40 0.50 – 1.20 0.41 - 0.50 1.00 - 2.79 0.46 + 0.07 0.49 - 0.70 2.65 + 0.54 2.65 - 4.13 0.30 - 3.00 0.63 ± 0.04 0.68 - 1.09 0.64 - 1,60 23 - 60 0.90 - 1.30 0.70 – 1.30 b minimum - maximum values or means + SE references (1) Clark et al (1997) (2) Tomovic et al (2011) (3) Dannenberger et al (2007) (4) Greenfield et al (2009) (5) Lombardi-Boccia et al (2005) (6) López-Alonso et al. (2007) (7) López-Alonso et al. (2012) (8) Rooke et al (2010) (9) Schönfeldt et al (2011) (10) Ventanas et al (2006) (11) Gerber et al (2009) 2.2.6.6 Effect of processing on the carcinogenic effect of red meat The risk of CRC incidence is higher per g of processed (cured) red meat than per g of unprocessed red meat (see also Table 2) (Santarelli et al, 2008) as clearly recognized also by e.g. van den Brandt & Goldbohm (2006), Boyle et al (2008) and Moore (2010). In line with arguments discussed under 2.2.6.2, Parr et al (2013) did not find an association between intake of red meat or meat cooking methods and CRC risk but a high processed red meat intake was associated with increased risk of CRC in a detailed and careful cohort study involving 84.538 Norvegian women. The effect of processed red meat was mainly driven by the intake of sausages confirming earlier work (Gaard et al, 1996). In a recent report summarizing evidence of the EPIC study involving 448,568 men and women, Rohrmann et al (2013) concluded that after correction for measurement error, higher all-cause mortality was significantly related only to processed red meat and not to red meat intake. The authors even estimated that 3.3% (95% CI 1.5% to 5.0%) of deaths could be prevented if all participants had a processed red meat consumption of less than 20 g/day. The important impact of these findings justifies a closer look at meat processing and the reactions involved. In Western meat technology processed red meats are predominantly prepared from pig meat. As the latter contains less heme iron than beef, the presence of heme cannot be the sole factor responsible for the increased risk of CRC associated with processed red meat as compared to fresh meat. Possible explanations obviously relate to the changes provoked by the addition of processing additives and by processing conditions and it has been suggested that nitrosyl heme present in processed red meat and hemin used in experimental diets are more toxic than the native heme from fresh meat myoglobin (Santarelli et al, 2008; Pierre et al, 2010). − 56− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be The curing process Apart from smoking, meat processing basically involves “curing”, a process dating back to ancient times and mainly characterized by the addition of salt (NaCl) containing sodium nitrite (and/or potassium nitrate as a source of nitrite). Whole meat cuts (hams) are cured by covering with dry salts, by immersion in brines or, when cooked after curing, by injection of brines. Minced (ground) meat is cured by mixing (“cuttering”) meat and fat with dry salts. Sodium nitrite (maximal level 150 ppm in the EU) should be added as a mixture with NaCl (nitrite or curing salt e.g. NaCl containing 0.6 % NaNO2) in order to prevent instantaneous production of toxic nitrous vapors (NO2). Other additives often used are ascorbate or erythorbate and sugars. The presence of salt dissolves proteins and leads to osmotic drying followed by coagulation of proteins and weight loss during further air drying for periods ranging from some weeks to several months. Nitrite is mainly used for its anti-bacterial effect, specifically against Clostridium botulinum, and/or the production of the characteristic bright red (pink when cooked) color originating from its reaction with myoglobin. However, the possible seven states of oxidation of N ranging between -3 (NH3 ) and +5 (HNO3) associated with the existence of intermediate per-ferryl ions (Fe: +IV and Fe: +V) (Qian and Buettner, 1999) apart from the ferrous (Fe: +II) and ferri (Fe: +III) ions results in a very complex set of possible reactions involving interactions with numerous food components and environmental conditions as described e.g. by Honikel (2008) and Skibsted (2011). Major reactions can be listed as follows: Nitrite added to meat primarily acts as an oxidant following: NO2- + H2O + e- → NO + 2OHinvolving oxidation of reductants such as: - NADH or added ascorbate and mainly the anhydrous form of nitrous acid N2O3. - Myoglobin to yield metmyoglobin following Mb(FeII) + NO2- + H2O → Mb(FeIII) + NO + 2OHThis reaction is responsible for the initial colour change from fresh red {MbFe(II)O2 in equilibrium with violet MbFe(II) depending on oxygen pressure} to the brown colour of MbFe(III). - Subsequently MbFe(III) is reduced to MbFe(II) by reductants like NADH or added ascorbate. NO binds strongly to MbFe(II) (but not to MbFe(II)O2) following: Mb(FeII) + NO → Mb(FeII)NO causing a second colour transformation to yield the characteristic red colour of cured meat. This compound loses the globin bond to iron upon heating (Sun et al, 2009) resulting in nitrosylmyo- or hemochromogen (or nitrosylprotoheme), the pigment changing the product color from bright red to the characteristic pink color of cooked cured meat (Fig. 14). Fig. 14. Heme compounds associated with the carcinogenic effects of processed red meats (Pegg et al, 1997). Hemin Nitrosylhemochromogen Nitrosomyoglobin − 57− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Apart from these well studied reactions, the use of 15N-labelled sodium nitrite has shown that 73 87% of added nitrite is retained in the muscle proteins of bacon (Woolford & Cassens, 1977). This underlines the importance of residual nitrite in cured meat proteins as a “hidden NO generating pool providing nitric oxide for the numerous reactions occurring during storage and cooking of cured meats” (Skibsted, 2011). These may be analogous to the reactions with iron-sulfur proteins (enzymes) responsible for the anti-bacterial activity of nitric oxide (Morita et al, 2004) and were shown e.g. to involve reactions with thiol groups, tryptophan (Nakai et al, 1978) and ascorbic acid (Izumi et al, 1989) as illustrated in Fig. 15. At pH values relevant for meat, N 2O3, the anhydrous form of nitrous acid, probably acts as nitrosating agent and reacts faster with ascorbate than with secondary amines such as proline thus preventing formation of potentially carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds (Skibsted, 2011). Fig.15. NO formed from nitrite during meat curing can participate in numerous reactions modifying proteins and pigments (from Skibsted, 2011) Residual nitrite in processed red meat is however not limited to the protein fraction as added 15Nlabelled sodium nitrite was recovered in cured whole adipose tissue (Goutefongea et al, 1977) and for up to 20 -25 % in the adipose part of cured bacon (Woolford & Cassens, 1977). Later work in model systems has demonstrated the formation of nitrosated lipids by addition of nitro groups to double bonds (Mouloud et al, 1992). These compounds were recognised as agents responsible for nitrosamine formation during frying of cured meat (Ross et al, 1987) and acting as cell signalling molecules in biological systems (Lim et al, 2002). In a more extensive approach, Nicolescu et al (2004) concluded that the reaction of NO derived from nitrite, with the free radical intermediates in lipid oxidation acts as as a lipid radical chain termination agent. The “lipid nitrites” are labile and will function both as NO donors and antioxidants. Both these aspects are obviously more important for minced cured meat products, containing large amounts of adipose tissue susceptible to oxidation and possibly acting as NO donors during processing and conservation but also during digestion. Production of lipid nitrites contributes to the well-recognized antioxidant effect of nitrite that effectively controls rancidity in processed red meats by inhibiting lipid peroxidation (Freybler et al, 1993). It is indeed remarkable that in spite of the oxidative properties of nitrite, and their possible strengthening by the presence of iron and chloride, little lipid oxidation is observed in processed red meats. It should however be clear that the oxidation status of lipids − 58− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be is also determined by other reactions involving nitrosomyoglobin with depletion of oxygen or peroxides and production of NO as described in detail by Skibsted (2011). Peroxynitrite, formed by the reaction of NO with the superoxide radical anion (NO + O2.- → ONOO- → NO3-) may initiate lipid oxidation. Antioxidant activity on the other hand also involves NO binding to the heme ferrous ion forming nitrosomyoglobin and to other non-heme iron proteins preventing pro-oxidant iron release (e.g. from the porphyrin) (Morrissey & Tichivangana, 1985) during an attack of H2O2 or hydroperoxides (Kanner, 1994). The importance of the latter mechanism is suggested by the antioxidant effect of the isolated cured meat pigment in the absence of nitrite (Shahidi et al., 1987). Many other possible reactions may be involved however as e.g. a contribution to an antioxidant medium by initial oxidation of NO2 in the presence of oxygen (Honikel, 2008). Also, the pro-oxidant activities of heme pigments present are strongly affected by low pH, the initial prevalence of deoxygenated heme pigment and the oxidative modification of the heme pigments as well as the degree of proteolysis (Carlsen et al, 2005). Last but not least, it is clear that during conservation of processed red meats, the presence of O2 and temperature conditions affect further oxidation reflected in browning of the products. Exposure to light intensifies oxidation but only in the presence of O2 as discussed in detail by Skibsted (2011). Results of dietary intervention studies Most of the available evidence supports an enhancing effect of nitrite on the formation of NOCs both in food and endogenously. As discussed above, the presence of nitrite in processed red meat enhances the formation of NOCs in the food. Indeed, Haorah et al (2001) showed that hotdogs contained 10 times more NOCs than fresh red meat. Furthermore, ATNC derived from nitrosation of NOC precursors present in hotdogs induced colonic aberrant crypts in the mouse colon (Davis et al., 2012). Several studies indicate that the presence of nitrite in processed food can also increase endogenous formation of NOCs. As for red meat, diets based on processed red meat have been reported to increase the fecal ATNC content but the effect of processed red meat appeared to be more pronounced. In mice, diets containing 18 % hot dogs increased fecal ATNC excretion 3.7-5.0 times compared to controls whereas equal amounts of beef resulted in a 2.6-2.9 fold increase (Mirvish et al, 2003). As fecal ATNC contain both unabsorbed dietary NOC and endogenously formed NOC, it was not clear if the observed increase was related to the increased dietary NOC content of processed red meat. In a later experiment, the same research group (Mirvish et al, 2008) showed that fecal ATNC excretion in mice increased with nitrite in the drinking water (Fig. 16), an effect even more increased by the presence of heme, whereas there is no or inconclusive evidence for nitrite being a colon carcinogen. Fig. 16. Fecal concentration of NOCs for mice fed various doses of NaNO 2 in drinking water (from Mirvish et al, 2008). − 59− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Such finding is not surprising as humans are exposed to 4.5 – 13.5 mg nitrite/d from the saliva (derived from nitrate reduction in the oral cavity) and such levels would increase colonic levels of ATNC. Endogenous production of nitrite and the important intake of nitrate with vegetables considerably reduce the probability of a carcinogenic nature for these compounds and arguments are indeed available to consider them as healthful dietary components (Hord et al, 2009). The general safety and even beneficial role of nitrate/nitrite in human health has indeed been extensively confirmed (Sindelar & Milkowski, 2012; Parthasarathy & Bryan, 2012). In this respect it may be significant to mention that in a large cohort study involving 491,841 participants, nitrite intake from processed red meats and other animal sources was associated with increased renal adenocarcinoma risk whereas no association was found for nitrite intake from plant sources or nitrate intake overall (DellaValle et al, 2013). Nevertheless, it has also been shown that although low concentrations of nitrite inhibit cancer cell progression at early stage it promotes cancer cell progression at higher concentrations in cells representing stage 4 colon carcinomas (Jiang et al, 2012). These findings may be related to the reported increased risk of CRC with nitrate in drinking water (van Grinsven et al, 2010). A likely hypothesis involves the presence of a minor specific carcinogenic component in the colonic/fecal ATNCs induced by red and processed red meat other than those induced by nitrite. Such component is probably a NOC and not an iron nitrosyl or S-nitrosothiol. In this respect, it should be noted that rats lack an enterosalivary recycing of nitrate. Addition of nitrite to the drinking water of rats however did not interact with the effect of heme compounds on biochemical markers linked to colon carcinogenesis (lipid peroxidation, cytotoxicity of fecal contents). However, according to Chenni et al (2013), addition of nitrite to the drinking water increased the level of fecal nitroso-compounds but their concentration and their nature (iron-nitrosyl) would probably not be associated with an increased risk of cancer. Obviously more precision is required for identification of such compound in colon/fecal contents and recently over 30 putative NOCS have been identified in fecal material (Clarke et al, 2011). The recent Danish study involving 185 archival CRC samples collected from participants of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer (EPIC)-Norfolk study supports the hypothesis that heme and nitrite present in processed red meat products may act together to induce higher levels of NOCs. Indeed, CRC cases harbouring GC-to-AT transition mutations were associated with processed red meat consumption, suggesting a dietary link with alkylating agents such as NOCs (Gay et al., 2012). The hypothesis was further supported by the observation that the promoting effect of nitrite treatment on preneoplastic lesion in the rat colon was linked with an increased fecal ATNC content (Santarelli, 2010). The same work however also provides support for a role of preformed (lipid) oxidation products as suggested by Baradat et al (2011) and Leuratti et al (2002) : the nitrite-treated and oxidized cured meat model similar to ham stored aerobically and fed to 1,2-dimethylhydrazine sensitized rats specifically increased the number of colon pre-neoplastic lesions compared with a similar non nitrite-treated and a similar nonoxidized meat (Table 15). No clear differences could however be observed in biomarkers for lipid oxidation in the animal, suggesting that the effect is probably brought about by the lipid oxidation products present in the oxidized product. In very recent work (Santarelli et al, 2013) nine different cured meat products were fed to rats and hot dogs and dry fermented sausage significantly and marginally increased mucin depleted foci respectively. These indicators of carcinogenesis however were not related to levels of lipid oxidation markers whereas dry fermented sausage contained eight times more TBARS than hot dogs. The authors suggest that the carcinogenic effects are more probably related to the formation of ATNC in the gut and/or the products induced by nitrosylated heme. A more outspoken effect of hot dogs could then relate to the liberation of nitrosyl heme from globin by cooking in hot dogs and the decreased availability of heme caused by fermentation in dry cured sausage. − 60− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 15. Effect of an oxidized processed red meat on pre-carcinogenic changes and biomarkers in rats (adapted from Santarelli et al, 2010) Diets mg MDA eq/100 g meat Histology Aberrant crypt foci Mucin depleted foci (MDF) Crypts/MDF Mucin depleted crypts/colon Fecal water Heme (µmol/l/24h) TBARS (μmol/l MDAa equivalent) Cytotoxicity (% dead cells) ATNCb (μmol/l as NNO) Urine DHN-MAc (μg/24 h) a DCNAd DCNOd 0.5 1.8 81 2.9 3.9 11 100 2.1 2.7 8.0 102* 4.1* 4.2 18.0* 0 58 0 47 137 102* 25 88 324 88* 11 424*# 0.5 5.3* control b 3.4 c MDA = malondialdehyde ATNC = apparent total N-nitroso compounds DHN-MA = 1,4d dihydroxynonane mercapturic acid Diets fed contained DCNO = dark meat cooked with nitrite and oxidized; DCNA = dark meat cooked with nitrite and kept anaerobic; Dry matter of diets contained identical proportions of fat (15 g / 100 g) and protein (40 g /100 g). The control diet 40 g of casein/100 g and experimental diets 55 g of processed red meat dry matter. Dark meat (supraspinatus and infraspinatus pig muscles) was cured using salt (NaCl) containing 0.6 g sodium nitrite/100 g salt at 2 g/100 g meat and cooked at 70°C for 1 hour in vacuum sealed plastic bags in a water bath. DCNA anaerobic meat was packaged under vacuum immediately after processing in plastic bags with low oxygen permeability and * DCNO oxidized meat kept in the dark without any packaging for 5 days after cooking. different from control # different from DNA. An effect of NaCl ? A major effect of meat processing {nitrite (and/or nitrate) curing} is of course the increased salt (NaCl) content reaching values ranging from 1 to 10%. The presence of Cl- leads to the production of nitrosyl chloride following HNO2 + H+ + Cl- → NOCl + H2O. NOCl is more reactive than N2O3 and chlorine may contribute with nitrite and ascorbate to the Fenton reaction producing hydroxyl radicals from ROS formed in biological tissues (Skibsted, 2011). Salty diets and salted foods have consistently been related to stomach cancer, mainly in Japan. Furthermore, NaCl enhances experimental gastrocarcinogenesis by N-methyl-N’-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine in rats (Takahashi et al, 1994). Until now, no link has been published between salt intake and CRC (Santarelli et al., 2008). However, the experimental evidence discussed above indicates that lipid (per)oxidation during processing or digestion is very probably an underlying cause of the increased risk for CRC associated with consumption of red and processed red meat. It was pointed out (Demeyer & De Smet, 2011) that this may involve free radical damage possibly linked to myeloperoxidase (MP) catalyzed generation of reactive chlorinating intermediates in the gut. Indeed, MP activity is part of the regulation of the antioxidant defense and redox status of tissues. It was shown to be involved in enhanced oxidative stress in neoplastic tissue of the colon (Rainis et al, 2007) and was found to be strongly dependent on extracellular chloride concentration in peripheral blood neutrophils (Painter et al, 2008). Also, DNA damage as the result of HOCl-mediated chlorination by myeloperoxidase has been suggested as a contribution to lung carcinogenesis (Masuda et al, 2001). The possibility that salt in consumed processed red meats increases plasma chloride levels that, possibly in combination with heme compounds, stimulate myeloperoxidase catalyze generation of reactive chlorinated intermediates in the gut is therefore a hypothesis deserving further consideration and research. − 61− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.6.7 Summary Red meat consumption is clearly associated with an increased intake of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as well as heterocyclic amines, two groups of compounds recognized as carcinogenic. PAH and HCA may be present as contaminants in the fresh meat and/or are formed during cooking by contact with the open flame (PAH) or by high temperature treatments to the “well done” state (HCA). However, both types of compounds are probably not the major carcinogenic constituents of red meat. Indeed, they are present in similar or greater levels in chicken and fish cooked in the same manner, foods not found to increase or even lower (fish) the risk of CRC. Both - volatile nitrosamines and non-volatile nitrogen nitrosocompounds as well as - lipid oxidation products are probably the most important compounds responsible for the increased risk for colorectal carcinogenesis associated with the consumption of both fresh and processed (nitrite cured) red meats. They are formed - during nitrite (and/or nitrate) curing and conservation of processed red meats and/or - during intestinal digestion of red meats and processed red meats. The production of both types of compounds during digestion is intensified by the presence of heme. Furthermore, due to the presence of nitrite heme mediated formation of lipid oxidation products as well as volatile nitrosamines and non-volatile nitrogen nitrosocompounds (yet to be identified) also occurs during processing and conservation of processed red meats. The ingestion of these compounds and their interaction with the colon epithelium probably explains the greater risk of processed red meats than of fresh red meats. The presence and formation of NOCs and lipid peroxidation products in processed (nitrite cured) meats deserves extensive additional research in relation to the justification of nitrite use in meat processing (Mirvish et al, 2008). A summarizing scheme presented by Corpet (2011) may not accurately nor completely cover all points discussed but also illustrates some mediating effects on heme induced carcinogenesis to be discussed hereafter (Fig.17). It should also be realized that considering all the different hazardous compounds present in red and processed red meat, the increased risk for CRC may not be associated with one unique causative agent, but with the presence of the different compounds, acting on multiple stages of CRC. − 62− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Fig.17. Catalytic effect of heme iron on fat peroxidation and N-nitrosation, and their inhibition by dietary means. Consequences for the development of colorectal cancer. Heme iron catalyzes nitrosation and fat peroxidation. End products are N-nitroso compounds (NOCs), malondialdehyde (MDA) and 4-hydroxy-nonenal (4-HNE). These pathways explain, at least in part, the promoting effect of red and cured meat on colorectal cancer. The catalytic effects of heme iron can be inhibited by trapping heme with calcium carbonate or chlorophyll. The endogenous formation of NOCs is inhibited by vitamin C and E. Ongoing studies suggest that specific polyphenols can inhibit fat peroxidation and/or nitrosation (From Corpet, 2011). − 63− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.7 Possibilities for mitigation Possibilities to mitigate - the carcinogenic effect of red meat and processed red meat, the established toxicity of heme and nitrosyl heme in relation to the production of nitrogen nitroso compounds and lipid oxidation products during processing {nitrite (and/or nitrate) curing}, preparation (cooking) and conservation of processed red meats as well as during intestinal digestion (nitrosation) of red meat and processed red meats are apparent from: Observed effects of dietary changes The only foods reported by WCRF/AICR (2011) to decrease the risk of colorectal cancer are dietary fiber (convincingly) as well as garlic and cow’s milk (probably). A risk decreasing effect of fish intake is strongly supported by the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (2012) and other extensive work (Hall et al, 2008) (Wu et al, 2012). These facts should support the concept of “healthy eating” as elaborated in relation to overweight and obesity (see e.g. Vanhauwaert, 2012) also for the prevention of CRC. A nearly significant protective association of a higher intake of vegetables and fruits, an index of “healthy eating”, with the overall risk of colorectal cancer has also been identified (Kurotani et al, 2010) and is generally accepted although the relation to folate supply requires some clarification (Lee & Chan, 2011). A large cohort study from the Italian EPIC study (Pala et al, 2011) involving 45,241 subjects clearly demonstrated an inverse association of yogurt intake with CRC risk, adjusted for energy, simple sugar, calcium, fiber, animal fat, alcohol and red meat intake, as well as body mass index, smoking, education and physical activity. The relative risk was 0.66 for the highest compared to the lowest yogurt intake. This finding confirms protective effects of dairy foods and calcium supplements reported earlier (Park et al, 2009). In a more general approach, Holtrop et al (2012) recently demonstrated the complexity of dietary factors determining the formation of carcinogenic NOC in humans. Consumption of meat-based weight-loss diets increased fecal NOC excretion in obese subjects, and this effect was increased mainly by dietary meat and nitrate contents. Other dietary components namely vitamin C, total energy, and non-starch polysaccharides however attenuated the effect in a complex manner involving e.g. the ratio of dietary components present. In other large scale observational work, it was recently confirmed that non-red meat sources of animal protein, often derived from low-fat dairy products, fish and poultry sources are associated with lower risks of CRC (Sun et al, 2012; Miller et al, 2013). Experimental work with animals or volunteers Major effects apparent from observational studies have been at least partially confirmed in experimental work. Joosen et al (2010) showed that although replacement of red meat with fatty fish had no effect on endogenous nitrosation, inflammation and genotoxicity of faecal water in apparently healthy human volunteers, it does reduce the formation of mutagenic and potentially carcinogenic NOC and may as such beneficially affect colorectal risk. The feeding of cruciferous vegetables (cauliflower, cabbage, broccoli, …), yogurt, and chlorophyllin tablets to fried meat consuming volunteers clearly resulted in enhanced urinary voidance of diet induced mutagens associated with a significant decrease of fecal mutagenicity and a nearly twofold decrease of the DNA damage in colorectal cells (Shaughnessy et al, 2011). A suppressive effect of calcium carbonate on promotion of carcinogenesis by beef meat was demonstrated in rats and was more efficient than that of calcium phosphate (Allam et al, 2011). The recent work of Santarelli et al (2013) shows that a high-calcium diet suppresses the carcinogenic effect of hot dogs in rats and the authors suggest “an alternative protective strategy against colorectal cancer: processed red meat meals should also include a calcium-rich food to counteract toxicity of cured meat”. Calcium supplements or α-tocopherol addition fully normalizes fecal TBARS in volunteers given cured − 64− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be meats (Santarelli, in preparation cited in Corpet, 2011a) and levels of postprandial plasma MDA showed up to 80 % reduction by consumption of red wine polyphenols (Kanner et al, 2012; Gorelik et al, 2013) or coffee (Sirota et al, 2013) polyphenols during a meat meal in humans. Widely accepted former knowledge for the protective effect of resistant starch for colorectal cancer in relation to a butyrate hind gut fermentation (Higgins & Brown, 2013) (Fung et al., 2013) was confirmed for red meat carcinogenesis in rats (Toden et al, 2007; Toden et al, 2010; Winter et al, 2011; Conlon et al, 2012). It was shown for the first time in humans that addition of resistant starch to high red meat diets reduced formation of a meat induced promutagenic adduct (Winter et al, 2012) as well as of mi-RNAs over expressed in CRC (Le Leu et al, 2012). Although primarily fermented in the caecum, wheat fiber arabinoxylans protected colonocytes from DNA damage and changed colonic microbial composition when fed to pigs, in conjunction with lower phenol concentrations and altered microbial populations (Belobrajdic et al, 2012). Tumor suppressive effects of dietary spinach were demonstrated in the rat colon and were linked to the lowered formation of altered micro RNAs specific for heterocyclic amine-induced colon cancers (Parasramka et al, 2012). Demonstrated possibilities for optimization of meat processing and meat preparation Adding antioxidant spices (rosmarinic acid) during cooking of hamburgers lowered malondialdehyde levels in meat as well as in plasma and urine after ingestion by volunteers (Li et al, 2010; Li et al, 2013). It is not clear whether an effect on malondialdehyde in vivo is involved besides the effect in the product. Smoking conditions can be optimized to minimize the PAH content of Frankfurter-type sausages (Pöhlmann et al, 2012). In relation to domestic meat preparation, the effects of grilling and over-grilling on benzo[a]pyrene formation in meat and chicken samples were investigated (Ince & Yaman, 2012) and well as the effects of pan-frying and microwave heating on N-nitrosamines in dry-cured sausage (Li et al, 2012). Addition of plant polyphenols in production of the latter was reported to lower levels of both TBARS and Nnitrosamines (Li et al, 2013). The use of spices lowers HCA production during cooking of beef as illustrated for PhIP in Table 16 and inhibitory effects were observed with other plant compounds for pork (Zhang et al., 2013). Similar reductions were found after treating beef with marinades containing polyphenolic antioxidant spices 1 h prior to grilling (Smith et al, 2008) but the use of alcohol in marinades may have the opposite effect (Wu et al, 2011)(Viegas et al, 2012a). Plant extracts inhibit both E.Coli O157:H7 and heterocyclic amine production in heated ground beef (Rounds et al, 2013). The work of Santarelli et al (2010) shows that pork meat cured without nitrite or packaged to prevent oxidation does not promote carcinogenesis in rats. α-Tocopherol added to the curing solution suppresses cured meat promotion of CRC in rats and associated biomarkers in volunteers (Corpet, unpublished results cited in Corpet, 2011a). It should be realized that the Mediterranean processing of raw and cured ham (e.g. Parma ham) is often characterized by the absence of nitrite and the presence in the products of Zn-Protoporphyrin, a compound known to inhibit hemin-induced DNA damage and cell hyperproliferation. It is formed by both enzymatic and non-enzymatic pathways involving an iron-removal reaction catalyzed by ferrochelatase, and its formation is inhibited by nitrite (Becker et al, 2012)(Fig. 18). The use of exogenously added recombinant yeast ferrochelatase is investigated and can open approaches to lower heme contents of cured meats (Chau et al, 2011). Other possibilities to mitigate the CRC promoting effect of processed red meats include use of less nitrite or use of promising natural nitrite alternatives (see e.g. Rodriguez-Sanchez et al., 2013) as aimed at e.g. in a recently initiated European Research Project: “Phytochemicals to Reduce Nitrite In Meat Products: Phytome” (http://www.fenavian.be/goto.php?id=74c407e263578d03d02c1123aa730b52&type=docs) and analogous research projects running in Flanders. Other targets involve the development of “functional meat products” introducing e.g. fructooligosaccharides (a “functional probiotic” ?!) in fermented cooked sausages (dos Santos et al, 2012); up to 50 % substitution of pork fat by canola oil in pate or liver sausage (Morales-Irigoyen et al, 2012) and red meat products enriched with fermentable dietary fiber shown to improve colonic health in rats (Paturi et al, 2012). − 65− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Processed meats can be enriched in plant antioxidants, calcium and (long chain) omega-3 unsaturated fatty acids through processing and/or animal feeding (Raes et al., 2004; Demeyer et al., 2008; Doolaege et al., 2012; Vossen et al., 2012; de Ciriano et al., 2013). The latter have indeed been shown to be associated with a decreased risk of CRC (Shen et al., 2012) (Zhong et al., 2013). Mediation of iron levels in pork by genetic selection has been proposed (Hermesh & Jones, 2012) and a special mention deserves the promoting effect of chloride salts on lipid oxidation in processed red meats (Gheisari & Motamedi, 2010). Substitution of “salt” in processed red meats by other chlorides should therefore be avoided (Selgas et al, 2009). Possibilities to improve the health properties of red meat and processed red meat products were comprehensively reviewed by Olmedilla-Alonso et al. (2013) stressing the requirement for dietary intervention studies to evaluate health effects. Table 16. Effect of spices on PhIP production in cooked beef Spices added Minced Garlic (g/100g) 0 5 10 15 Rosemary 0 0.2 % 1 2 PhIP (ng/g) Reference Jung et al (2010)1 264 222 57 40 Puangsombat et al (2011)2 6.53 4.15 ground beef patties fried at 220°C for 10 min beef patties cooked at 204°C (400 ◦F) for 10 min Fig. 18. Scheme for the interaction of nitrite with the production of zinc protoporphyrin (From Becker et al, 2012). − 66− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 2.2.8 The types of processed red meats involved Although the WCRF/AICR (2007) recommendation clearly defines “processed red meats” as “meats preserved by smoking, curing or salting or by the addition of chemical preservatives”, a lack of the precise definition of processed red meats is often pointed out (Demeyer et al, 2008). Indeed, contrasting with dairy products, the processed red meats are a very diverse group of foods, characterized by the use of very heterogeneous raw materials (different muscle and fat tissues, organs, blood, …) as e.g. recognized in a recent FAO publication (Heinz &Hautzinger, 2007) (Fig. 19). Fig. 19. Meat products grouped according to the processing technology applied (Heinz a &Hautzinger, 2007) a Fotographs of typical examples available at http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ai407e/AI407E09.htm In Western meat technology, processed red meats are predominantly prepared from pig meat. In fact, it can be estimated that in Belgium, pig meat provides about 80 % of processed red meats and that at least about 50 % of pig meat is processed (Anonymous, 2010), suggesting that pig meat consumption reflects to a considerable extent processed (cured) meat consumption. Perhaps contrasting with a general perception, it can be estimated that pig carcasses mainly provide more than twice the amount of fat than protein, even when lean breeds are considered (Table 17). Efficient meat technology however recovers most of the fat in a diversity of products widely differing in fat content as shown e.g. in a product classification recently used by Vandendriessche (2008) (Table 18). As apparent from Fig. 19 however the latter classification does not sufficiently cover differences in fat content as well as in the use of nitrite. In view of the large differences in fat content and the established relation of lipid oxidation as well as the use of nitrite to the promotion of CRC by processed red meats, a different effect between high fat (minced products) and lower fat (whole muscle products) might be expected, even in the absence of nitrite. In the context of specific recommendations for Belgium, a variety of ground red meat products with added fat and salt but no nitrite should perhaps be considered separate from fresh as well as from processed red meats. In fact, such ground “mixed meats” (vleesmengelingen/viandes hachées) covering hamburger, fricadel, meat balls, brochettes, pita/gyros and similar products made up over 30 % of fresh meat home purchases between 2002 and 2012 (http://www.vlam.be/marketinformationdocument/files/GfKvleesinclusiefgevogeltewildenkonijn201 2-AP.pdf).They are often heated and may contain added poultry. − 67− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 17. Estimated protein and fat yield from pigs and cattle (% of live weight) muscle adipose tissue Tissue Protein Tissue Fat Lean Pig 44 (20)a 8.8 24 (80)b 19.2 Double muscled beef 44 (20) 8.8 12 (80) 9.6 a b between brackets estimate for % protein in muscle estimate for % fat in adipose tissue Table 18. Mean fat contents of different processed red meat types in Belgium (Vandendriessche, 2008) Product Whole muscle products Minced (ground) products Type % fat Type % fat Heated Cooked ham 0.5 - 5 Luncheon meat 20 - 30 Raw Dry cured ham (e.g. Parma, Iberico) 2.5 - 10 Fermented dry sausage (e.g. chorizo) 30 – 40 In Swedish research (Larsson et al., 2006) similar hazard risk ratio estimates of 1.55, 1.50 and 1.48 were found for bacon, hot dogs and salami, respectively but to our knowledge however no systematic studies have compared different processed red meats in epidemiology. Although data are affected by possible differences in effectiveness of registration rate, it is generally recognized that colorectal cancer death rates differ between Northern Europe and Mediterranean countries (Parnaud &Corpet, 1997). We have therefore attempted to gain insight in this problem by comparison of the consumption of specific processed red meats between Northern and Southern European countries as observed in the EPIC study and described by Linseisen et al (2006). Using the data for women (slightly different only from data for men), Table 19 illustrates striking differences: women in Northern Europe consume about twice the amount of processed red meats (38 g/d) than in Southern Europe (20 g/d). The proportion of raw and cured products (e.g. raw ham and salami type) is about twice as important in Southern Europe (32 %) compared to Northern Europe (14 %). In Northern Europe a much higher proportion of cooked and cured sausages (46 vs. 34 %) and “minced” hamburger type products (13 vs. 4 %) is consumed. It can be calculated that the average consumption of the latter product classes known to be high in fat content amounts to 22.6 g/d and 7.6 g/d in Northern and Southern Europe respectively. Considering the absence of added nitrite in the production technology of Mediterranean dry-cured ham containing Zn-Protoporphyrin as discussed above, these results are in line with the hypothesis that the higher incidence of processed red meat induced colorectal cancer in Northern compared to Southern Europe mainly relates to a higher consumption of fatty meat products and Fe-nitrosyl-heme provoked lipid peroxidation in the product and/or the gut. − 68− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Table 19. Adjusted mean (± SE) daily intake of processed (cured) meat product classes in women calculated from EPIC study data (Demeyer & De Smet, 2011). Total (g/day) Southern Europe (n=4) a Northern Europe (n=5) b UK 20 ± 3.7 38.4 ± 3.6 24.3 14.4 4.5 % of total Raw cured Ham Salami type 32.8 Cooked cured Ham Sausages 52.2 Main other Bacon Minced1 Cuts2 Raw spreadable 15.0 15.5 ± 4.7 17.3 ± 7.9 7.8 ± 1.7 6.6 ± 1.8 58.9 19.4 ± 6.0 33.9 ± 5.8 0.8 3.7 30.9 12.7 ± 1.6 46.2 ± 3.4 26.7 3.6 ± 0.1 4.0 ± 2.1 5.0 ± 2.3 0.6 ± 0.4 21.4 9.5 64.6 3.6 ± 1.0 12.7 ± 4.0 9.6 ± 2.9 0.7 ± 0.3 a Greece, Spain, Italy, Southern France; Germany, The Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden 1 Hamburger, fricadel, meat balls; liver pâté 2 Roasted meat in aspic, schnitzel, .. b − 69− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 24.8 12.4 1.7 25.7 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS For the benefit of the Spanish Governments, Bejar et al (2010) stated that “a minimal time span of ten-fifteen years is necessary for changes in exposure to risk factors” to be able to modify the incidence of CRC. This report confirms their conclusion that implementation of “legislative and educational measures in the field of Health Promotion regarding the diet can therefore be considered urgent”. Such measures should inform the consumer how to make healthy food choices based on scientific evidence in a clear and straightforward manner not drown in the actual confusing information cloud (Perez-Cuero & Verbeke, 2012). Discussing guidelines for a healthy diet from an ecological perspective, the Dutch Health Council (Health Council of the Netherlands, 2011) concluded that “the average consumption of red meat at the population level and the combined intake of red and processed red meat exceeded the norms set by the World Cancer Research Fund and the British Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition”. Based on one reference only (not covered by the ISI Web of Science nor by PubMed) it considers that “the significance of this fact for questions of health is uncertain”. Nevertheless, its recommendations for other reasons involve only “occasional consumption” of “mince, rolled beef and sausage” (meat) and of “raw ham, smoked meat, frankfurter, shoulder of ham, sausage, bacon, pâté and pork fricandeau” (meat products). Evaluating the “New Nordic diet”, Adamsson et al (2012) refer to “ a primarily plant-based diet ... associated with decreased morbidity and mortality”. In analogy with more evidence based and explicit French (Programme National Nutrition Santé, France, 2009) and UK (Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, UK, 2010) guidelines this report justifies a proposal to amend the existing recommendation at the federal Government level (“Nationaal voedingsplan voor een betere gezondheid - Plan National Nutrition pour une meilleure santé” at http://www.belgium.be/nl/gezondheid/gezond_leven/voeding/nationaal_plan/ or http://www.belgium.be/fr/sante/vie_saine/alimentation/plan_national/). The epidemiological evidence is less clear when higher upper levels of intake (up to about 200 g/d) are absent and is not apparent with populations of older and health conscious individuals (see under 2.2.2.4). Also, it has been shown that moderate amounts of red meat (~ 100 g/d for adults ) remain valuable sources for net protein synthesis for the elderly. It is therefore proposed to maintain the actual recommended maximal intake of 100 g/d of the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/meat substitutes and the adapted proposal reads : “It is recommended to consume not more than 100 g per day (amount before preparation) of the food group meats/fish/eggs/legumes/meat substitutes. A high consumption of red meat (mainly beef, pork, sheep but also meats from other species except poultry), mixed meats (with added fat and salt) and even more, of processed red meats (mainly cured using nitrite) slightly increases the risk of colorectal cancer. Therefore, choose preferably poultry, limit red and mixed meats and avoid processed red meats, in particular fatty meat products of the cooked sausage type, paté and salami. When preparing red meat (baking, roasting and cooking) make full use of vegetable spices, do not overheat the meat to a dark brown colour but, when present, remove such parts on the plate before consumption. Eating fish, including fat fish, once or twice a week is recommended as well as the occasional use of vegetable meat alternatives.” It should be remembered that “red meat” and “mixed meats” refer to fresh red meat products that have not been subjected to other treatments than cooling, freezing and or comminution for mixing with other red meats and salt (e.g. ground meat and hamburger type products). Processed red meat is defined as ”red meats preserved by salting (mainly with addition of nitrite and/or nitrate) and one or more other treatments”. In quantitative terms and in accordance with the WCRF/AICR (2007) this means that at the level of the individual who eats red meat, the recommendation is not to exceed the consumption of 500 g/week, very little if any of which to be processed.. This should be in accordance with a public health goal for a population average consumption of less than 300 g/week of red meat, very little if any of which to be processed, a goal aimed at effects complementary to the screening effort planned in Flanders. In addition and in comparison to the messages related to the abstention of smoking and excessive alcohol use, an − 70− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be alternative/additional and more straightforward and simple message for the consumer as inspired by Perez-Cuero & Verbeke (2012) might be: “The best prevention of colorectal cancer is the combination of higher physical activity with a fiber-rich diet, limiting red meat and minimizing processed meat products.” − 71− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 4 REFERENCES Adamsson V, Reumark A, Cederholm T, Vessby B, Rise´rus U, Johansson G. What is a healthy Nordic diet? Foods and nutrients in the NORDIET study Food & Nutrition Research 2012;56:18189. Alaejos MS, Gonzalez V, Afonso AM. Exposure to heterocyclic aromatic amines from the consumption of cooked red meat and its effect on human cancer risk: A review Food additives and contaminants. 2008;25:2-24. Alexander DD, Cushing CA. Red meat and colorectal cancer: a critical summary of prospective epidemiologic studies. Obesity reviews 2011;12:e472–e93. Alexander DD, Cushing CA, Lowe KA, Sceurman B, Roberts MA. Meta-analysis of animal fat or animal protein intake and colorectal cancer. American journal of clinical nutrition 2009;89:1402-09. Alexander DD, Miller AJ, Cushing CA, Lowe KA. Processed meat and colorectal cancer: A quantitative review of prospective epidemiologic studies. Eur J Cancer 2010;19:328–41. Alexander DD, Weed DL, Cushing CA, Lowe KA. Meta-analysis of prospective studies of red meat consumption and colorectal cancer. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2011;20:293–307. Alexander J, Benford D, Cockburn A, Cravedi J-P, Dogliotti E, Di Domenico et al. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Food - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (Question N° EFSA-Q-2007-136) The EFSA Journal 2008;724:1-114. Allam O, Bahuaud D, Taché S, Naud N, Corpet DE, Pierre FH. Calcium carbonate suppresses haem toxicity markers without calcium phosphate side effects on colon carcinogenesis. British Journal of Nutrition 2011;105:384–92. Al-Sohaily S, Biankin A, Leong R, Kohonen-Corish M, Warusavitarne J. Molecular pathways in colorectal cancer. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2012;27:1423-31. Altorf-van der Kuil W, Brink EJ, Boetje M, Siebelink E, Bijlsma S, Engberink MF, van 't Veer P, Tomee D, Bakker SJL, van Baak MA, Geleijnse JM. Identification of biomarkers for intake of protein from meat, dairy products and grains: a controlled dietary intervention study British Journal of Nutrition 2013;110:810-22. Anand P, Kunnumakara AB, Sundaram C, Harikumar KB, Tharakan ST, Lai OS et al. Cancer is a Preventable Disease that Requires Major Lifestyle Changes. Pharmaceutical research 2008;25:2097-116. Andersen V, Ostergaard M, Christensen J, Overvad K, Tjonneland A, Vogel U. Polymorphisms in the xenobiotic transporter Multidrug Resistance 1 (MDR1) and interaction with meat intake in relation to risk of colorectal cancer in a Danish prospective case-cohort study. BMC Cancer 2009;9:Art. No. 407. Andersen V, Christensen J, Overvadd K, Tjønneland A,Vogel U. Heme oxygenase-1 polymorphism is not associated with risk of colorectal cancer: a Danish prospective study. European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology 2011;123:282–85. Andersen V, Holst R, Vogel U. Systematic review: diet-gene interactions and the risk of colorectal cancer. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2013;37:383-91. Anderson KE, Sinha R, Kulldorff M, Gross M, Lang NP, Barber C et al. Meat intake and cooking techniques: associations with pancreatic cancer. Mutation Research 2002;506:225– 31. Andrews NC. Molecular control of iron metabolism: Best Practice & Research. Clinical haematology 2005;18:159-69. Angeli JP, Garcia CC, Sena F, Freitas FP, Miyamoto S, Medeiros MH et al. Lipid hydroperoxide-induced and hemoglobin-enhanced oxidative damage to colon cancer cells. Free radical biology and medicine 2011;51:503-15. Anonymous. Prijzen, kosten en rendabiliteit in de varkenskolom. Federale Overheidsdienst Economie, K.M.O., Middenstand en Energie. Brussel: 2010. Available from: URL:<http://economie.fgov.be/nl/binaries/study_porc_nl_tcm325-73348.pdf> − 72− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Aston LM, Smith JN, Powles JW. Impact of a reduced red and processed meat dietary pattern on disease risks and greenhouse gas emissions in the UK: a modelling study. BMJ OPEN 2012;2:Article Number:e001072. Atkin W. Editorial: Implementing screening for colorectal cancer. BMJ 1999;319:1249. Augustsson K, Skog K, Jägerstad M, Steineck G. Assessment of the human exposure to heterocyclic amines. Carcinogenesis 1997;18:1931–35. Aune D, Chan DS, Vieira AR, Rosenblatt DA, Vieira R, Greenwood DC et al. Red and processed meat intake and risk of colorectal adenomas: a systematic review and metaanalysis of epidemiological studies. Cancer Causes & Control 2013;24:611-27. Baghurst PA. Colorectal cancer. Nutrition & Dietetics 2007;64:S173-80. Bajro MH, Josifovski T, Panovski M, Jankulovski N, Nestorovska AK, Matevska N et al. Promoter length polymorphism in UGT1A1 and the risk of sporadic colorectal cancer. Cancer Genetics 2012;205:163-67. Bao Y, Nimptsch K, Chan AT, Ng K, Meyerhardt JA, Willett WC et al. Reported behavior of eating anything at anytime and risk of colorectal cancer in women. International journal of cancer 2012;130:1395-400. Baradat M, Jouanin I, Dalleau S, Tache S, Gieules M, Debrauwer L et al. 4-Hydroxy-2(E)nonenal Metabolism Differs in Apc(+/+) Cells and in Apc(Min/+) Cells: It May Explain Colon Cancer Promotion. Heme Iron Chemical research in toxicology 2011;24:1984-93. Barbir A, Linseisen J, Hermann S, Kaaks R, Teucher B, Eichholzer M et al. Effects of phenotypes in heterocyclic aromatic amine (HCA) metabolism-related genes on the association of HCA intake with the risk of colorectal adenomas. Cancer Causes & Control 2012;23:1429-42. Baron CP, Andersen HJ. Myoglobin-Induced Lipid Oxidation. A Review. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002;50:3887-97. Bartsch H, Nair J. Oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation-derived DNA lesions in inflammation driven carcinogenesis. Cancer Detect. Prev. 2004;28, 385-91. Bastide NM, Pierre FH, Corpet DE. Heme Iron from Meat and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis and a Review of the Mechanisms Involved. Cancer Prev Res 2011;4:177-84. Bax M-L, Buffière C, Hafnaoui N, Gaudichon C, Savary-Auzeloux C, Dardevet D et al. Effects of Meat Cooking, and of Ingested Amount, on Protein Digestion Speed and Entry of Residual Proteins into the Colon: A Study in Minipigs. Plos One 2013;8: 4-e61252. Becker EM, Westermann S, Hansson M, Skibsted LH. Parallel enzymatic and non-enzymatic formation of zinc protoporphyrin IX in pork. Food chemistry 2012;130:832-40. Bejar L, Gili M, Ramirez G, Lopez J, Cabanillas JL. Dietary changes and colorectal cancer trends in Spain during 1951-2007. Revista Espanola de Enfermedades Digestivas 2010;102:159-64. Bejar LM, Gili M, Infantes B, Marcott PF. Incidence of colorectal cancer and influence of dietary habits in fifteen European countries from 1971 to 2002. Gaceta sanitaria 2012;26:6973. Belobrajdic DP, Bird AR, Conlon MA, Williams BA, Kang S, McSweeney CS et al. An arabinoxylan-rich fraction from wheat enhances caecal fermentation and protects colonocyte DNA against diet-induced damage in pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 2012;107:1274-82. Beresford SA, Johnson KC, Ritenbaugh C, Lasser NL, Snetselaar LG, Black HR, et al. Lowfat dietary pattern and risk of colorectal cancer - The Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled dietary modification trial JAMA-Journal of the American Medical Association 2006;295:643-54. Bhopal RS, Bansal N, Steiner M, Brewster DH. Does the 'Scottish effect' apply to all ethnic groups? All-cancer, lung, colorectal, breast and prostate cancer in the Scottish Health and Ethnicity Linkage. Cohort Study BMJ OPEN 2012;2: Article Number:e001957. Biasi F, Chiarpotto E, Sottero B, Maina M, Mascia C, Guina T et al. Evidence of cell damage induced by major components of a diet-compatible mixture of oxysterols in human colon cancer CaCo-2 cell line. Biochimie 2012;95: 632-40. − 73− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Bingham SA, Hughes R, Cross AJ. Effect of White Versus Red Meat on Endogenous NNitrosation in the Human Colon and Further Evidence of a Dose Response. J. Nutr. 2002;132:3522S–25S. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 823:111-45. Boland CR, Goel A. Microsatellite Instability in Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology 2010;138:2073-U87. Bos JL. RAS oncogenes in human cancer - a review. Cancer Research 1989;49:4682-89. Botma A, Vasen HF, van Duijnhoven FJ, Kleibeuker JH, Nagengast FM, Kampman E. Dietary Patterns and Colorectal Adenomas in Lynch Syndrome. The GEOLynch Cohort Study Cancer 2013;119:512-21. Bourre JM. Nutritional value of beef. Bulletin de l’Académie Nationale de Médecine 2011;195:1787-99. Boyle P, Boffetta P, Autier P. Editorial : Diet, nutrition and cancer: public, media and scientific confusion. Annals of Oncology 2008;19:1665–67. Butler LM, Wang R, Koh WP, Yu MC. Prospective study of dietary patterns and colorectal cancer among Singapore Chinese. British Journal of Cancer 2008;99:1511–16. Byres E, Paton AW, Paton JC, Lofling JC, Smith DF, Wilce MC et al. Incorporation of a nonhuman glycan mediates human susceptibility to a bacterial toxin. Nature 2008;456: 648-53. Cai J, Zhao Y, Zhu CL, Li J, Huang ZH. The association of NAT1 polymorphisms and colorectal carcinoma risk: evidence from 20,000 subjects. Molecular Biology Reports 2012;39:7497-503. Camilleri GM, Verger EO, Huneau JF, Carpentier F,Dubuisson C, Mariotti F. Plant and Animal Protein Intakes Are Differently Associated with Nutrient Adequacy of the Diet of French Adults. Journal of Nutrition 2013;143:1466-73. Carlsen CU, Møller JK, Skibsted LH. Review : Heme-iron in lipid oxidation. Coordination Chemistry Reviews 2005;249: 485–98. Chan DS, Lau R, Aune D, Vieira R, Greenwood DC, Kampman E et al. Red and Processed Meat and Colorectal Cancer Incidence: Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies. PLoS ONE 2011; 6: Art. No. e20456. Chau TT, Ishigaki M, Kataoka T, Taketani S. Ferrochelatase Catalyzes the Formation of Znprotoporphyrin of Dry-Cured Ham via the Conversion Reaction from Heme in Meat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2011;59:12238–245. Chenni FZ, Tache S, Naud N, Gueraud F, Hobbs DA, Kunhle GG et al. Heme-induced biomarkers associated with red meat promotion of colon cancer are not modulated by the intake of nitrite. Nutrition and Cancer. An International Journal 2013;65:227-33. Chizzolini R, Zanardi E, Dorigoni V, Ghidini S. Calorific value and cholesterol content of normal and low-fat meat and meat products. Trends Fd Sci & Technol 1999;10: 119-28. Cho E, Smith-Warner SA. Meat and fat intake and colorectal cancer risk: a pooled analysis of 14 prospective studies In: Proceedings of the 95th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2004;27-31 Orlando, Florida (FLA): AACR; abstract 491. Available from: URL:<http://www.aacrmeetingabstracts.org/cgi/content/abstract/2004/1/113?maxtoshow=&hits =10> Cirillo T, Montuori P, Mainardi P, Russo I, Fasano E, Triassi M et al. Assessment of the dietary habits and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure in primary school children. Food Additives and Contaminants 2010;27:1025–39. Clark EM, Mahoney AW, Carpenter CE. Heme and total iron in ready-to-eat chicken. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 1997;45:124-6. Clarke DB, Startin JR, Hasnip SK, Crews C , Lloyd AS, Dennis MJ. Progress towards the characterisation of faecal N-nitroso compounds. Analytical methods 2011;3:544-51. Clevers H. At the crossroads of inflammation and cancer. J Cell 2004;118: 671-4. Collins D, Hogan AM, Winter DC. Microbial and viral pathogens in colorectal cancer. Lancet Oncol 2011;12: 504–12. Collins JF, Wessling-Resnick M, Knutson MD. Hepcidin Regulation of Iron. − 74− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be J. Nutr. 2008;138:2284–8. Colon Cancer Family Registry and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium. Identification of Genetic Susceptibility Loci for Colorectal Tumors in a GenomeWide Meta-analysis. J Gastroenterology 2013;144:799- 807. Conlon MA, Kerr CA, McSweeney CS, Dunne RA, Shaw JM, Kang S et al. Resistant Starches Protect against Colonic DNA Damage and Alter Microbiota and Gene Expression in Rats Fed a Western Diet. Journal of nutrition 2012;142:832-40. Corpet D. Red meat and colon cancer: Should we become vegetarians, or can we make meat safer? Meat science 2011;89:310-16. Corpet D. Review of the mechanisms for the effects of red and processed meat on colorectal cancer. In: WCRF/AICR 2011a;124-27. Cortese S, Azoulay R, Castellanos FX, Chalard F, Lecendreux M, Chechin D et al. Brain iron levels in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A pilot. MRI study. World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 2012;13:223-231. Cotterchio M, Boucher BA, Manno M, Gallinger S, Okey AB, Harper PA. Red Meat Intake, Doneness, Polymorphisms in Genes that Encode Carcinogen-Metabolizing Enzymes, and Colorectal Cancer Risk. Cancer epidemiology biomarkers and prevention 2008;17:3098-107. Coussens LM, Werb Z. Inflammation and cancer. Nature 2002;420: 860–7. Craig WJ, Mangels AR. Position of the American Dietetic Association: Vegetarian Diets. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2009;109: 1266-82. Cross AJ, Sinha R. Meat-Related Mutagens/Carcinogens in the Etiology of Colorectal Cancer. Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis 2004;44:44–55. Cross AJ, Ferrucci LM, Risch A, Graubard BI, Ward MH, Park Y et al. A Large Prospective Study of Meat Consumption and Colorectal Cancer Risk: An Investigation of Potential Mechanisms Underlying this Association. Cancer research 2010;70: 2406-14. Cross AJ, Leitzmann MF, Gail MH, Hollenbeck AR, Schatzkin A, Sinha R. A prospective study of red and processed meat intake in relation to cancer risk. PLoS medicine 2007;4:1973-84. Cross AJ, Pollock JR, Bingham SA. Haem, not protein or inorganic iron is responsible for endogenous intestinal n-nitrosation arising from red meat. Cancer Res 2003;63:2358-60. CSS – Conseil Supérieur de la Santé. Recommandations nutritionnelles pour la Belgique. Bruxelles: CSS; 2009. Avis n°8309. Dannenberger D, Reichardt W, Danier J, Numberg K, Numberg G, Ender K. Investigations on selected essential micronutrients in muscle of German pure and crossbred pigs. Fleischwirtschaft 2007;87:90-3. Davis ME, Lisowyj MP, Zhou L, Wisecarver JL, Gulizia JM, Shostrom VK et al. Induction of Colonic Aberrant Crypts in Mice by Feeding Apparent N-Nitroso Compounds Derived From Hot Dogs Nutrition and cancer. The international journal 2012;64:342-49. de Abreu Silva EO, Marcadenti A. Higher Red Meat Intake May Be a Marker of Risk, Not a Risk Factor Itself. Arch intern med 2009;169:1538-39. de Boer J, Schosler H, Boersema JJ. Climate change and meat eating: An inconvenient couple? Journal of Environmental Psychology 2013;33:1-8. de Ciriano MG, Berasategi I, Navarro-Blasco I, Astiasaran I, Ansorena D. Reduction of sodium and increment of calcium and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids in dry fermented sausages: effects on the mineral content, lipid profile and sensory quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2013;93: 876-81. De Geeter H. Vlees wordt ingedeeld in rood en wit vlees. Waarom? Nutrinews 2009;2:18-9. De Henauw S, De Backer G. Nutrient and food intakes in selected subgroups of Belgian adults. British Journal of Nutrition 1999;81:S37–S42. de Kok TM, van Maanen JM. Evaluation of fecal mutagenicity and colorectal cancer risk. Mutation Research 2000;463:53–101. De Stefani E, Aune D, Boffetta P, Deneo-Pellegrini H, Ronco AL, Acosta G et al. Salted Meat Consumption and the Risk of Cancer: a Multisite. Case-Control Study in Uruguay Asian pacific. Journal of cancer prevention 2009;10 :853-7. − 75− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be De Stefani E, Ronco AL, Boffetta P, Deneo-Pellegrini H, Correa P, Acosta G et al. Nutrientderived Dietary Patterns and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: a Factor Analysis in Uruguay Asian pacific. Journal of cancer prevention 2012;13:231-5. De Vriese S, Huybrechts I, Moreau M, Van Oyen H. De Belgische voedselconsumptiepeiling 1 – 2004. Wetenschappelijk Instituut Volksgezondheid: Afdeling Epidemiologie. Brussel: WIV; 2006. Available from: URL:<(http://www.iph.fgov.be/epidemio/epinl/foodnl/table04.htm)> DellaValle CT, Daniel CR, Aschebrook-Kilfoy B, Hollenbeck AR, Cross AJ, Sinha R et al. Dietary intake of nitrate and nitrite and risk of renal cell carcinoma in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. British Journal of Cancer 2013;108:205-12. Demeyer D, De Smet S. Relative importance and profile of processed meat intake in relation to colon cancer death rates in Europe Proc. 57th International Congress of Meat Science and Technology Ghent-Belgium 2011;7-12. Demeyer D. Positioning of foods in availability and consumption of dietary energy, in food based dietary guidelines and in nutrient profiling: Belgium as a case study. 2008;21. Available from: URL:<http://www.fenavian.be/> Demeyer D. Letter to the Editors: Balancing the risks and benefits of unprocessed and processed red meat consumption for both consumers and the environment. Meat Science 2010;86:529-30. Demeyer D, Honikel K, De Smet S. The World Cancer Research Fund report 2007: A challenge for the meat processing industry. Meat science 2008;80:953-59. Demeyer DI, De Smet S. The recommendation to limit or avoid consumption of processed meat is justified because of the association with the incidence of colorectal cancer and justifies the use of alternatives for nitrite in meat processing Nitric oxide. Biology and Chemistry 2010;23:150-1. D'evoli L, Salvatore P, Lucarini M, Nicoli S, Aguzzi A, Gabrielli P et al. Nutritional value of traditional Italian meat-based dishes: influence of cooking methods and recipe formulation. International journal of food sciences and nutrition 2009;60:38-49. Deziel NC, Buckley TJ, Sinha R, Abubaker S, Platz EA, Strickland PT. Comparability and repeatability of methods for estimating the dietary intake of the heterocyclic amine contaminant 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5b]pyridine (PhIP). Food Additives and Contaminants Part A. Chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment 2012;29:1202-11. Doolaege EH, Vossen E, Raes K, De Meulenaer B, Verhe R, Paelinck H et al. Effect of rosemary extract dose on lipid oxidation, colour stability and antioxidant concentrations, in reduced nitrite liver pates. Meat science 2012; 90:925-31. dos Santos BA, Campagnol PC, Pacheco MT, Pollonio MA. Fructooligo-saccharides as a fat replacer in fermented cooked sausages. International Journal of Food Science and Technology 2012;047:1183-92. Drabik-Markiewicz G, Van den Maagdenberg K, De Mey E, Deprez S, Kowalska T, Paelinck H. Role of proline and hydroxyproline in N-nitrosamine formation during heating in cured meat. Meat Science 2009;81:479–86. Dundar A, Sarıçoban C, Yılmaz MT. Response surface optimization of effects of some processing variables on carcinogenic/mutagenic heterocyclic aromatic amine (HAA) content in cooked patties. Meat Science 2012;91: 325–33. EFSA - European Food Safety Agency. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Food [1] Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain. The EFSA Journal 2008;724: 1-114. Egeberg R, Olsen A, Christensen J, Halkjaer J, Jakobsen MU, Overvad K. Associations between Red Meat and Risks for Colon and Rectal Cancer Depend on the Type of Red Meat Consumed. Journal of Nutrition 2013;143: 464-72. − 76− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Engemann A, Focke C, Humpf HU. Intestinal formation of N-nitroso compounds in the pig cecum model. J Agric Food Chem. 2013;61:998-1005. EC - European Commission. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Diagnosis - First Edition - Segnan N, Patnick J, von Karsa L. editors. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2010. EPIC - European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. 2012. Availible from: URL : <http://epic.iarc.fr/keyfindings.php> EPIC - European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Food content of potential carcinogens. 2012a. Availible from: URL:< http://www.epic-spain.com/libro.html > Faustman C, Sun Q, Mancini R, Suman SP. Myoglobin and lipid oxidation interactions: Mechanistic bases and control. Meat Science 2010;86:86–94. Ferguson LR. Meat and cancer. Meat science, 2010;84: 308-13. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: Globocan 2008. International journal of cancer 2010;127:2893-917. Ferrucci LM, Cross AJ, Gunter MJ, Ahn J, Mayne ST, Ma X et al. Xenobiotic Metabolizing Genes, Meat-Related Exposures, and Risk of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma. J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics 2011;3:170–81. Ferrucci LM, Sinha R, Huang WY, Berndt SI, Katki HA, Schoen RE et al. Meat consumption and the risk of incident distal colon and rectal adenoma. British journal of cancer 2012;106:608-16. Cox B, Debacker N, De Vriese S, Drieskens S, Huybrechts I, Moreau M et al. Food Consumption Survey Interactive Analysis (NUTRIA), Unit of Epidemiology, Scientific Institute of Public Health, Brussels, Belgium. 2004. Availible from: URL: <(http://www.iph.fgov.be/epidemio/epien/PROG5.HTM) > Frew E, Wolstenholme JL, Atkin W, Whynes DK. Estimating time and travel costs incurred in clinic based screening: flexible sigmoidoscopy screening for colorectal cancer. J Med Screen 1999;6:119–23. Freybler LA, Gray JI, Asghar A, Booren AM, Pearson AM, Buckley DJ. Nitrite Stabilization of Lipids In Cured Pork Meat Science 1993;33:85-96. Fu ZM, Shrubsole MJ, Smalley WE, Wu HY, Chen Z, Shyr Y et al. Association of Meat Intake and Meat-Derived Mutagen Exposure with the Risk of Colorectal Polyps by Histologic Type. Cancer prevention research 2011;4:1686-97. Fung KYC, Ooi CC, Zucker MH, Lockett T, Williams DB, Cosgrove LJ, Topping DL. Colorectal Carcinogenesis: A Cellular Response to Sustained Risk Environment . International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2013;14:13525-41. Fung TT, Hu FB, Schulze M, Pollak M, Wu TY, Fuchs CS et al. A dietary pattern that is associated with C-peptide and risk of colorectal cancer in women. Cancer causes and control 2012;23: 959-65. Fung TT, Hu FB, Wu KN, Chiuve SE, Fuchs CS, Giovannucci E. The Mediterranean and Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diets and colorectal cancer. American journal of clinical nutrition 2010;92:1429-35. Gaard M, Tretli S, Loken EB. Dietary factors and risk of colon cancer: A prospective study of 50,535 young Norwegian men and women. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 1996; 5: 445-454. Garnett T. Food sustainability: problems, perspectives and solutions. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2013;72:29-39. Gay LJ, Mitrou PN, Keen J, Bowman R, Naguib A, Cooke J et al. Dietary, lifestyle and clinicopathological factors associated with APC mutations and promoter methylation in colorectal cancers from the EPIC-Norfolk study. Journal of Pathology 2012;228: 405-15. Geissler C, Singh M. Iron, Meat and Health Nutrients 2011;3: 283-316. − 77− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Gerber N, Brogioli R, Hattendorf B, Scheeder MR, Wenk C, Gunther D. Variability of selected trace elements of different meat cuts determined by ICP-MS and DRC-ICPMS. Animal 2009;3:166-72. Gheisari HR, Motamedi H. Chloride salt type/ionic strength and refrigeration effects on antioxidant enzymes and lipid oxidation in cattle, camel and chicken meat. Meat Science 2010;86:377-83. Gilsing AM, Berndt SI, Ruder EH, Graubard BI, Ferrucci LM, Burdett L et al. Meat-related mutagen exposure, xenobiotic metabolizing gene polymorphisms and the risk of advanced colorectal adenoma and cancer. Carcinogenesis 2012;33:1332-39. Gilsing AM, Weijenberg MP, Hughes LA, Ambergen T, Dagnelie PC, Goldbohm RA et al. Longitudinal Changes in BMI in Older Adults Are Associated with Meat Consumption Differentially, by Type of Meat Consumed. Journal of nutrition 2012a;142:340-9 . Girard H, Butler LM, Villeneuvea L, Millikan RC, Sinha R, Sandler RS et al. UGT1A1 and UGT1A9 functional variants, meat intake, and colon cancer,among Caucasians and African-Americans Mutation. Research 2008;644:56–63. Goldman R, Shields PG. Food Mutagens. J. Nutr. 2003;133:965S–73S. Gonzalez-Gross M, Valtuena J, Moreno LA, Ferrari M, Kersting M, De Henauw S et al. Vitamin D status among adolescents in Europe: the Healthy Lifestyle in Europe by Nutrition in Adolescence study. British journal of nutrition 2012;107:755-64. Gorelik S, Kanner J, Schurr D, Kohen R. A rational approach to prevent postprandial modification of LDL by dietary polyphenols. Journal of Functional Foods 2013;5:163-9. Gottschalg E, Scott GB, Burns PA, Shuker DE. Potassium diazoacetate-induced p53 mutations in vitro in relation to formation of O6-carboxymethyl- and O6-methyl-20deoxyguanosine DNA adducts: relevance for gastrointestinal cancer. Carcinogenesis 2007;28:356–62. Goutefongea R, Cassens RG, Woolford G. Distribution of sodium nitrite in adipose tissue during curing. Journal of Food Science 1977;42:1637–41. Gratz SW, Wallace RJ, El-Nezami HS. Recent perspectives on the relations between fecal mutagenicity, genotoxicity, and diet Front. Pharmacol. 2011;2:1-9. Greenfield H, Arcot J, Barnes JA., Cunningham J, Adorno P, Stobaus T et al. Nutrient composition of Australian retail pork cuts 2005/2006. Food Chemistry 2009;117:721–30. Grivennikov SI, Greten FR, Karin M. Immunity, Inflammation, and Cancer : the good, the bad and the ugly. Cell 2010;140:883-99. Gunter MJ, Probst-Hensch NM, Cortessis VK, Kulldorff M, Haile RW, Sinha R. Meat intake, cooking-related mutagens and risk of colorectal adenoma in a sigmoidoscopy-based casecontrol study. Carcinogenesis 2005;26:637-42. Halkjaer J, Olsen A, Overvad K, Jakobsen MU, Boeing H, Buijsse B et al. Intake of total animal and plant protein and subsequent changes in weight or waist circumference in European men and women: the Diogenes project International. Journal of obesity 2011;35:1104-13. Hall MN, Chavarro JE, Lee IM, Willett WC, Ma J. A 22-year prospective study of fish, n-3 fatty acid intake, and colorectal cancer risk in men. Cancer epidemiology biomarkers & prevention 2008;17:1136-43. Halliwell B, Gutteridge JM. Review article : Oxygen toxicity, oxygen radicals, transition metals and disease. J Biochem 1984;219:1-14. Haorah J, Zhou L, Wang XJ, Xu GP, Mirvish SS. Determination of total N-nitroso compounds and their precursors in frankfurters, fresh meat, dried salted fish, sauces, tobacco, and tobacco smoke particulates. Journal of agricultural and food chemistry 2001;49:6068-78. Hara A , Sasazuki S, Inoue M, Iwasaki M, Shimazu T, Sawada N et al. Zinc and heme iron intakes and risk of colorectal cancer: a population-based prospective cohort study in Japan. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012;96:864-73. Hartnett L, Egan LJ. Inflammation, DNA methylation and colitis-associated cancer. Carcinogenesis 2012;33:723-31. − 78− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Hasan N, Pollack A, Cho I. Infectious Causes of Colorectal Cancer. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2010;24:1019–39. GR - Health Council of the Netherlands. Guidelines for a Healthy Diet: the Ecological Perspective. The Hague: GR; 2011. Hebels DG, Sveje KM, de Kok MC, van Herwijnen MH, Kuhnle GG, Engels LG et al. Red meat intake-induced increases in fecal water genotoxicity correlate with pro-carcinogenic gene expression changes in the human colon. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2012;50:95-103. Hebels DG, Brauers KJ, van Herwijnen MH, Georgiadis PA, Kyrtopoulos SA, Kleinjans JC. Time-series analysis of gene expression profiles induced by nitrosamides and nitrosamines elucidates modes of action underlying their genotoxicity in human colon cells. Toxicology letters 2011;207:232-41. Hedlund M, Padler-Karavani V, Varki NM, Varki A. Evidence for a human-specific mechanism for diet and antibody-mediated inflammation in carcinoma progression. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the United States of America 2008;105:18936-41. Heinz G, Hautzinger. Meat processing technology for small-to medium-scale producers. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - Regional office for Asia and the pacific Bangkok FAO 2010 ISBN: 978-974-7946-99-4. Available from: URL:<http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/ai407e/AI407E00.htm> Hentze MW, Muckenthaler MU, Galy B, Camaschella C. Two to Tango: Regulation of Mammalian Iron. Metabolism Cell 2010;142:24-38. Hermesch S, Jones RM. Genetic parameters for haemoglobin levels in pigs and iron content in pork. Animal 2012;6:1904-12. Higgins JA, Brown IL. Resistant starch: a promising dietary agent for the prevention/treatment of inflammatory bowel disease and bowel cancer. Current Opinion in Gastroenterology 2013;29:190-4. HGR - Hoge Gezondheidsraad. Voedingsaanbevelingen voor België. Brussel: HGR; 2009. Advies nr. 8309. Hofmann JN, Liao LM, Strickland P, Shu XO, Yang G, Ji BT, Li HL,Rothman N, Kamangar, Gao YT, Zheng W, Chow WH.Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons: determinants of urinary 1hydroxypyrene glucuronide concentration and risk of colorectal cancer in the Shanghai Women's Health Study BMC Cancer 2013; 13: 282. Hogg N. Red meat and colon cancer: Heme proteins and nitrite in the gut. A commentary on “Diet-induced endogenous formation of nitroso compounds in the GI tract”. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 2007;43:1037-39. Holtrop G, Johnstone AM, Fyfe C, Gratz SW. Diet Composition is Associated with Endogenous Formation of N-Nitroso Compounds in Obese Men. Journal of Nutrition 2012;142:1652-58. Honikel KO. The use and control of nitrate and nitrite for the processing of meat products. Meat Science 2008;78:68-76. Hord NG, Tang YP, Bryan NS. Food sources of nitrates and nitrites: the physiologic context for potential health benefits. American journal of clinical nutrition 2009;90:1-10. Hu JF, La Vecchia C, DesMeules M, Negri E, Mery L. Meat and fish consumption and cancer in Canada. Nutrition and cancer - International Journal 2008;60:313-24. Hu JF, La Vecchia C, Morrison H, Negri E, Mery L. Salt, processed meat and the risk of cancer. European Journal of cancer prevention 2011;20:132-39. Huang T, Yang B, Zheng JS, Li GP, Wahlqvist ML, Li D. Cardiovascular Disease Mortality and Cancer Incidence in Vegetarians: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. Annals of nutrition and metabolism 2012;60: 233-40. Hughes R , Cross AJ , Pollock JR, Bingham S. Dose-dependent effect of dietary meat on endogenous colonic N-nitrosation. Carcinogenesis 2001; 22:199-202. Hunt JR. Bioavailability of iron, zinc, and other trace minerals from vegetarian diets. Am J Clin Nutr 2003;78:633S–9S. − 79− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Hurrell R, Egli I. Iron bioavailability and dietary reference values. Am J of clinical nutrition 2010;91:1461S-67S. Hutter CM, Chang-Claude J, Slattery ML, Pflugeisen BM, Lin Y, Duggan D et al. Characterization of Gene-Environment Interactions for Colorectal Cancer Susceptibility Loci. Cancer research 2012;72:2036-44. Huxley RR, Ansary-Moghaddam A, Clifton P, Czernichow S, Parr CL, Woodward M. The impact of dietary and lifestyle risk factors on risk of colorectal cancer: A quantitative overview of the epidemiological evidence. Int J Cancer 2009;125:171-80. Huybrechts I, Lin Y, De Keyzer W, Matthys C, Harvey L, Meirhaeghe A et al. Intake and dietary sources of haem and non-haem iron in Flemish preschoolers. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012;66:806-12. IJssennagger N, de Wit N, Muller M, van der Meer R. Dietary Heme-Mediated PPAR alpha Activation Does Not Affect the Heme-Induced Epithelial Hyperproliferation and Hyperplasia in Mouse Colon. PLos One 2012;7:Article Number: e43260. IJssennagger N, Derrien M, van Doorn GM, Rijnierse A, van den Bogert B, Müller M et al. Dietary Heme Alters Microbiota and Mucosa of Mouse Colon without Functional Changes in Host-Microbe Cross-Talk. PLoS One 2012b;7: e49868. IJssennagger N, Rijnierse A, de Wit NJW, Boekschoten MV, Dekker J, Schonewille A,Müller M, Van der Meer R. Dietary heme induces acute oxidative stress, but delayed cytotoxicity and compensatory hyperproliferation in mouse colon. Carcinogenesis 2013 ;34 (7):1628-35. Ince M, Yaman M. High Performance Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry for Determination of Benzo[a]pyrene in Grilled Meat Foods. Asian J. of Chemistry 2012;24:339195. IARC - International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to humans. Some naturally occurring substances: Food items and constituents. Heterocyclic aromatic amines and mycotoxins 1993;Vol. 56. Available from: URL:<http://www.iarc.fr/en/publications/list/monographs/> Itzkowitz SH, Yio XY. Inflammation and cancer - IV. Colorectal cancer in inflammatory bowel disease: the role of inflammation. Am J of Physiology-Gastrointestinal and Liver Physiology 2004;287:G7-G17. Izumi K, Cassens RG, Greaser MI. Reaction of nitrite with ascorbic-acid and its significant role in nitrite-cured food. Meat Science 1989;26:141-53. Jägerstad M, Skog K. Genotoxicity of heat-processed foods. Mutation Research 2005;574:156–72. Jakszyn P, Agudo A, Ibáñez R, García-Closas R, Pera G, Amiano P et al. Development of a Food Database of Nitrosamines, Heterocyclic Amines, and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. J Nutr 2004;134:2011–14. Jeffery IB, O'Toole PW. Diet-Microbiota Interactions and Their Implications for Healthy Living. Nutrients 2013;5:234-52. Jiang H, Tang YP, Garg HK, Parthasarathy DK, Torregrossa AC, Hord NG et al. Concentration- and stage-specific effects of nitrite on colon cancer cell lines. Nitric OxideBiology and Chemistry 2012;26:SI267-73. Johnson CM, Wei CM, Ensor JE, Smolenski DJ, Amos CI, Levin B, Berry DA. Meta-analyses of colorectal cancer risk factors Cancer Causes & Control 2013;56:1207-1222. Joosen AM, Kuhnle GG, Aspinall SM, Barrow TM, Lecommandeur E, Azqueta A et al. Effect of processed and red meat on endogenous nitrosation and DNA damage. Carcinogenesis 2009;30:1402-07. Joosen AM, Lecommandeur E, Kuhnle GG, Aspinall SM, Kap L, Rodwell SA. Effect of dietary meat and fish on endogenous nitrosation, inflammation and genotoxicity of faecal water. Mutagenesis 2010;25:243-47. Jung K, Lee K, Park J, Dong A, Shin HS. Influence of Fructooligosaccharides and Garlic on Formation of Heterocyclic Amines in Fried Ground Beef Patties. Food science and biotechnology 2010;19:1159-64. − 80− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Kabat GC, Miller AB, Jain M, Rohan TE. A cohort study of dietary iron and heme iron intake and risk of colorectal cancer in women. British journal of cancer 2007;97:118-22. Kanazawa K, Ashida H. Dietary hydroperoxides of linoleic acid decompose to aldehydes in stomach before being absorbed into the body. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta-Lipids and lipid metabolism 1998;1393:349-61. Kanner J. Dietary advanced lipid oxidation endproducts are risk factors to human health. Mol Nutr Food Res 2007; 51:1094-101. Kanner J. Oxidative processes in meat and meat products: quality implications. Meat Sci 1994;6:169–89. Kanner J, Gorelik S, Roman S, Kohen R. Protection by Polyphenols of Postprandial Human Plasma and Low-Density Lipoprotein Modification: The Stomach as a Bioreactor. J of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2012;60: 8790-96. Karin M. Nuclear factor-kappaB in cancer development and progression. Nature 2006;441:431–36. Kato I, Boleij A, Kortman GA, Roelofs R, Djuric Z, Severson RK et al. Partial Associations of Dietary Iron, Smoking and Intestinal Bacteria with Colorectal Cancer Risk. Nutrition and Cancer- an International Journal 2013;65:169-77. Kazerouni N, Sinha R, Hsu CH, Greenberg A, Rothman N. Analysis of 200 food items for benzo[a]pyrene and estimation of its intake in an epidemiologic study. Food and chemical toxicology 2001;39:423-36. Key TJ, Appleby PN, Spencer EA, Travis RC, Allen NE, Thorogood M et al. Cancer incidence in British vegetarians. British journal of cancer 2009;101:192-197. Kirkegaard H, Johnsen NF, Christensen J, Frederiksen K, Overvad K, Tjonneland A. Association of adherence to lifestyle recommendations and risk of colorectal cancer: a prospective Danish cohort study. BMJ 2010;341:Art. No. c5504. Knekt P, Järvinen R, Dich J, Hakulinen T. Risk of colorectal and other gastro-intestinal cancers after exposure to nitrate, nitrite and n-nitroso compounds: a follow-up study. Int J Cancer 1999;80:852–56. Krebs NF, Hambidge KM. Complementary feeding: clinically relevant factors affecting timing and composition. American journal of clinical nutrition 2006;85:639S-45S. Krebs NF, Mazariegos M, Chomba E, Sami N, Pasha O, Tshefu A et al. Randomized controlled trial of meat compared with multimicronutrient-fortified cereal in infants and toddlers with high stunting rates in diverse settings. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012a;96:840-47. Krebs NF, Mazariegos M, Tshefu A, Bose C, Sami N, Chomba E et al. Meat consumption is associated with less stunting among toddlers in four diverse low-income settings. Food and nutrition bulletin 2011;32:185-91. Krebs NF, Westcott JE, Culbertson DL, Sian L, Miller LV, Hambidge KM. Comparison of complementary feeding strategies to meet zinc requirements of older breastfed infants. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012;96:30-5. Kuhnle GG, Story GW, Reda T, Mani AR, Moore KP, Lunn JC et al. Diet-induced endogenous formation of nitroso compounds in the GI tract Free. Radical Biology & Medicine 2007;43:1040–47. Kumar TV, Ramji S. Effect of Zinc Supplementation on Growth in Very Low Birth Weight Infants. Journal of tropical pediatrics 2012;58:50-4. Kunitsugu I, Okuda M, Sugiyama S, Yoshitake N, Tanizawa Y, Sasaki S et al. Meat intake frequency and anemia in Japanese children and adolescents. Nursing & Health Sciences 2012;14:197-203. Kurotani K, Budhathoki S, Joshi AM, Yin GA, Toyomura K, Kono S et al. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer in a Japanese population: The Fukuoka Colorectal Cancer Study. British journal of nutrition 2010;104:1703-11. − 81− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Küry S, Buecher B, Robiou-du-Pont S, Scoul C, Sébille V, Colman H et al. Combinations of cytochrome P450 gene polymorphisms enhancing the risk for sporadic colorectal cancer related to red meat consumption. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers 2007;Prev16:1460–67. Lagiou P, Trichopoulou A, Henderickx HK, Kelleher C, Leonhauser IU, Moreiras O et al. Household budget survey nutritional data in relation to mortality from coronary heart disease, colorectal cancer and female breast cancer in European countries. European journal of clinical nutrition 1999;53:328-32. Lambrinoudaki I, Ceasu I, Depypere H, Erel T, Rees M, Schenck-Gustafsson K et al. EMAS position statement: Diet and health in midlife and beyond. Maturitas 2013;4:99-104. Landi D, Gemignani F, Naccarati A, Pardini B, Vodicka P, Vodickova L, et al. Polymorphisms within micro-RNA-binding sites and risk of sporadic colorectal cancer. Carcinogenesis 2008;29:579–84. Landi D, Moreno V, Guino E, Vodicka P, Pardini B, Naccarati A et al. Polymorphisms affecting micro-RNA regulation and associated with the risk of dietary-related cancers: A review from the literature and new evidence for a functional role of rs17281995 (CD86) and rs1051690 (INSR), previously associated with colorectal cancer mutation researchfundamental and molecular mechanisms of mutagenesis 2011;717:109-15. Lang T, Barling D. Nutrition and sustainability: an emerging food policy discourse Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 2013;72:1-12. Lanza E, Schatzkin A, Daston C, Corle D, Freedman L, Ballard-Barbash R et al. Implementation of a 4-y, high-fiber, high-fruit-and-vegetable, low-fat dietary intervention: results of dietary changes in the Polyp Prevention Trial. American J of Clinical Nutrition 2001;74:387-401. Larsson SC, Wolk A. Meat consumption and risk of colorectal cancer: a meta- analysis of prospective studies. International Journal of Cancer 2006;119:2657-64. Larsson SC, Rafter J, Holmberg L, Bergkvist L, Wolk A. Red meat consumption and risk of cancers of the proximal colon, distal colon and rectum: The Swedish Mammography Cohort. Int J Cancer 2005;113:829–34. Latvala T, Niva M, Makela J, Pouta E, Heikkila J, Kotro J et al. Diversifying meat consumption patterns: Consumers' self-reported past behaviour and intentions for change. Meat Science 2012;92:71-7. Le Leu R, Conlon M, Winter J, Humphreys K, Michael M, Hu Y et al. Effect of high red meat intake and resistant starch in humans on risk factors for colorectal cancer. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2012;27: 24-5. Le Marchand L, Hankin JH, Pierce LM, Sinha R, Nerurkar PV, Franke AA et al. Well-done red meat, metabolic phenotypes and colorectal cancer in Hawaii. Mutation Research 2002;506– 07: 205–14. Lecerf JM. Meat and human health: excess and errors. Bulletin de l’Academie Nationale de Médecine 2011;195:1801-12. Lecerf JM. Cooking and cancer: why not? Correspondances en Metabolismes Hormones. Diabetes et Nutrition 2012;16 :155-60. Lee DH, Anderson KE, Harnack LJ, Folsom AR, Jacobs DR. Heme iron, zinc, alcohol consumption, and colon cancer: Iowa Women's Health Study. Journal of the national cancer institute 2004;96:403-07. Lee JE, Chan AT. Fruit, Vegetables, and Folate: Cultivating the Evidence for Cancer Prevention. Gastroenterology 2011;41:16-20. Lee SA, Shu XO, Yang G, Li HL, Gao YT, Zheng W. Animal Origin Foods and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Report From the Shanghai Women's Health Study Nutrition and cancer. International journal 2009;61:194-205. Lenoir-Wijnkoop I, Jones PJ, Uauy R, Segal L, Milner J. Nutrition economics - food as an ally of public health. British journal of Nutrition 2013;109:777-84. − 82− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Leuratti C, Watson MA, Deag EJ, Welch A, Singh R, Gottschalg E et al. Detection of malondialdehyde DNA adducts in human colorectal mucosa: Relationship with diet and the presence of adenomas. Cancer epidemiology biomarkers & prevention 2002;11:267-73. Lewin MH, Bailey N, Bandaletova T, Bowman R, Cross AJ, Pollock J et al. Red meat enhances the colonic formation of the DNA adduct O6-carboxymethyl guanine: implications for colorectal cancer risk. Cancer Research 2006;66:1859-65. Li FY, Lai MD. Colorectal cancer, one entity or three. Journal of Zhejiang university 2009;10:219-29. Li L, Shao JH, Zhu XD, Zhou GH, Xu XL. Effect of plant polyphenols and ascorbic acid on lipid oxidation residual nitrite and N-nitrosamines formation in dry-cured sausage International Journal of Food Science And Technology 2013; 48: 1157-1164. Li L, Wang P, Xu XL, Zhou, GH. Influence of Various Cooking Methods on the Concentrations of Volatile N-Nitrosamines and Biogenic Amines in Dry-Cured Sausages. Journal of Food Science 2012;77:C560-C65. Li Z, Henning SM, Zhang Y, Rahnama N, Zerlin A, Thames G et al. Decrease of postprandial endothelial dysfunction by spice mix added to high-fat hamburger meat in men with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet. Med. 2013;30:590–95. Li ZP, Henning SM, Zhang YJ, Zerlin A, Li LY, Gao K et al. Antioxidant-rich spice added to hamburger meat during cooking results in reduced meat, plasma, and urine malondialdehyde concentrations. American journal of clinical nutrition 2010;91:1180-84. Liang PS, Chen T-Y, Giovannucci E. Cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cancer 2009;124:2406–15. Lim DG, Sweeney S, Bloodsworth A, White CR, Chumley PH, Krishna NR et al. Nitrolinoleate, a nitric oxide-derived mediator of cell function: Synthesis, characteri-zation, and vasomotor activity. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences of the United States of America 2002;99:15941–46. Lin Y, Bolca S, Vandevijvere S, De Vriese S, Mouratidou T, De Neve M et al. Plant and animal protein intake and its association with overweight and obesity among the Belgian population. British journal of nutrition 2011;105:1106-16. Linseisen J, Kesse E, Slimani N, , Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Ocke MC, Skeie G et al. Meat consumption in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohorts: results 24-hour dietary recalls. Public Health Nutrition 2002;5:SI1243-58. Linseisen J, Rohrmann S, Norat T, Gonzalez CA, Iraeta MD, Gomez PM et al. Dietary intake of different types and characteristics of processed meat which might be associated with cancer risk – results from the 24-hour diet recalls in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Public Health Nutrition 2006; 9:449–64. Liu F, Yuan D, Wei YG, Wang WT, Yan LN, Wen TF et al. Systematic Review and MetaAnalysis of the Relationship between EPHX1 Polymorphisms and Colorectal Cancer Risk. PLos One 2012a;7: e43821. Liu JX, Ding DP, Wang XX, Chen YZ, Li R, Zhang Y et al. N-Acetyltransferase Polymorphism and Risk of Colorectal Adenoma and Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Variations from 59 Studies. PLos One 2012; 7:e42797. Loh YH, Jakszyn P, Luben RN, Mulligan AA, Mitrou PN, Khaw KT. N-nitroso compounds and cancer incidence: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)– Norfolk Study. Am J Clin Nutr 2011;93:1053–61. Lombardi-Boccia G, Lanzi S, Aguzzi A. Aspects of meat quality: trace elements and B vitamins in raw and cooked meats. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2005;18:39–46. Lombardi-boccia G, Martinez-dominguez B, Aguzzi A. Total Heme and Non-heme Iron in Raw and Cooked Meats. Journal of food science 2002;67:1738-41. López-Alonso M, García-Vaquero M, Benedito JL, Castillo C, Miranda M. Trace mineral status and toxic metal accumulation in extensive and intensive pigs in NW. Spain Livestock Science 2012;146:47–53. − 83− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be López-Alonso M, Miranda M, Castillo C, Hernández J, García-Vaquero M, Benedito JL. Toxic and essential metals in liver, kidney and muscle of pigs at slaughter in Galicia. Food Additives and Contaminants 2007;24:943-54. Lorrain B, Dangles O, Genot C, Dufour C. Chemical Modeling of Heme-Induced Lipid Oxidation in Gastric Conditions and Inhibition by Dietary Polyphenols. J Agric Food Chem 2010;58:676–83. Lund EK, Belshaw NJ, Elliott GO, Johnson IT. Recent advances in understanding the role of diet and obesity in the development of colorectal cancer. Proceedings of the nutrition society 2011;70:194-204. Lunn JC, Kuhnle G, Mai V, Frankenfeld C, Shuker DE, Glen RC et al. The effect of haem in red and processed meat on the endogenous formation of N-nitroso compounds in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Carcinogenesis 2007;28:685-90. Macdiarmid JI, Kyle J, Horgan GW, Loe J, Fyfe C, Johnstone A et al. Sustainable diets for the future: can we contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by eating a healthy diet? American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012;96:632-9. Magalhaes B, Peleteiro B, Lunet N. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. European journal of cancer prevention 2012;21:15-23. Major JM, Cross AJ, Doubeni CA, Park Y, Lian M, Hollenbeck AR et al. Socioeconomic deprivation impact on meat intake and mortality: NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer causes and control 2011;22:1699-707. Mann J. Evidence-based nutrition: Does it differ from evidence-based medicine? Annals of Medicine 2010;42:475–86. Markowitz SD, Bertagnolli MM. Molecular Origins of Cancer: Molecular Basis of Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 2009;361:2449-60. Marnett LJ, Plastaras JP. Review : Endogenous DNA damage and mutation. Trends in Genetics 2001;17:214–21. Marnett LJ. Inflammation and Cancer: Chemical Approaches to Mechanisms, Imaging. Journal of Organic Chemistry 2012;77:5224-38. Massey RC, Key PE, Mallett AK, Rowland IR. An investigation of the endogenous formation of apparent total N-nitroso compounds in conventional microflora and germ-free rats. Food Chem Toxicol. 1988;26: 595-600. Masuda M, Suzuki T, Friesen MD, Ravanat JL, Cadet J, Pignatelli B et al. Chlorination of guanosine and other nucleosides by hypochlorous acid and myeloperoxidase of activated human neutrophils - Catalysis by nicotine and trimethylamine. Journal of biological chemistry 2001;276:40486-96. McAfee AJ, McSorley EM, Cuskelly GJ, Moss BW, Wallace JM, Bonham MP et al. Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and benefits. Meat science 2010;84:1-13. McEvoy CT, Temple N, Woodside JV. Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: a review. Public Health Nutrition 2012;15:2287-94. McMichael AJ, Powles JW, Butler CD, Uauy R. Food, livestock production, energy, climate change, and health. Lancet 2007;370:1253-63. McNeill S, Van Elswyk ME. Red meat in global nutrition. Meat Sci 2012;92:166-73. Mei Q, Zhou DJ, Han JL, Lu H, Tang B. CYP1B1 Asn453Ser polymorphism and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Metabolism-Clinical And Experimental 2012;61:1321-29. Meyer KA, Sijtsma FP, Nettleton JA, Steffen LM, Van Horn L, Shikany JM et al. Dietary patterns are associated with plasma F-2-isoprostanes in an observational cohort study of adults. Free Radical Biology and Medicine 2013;57:201-09. Mhurchu CN, Capelin C, Dunford EK, Webster JL, Neal BC, Jebb SA. Sodium content of processed foods in the United Kingdom: analysis of 44,000 foods purchased by 21,000 households. American journal of clinical nutrition 2011;93:594-600. Miller PE, Lazarus P, Lesko SM, Cross AJ, Sinha R, Laio J et al. Meat-Related Compounds and Colorectal Cancer Risk by Anatomical Subsite Nutrition and Cancer. International Journal 2013;65:202-26. − 84− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Mills EW, Seetharaman K, Maretzki AN. A Nutribusiness Strategy for Processing and Marketing Animal-Source Foods for Children. J. Nutr. 2007;137:1115–8. Millward DJ, Garnett T. Food and the planet: nutritional dilemmas of greenhouse gas emission reductions through reduced intakes of meat and dairy foods. Proceedings of the nutrition society 2010;69:103-18. Mirvish SS, Davis ME, Lisowyj MP, Gaikwadt NW. Effect of Feeding Nitrite, Ascorbate, Hemin, and Omeprazole on Excretion of Fecal Total Apparent N-Nitroso Compounds in Mice. Chemical research in toxicology 2008;21:2344-51. Mirvish SS, Haorah J, Zhou L, Hartman M, Morris CR, Clapper ML. N-Nitroso compounds in the gastrointestinal tract of rats and in the feces of mice with induced colitis or fed hot dogs or beef. Carcinogenesis 2003;24:595-6. Mithril C, Dragsted LO, Meyer C, Blauert E, Holt MK, Astrup A. Guidelines for the New Nordic Diet. Public Health Nutrition 2012;15:1941-47. Moor HG. Colorectal Cancer: What Should Patients and Families Be Told to Lower the Risk of Colorectal Cancer? Surgical oncology clinics of North America 2010;19:693- 710. Morales-Irigoyen EE, Severiano-Perez P, Rodriguez-Huezo ME, Totosaus A. Textural, physicochemical and sensory properties compensation of fat replacing in pork liver pate incorporating emulsified canola oil. Food Science and Technology International 2012;8:41341. Morita H, Yoshikawa H, Suzuki T, Hisamatsu S, Kato Y, Sakata R et al. Anti-microbial action against verotoxigenic Escherichia coli O157 : H7 of nitric oxide derived from sodium nitrite. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry 2004;68:1027-34. Morita M, Le Marchand L, Kono S, Yin G, Toyomura K, Nagano J et al. Genetic Polymorphisms of CYP2E1 and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: The Fukuoka. Colorectal Cancer Study Cancer epidemiology biomarkers and prevention 2009;18:235-41. Morrissey PA, Tichivangana JZ. The Antioxidant Activities of Nitrite and Nitrosylmyoglobin in Cooked Meats. Meat Science 1985;14:175-90. Mouloud M, Metro F, Goutefongea R, Dumont JP. Mass-spectrometric study of derivatives formed by the reaction of oleic-acid with nitrite - some evidence for the formation of derivatives nitrosubstituted on the alpha-position of the double-bond. Sciences Des Aliments 1992;12:371-82. Mozaffarian D. Meat Intake and Mortality: Evidence for Harm, No Effect, or Benefit? Arch intern med 2009;169:1537-38. Mullie P, Godderis L, Clarys P. Determinants and nutritional implications associated with lowfat food consumption. Appetite 2012;58:34-8. Murata M, Thanan R, Ma N, Kawanishi S. Role of nitrative and oxidative DNA damage in inflammation-related carcinogenesis. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012:623019. Murkovic M. Chemistry, formation and occurrence of genotoxic heterocyclic aromatic amines in fried products. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 2004;106:777–85. Nakai H, Cassens RG, Greaser ML, Woolford G. Significance of the reaction of nitrite with tryptophan. Journal of Food Science 1978;43:1857–60. Navia JL, Byers T, Djordjevic D, Hentges E, King J, Klurfeld D et al. Integrating the Totality of Food and Nutrition Evidence for Public Health Decision Making and Communication. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition 2010;50:1:1-8. Nebert DW, Ingelman-sundberg M, Daly AK. Genetic epidemiology of environmental toxicity and cancer susceptibility: human allelic polymorphisms in drugmetabolizing enzyme genes, their functional importance, and nomenclature issues. Drug metabolism reviews 1999;31:467– 87. Nicolescu AC, Reynolds JN, Ross L, Barclay C, Thatcher GR. Organic Nitrites and NO: Inhibition of Lipid Peroxidation and Radical Reactions. Chem Res Toxicol 2004;17:185-96. Norat T, Bingham S, Ferrari P, Slimani N, Jenab M, Mazuir M et al. Meat, fish, and colorectal cancer risk: The European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition. Journal of the national cancer institute 2005;97:906-16. − 85− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Norat T, Lukanova A, Ferrari P, Riboli E. Meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk: Doseresponse meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. International Journal of Cancer 2002;98:241-56. Nordgren A. Ethical Issues in Mitigation of Climate Change: The Option of Reduced Meat Production and Consumption. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental ethics 2012;25:56384. Ollberding NJ, Nomura AM, Wilkens LR, Henderson BE, Kolonel LN. Racial/ethnic differences in colorectal cancer risk: the multiethnic cohort study. Int. J. Cancer 2011;129:1899–1906. Ollberding NJ, Wilkens LR, Henderson BE, Kolonel LN, le Marchand L. Meat consumption, heterocyclic amines and colorectal cancer risk: The Multiethnic. Cohort Study International Journal of Cancer Early View 2012. Available from: URL:<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.27546/pdf> Olmedilla-Alonso B, Jimenez-Colmenero F, Sanchez-Muniz FJ. Development and assessment of healthy properties of meat and meat products designed as functional foods. Meat Science 2013;95:919-30. Ozden TA, Gokcay G, Issever H, Durmaz O, Sokucu S, Saner G. Serum and hair zinc levels of infants and their mothers. Clinical Biochemistry 2012;45:753-57. Pacolet J, De Coninck A, Hedebouw G, Cabus S, Spruytte N. De medische en niet-medische kosten van kankerpatiënten - Studie in opdracht van de Vlaamse Liga tegen Kanker gerealiseerd met de medewerking van de Christelijke Mutualiteit, het Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven en het Ziekenhuis Netwerk Antwerpen. Gepubliceerd door HIVA – Onderzoeksinstituut voor Arbeid en Samenleving (K.U.Leuven). 2011. Availible from: URL:<http://www.hiva.be> Padidar S, Farquharson AJ, Williams LM, Kearney R, Arthur JR, Drew JE. High-Fat Diet Alters Gene Expression in the Liver and Colon: Links to Increased Development of Aberrant Crypt Foci. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 2012;57:1866-74. Painter RG, Bonvillain RW, Valentine VG, Lombard GA, LaPlace SG, Nauseef WM et al. The role of chloride anion and CFTR in killing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by normal and CF neutrophils. Journal of Leukocyte Biology 2008;83:1345-53. Pala V, Sieri S, Berrino F, Vineis P, Sacerdote C, Palli D et al. Yogurt consumption and risk of colorectal cancer in the Italian European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort. International Journal of Cancer 2011;129:2712-19. Pan A, Sun Q, Bernstein AM, Schulze MB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ et al. Red Meat Consumption and Mortality - Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies. Archives of Internal Medicine 2012;172:555-63. Parasramka MA, Dashwood WM, Wang R, Abdelli A, Bailey GS, Williams DE, et al. MicroRNA profiling of carcinogen-induced rat colon tumors and the influence of dietary spinach. Molecular Nutrition and Food Research 2012; 56:1259-69. Park SY, Murphy SP, Wilkens LR, Yamamoto JF, Sharma S, Hankin JH et al. Dietary patterns using the food guide pyramid groups are associated with sociodemographic and lifestyle factors: The multiethnic cohort study. Journal of Nutrition 2005;135:843-49. Park Y, Leitzmann MF, Subar AF, Hollenbeck A, Schatzkin A. Dairy Food, Calcium, and Risk of Cancer in the NIH-AARP. Diet and Health Study. Archives of Internal Medicine 2009;169:391-401. Parkin DM. International Variation Oncogene 2004;23:6329- 40. Parkin DM, Olsen AH, Sasieni P. The potential for prevention of colorectal cancer in the UK. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2009;18: 179-90. Parnaud G, Corpet DE. Colorectal cancer - controversial role of meat consumption. Bulletin du Cancer 1997;84:899-911. Parnaud G, Pignatelli B, Peiffer G, Tache S, Corpet DE. Endogenous N-nitroso compounds, and their precursors, present in bacon, do not initiate or promote aberrant crypt foci in the colon of rats. Nutrition and Cancer-An International Journal 2000;38:74-80. − 86− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Parr CL, Hjartaker A, Lund E, Veierod MB. Meat intake cooking methods and risk of proximal colon distal colon and rectal cancer: The Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) cohort study. International Journal of Cancer 2013; 133: 1153-1163. Parthasarathy DK, Bryan NS. Sodium nitrite: The "cure" for nitric oxide insufficiency. Meat Science 2012;92:SI274-79. Paturi G, Nyanhanda T, Butts CA, Herath TD, Monro JA, Ansell J. Effects of Potato Fiber and Potato-Resistant Starch on Biomarkers of Colonic Health in Rats Fed Diets Containing Red Meat. Journal of Food Science 2012; 277:H216-23. Pedersen M, Halldorsson TI, Autrup H, Brouwer A, Besselink H, Loft S et al. Maternal diet and dioxin-like activity, bulky DNA adducts and micronuclei in mother-newborns. Mutation research-fundamental and molecular mechanisms of mutagenesis 2012;734:12-1. Pegg RB, Shahidi F, Fox Jr JB. Unraveling the chemical identity of meat pigments. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 1997;37: 561– 589 Peng H, Xie SK, Huang MJ, Ren DL. Associations of CYP2E1 rs2031920 and rs3813867 polymorphisms with colorectal cancer risk: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Tumor Biology 2013; 34:2389-95. Pennings B, Groen BBL, van Dijk JW, de Lange A, Kiskini A, Kuklinski M, Senden JMG, van Loon LJC. Minced beef is more rapidly digested and absorbed than beef steak, resulting in greater postprandial protein retention in older Men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2013; 98:121-28. Pérez-Cueto FJ, Verbeke W. Consumer implications of the WCRF's permanent update on colorectal cancer. Meat Science 2012;90:977–8. Phillips SM. Nutrient-rich meat proteins in offsetting age-related muscle loss. Meat Science 2012;92:SI174-8. Pierre F, Freeman A, Tache S, Van der Meer R, Corpet DE. Beef meat and blood sausage promote the formation of azoxymethane-induced mucin-depleted foci and aberrant crypt foci in rat colons. Journal of Nutrition 2004;134:2711-16. Pierre F, Peiro G, Tache S, Cross AJ, Gasc N, Gottardi G et al. New marker of colon cancer risk associated with heme intake: 1,4-dihydroxynonane mercapturic acid. Cancer epidemiology biomarkers and prevention 2006;15:2274-79. Pierre FH, Santarelli RL, Allam O, Tache S, Naud N, Gueraud F et al. Freeze-dried ham promotes azoxymethane-induced mucin-depleted foci and aberrant crypt foci in rat colon. Nutr Cancer 2010;62:567-73. Pöhlmann M, Hitzel A, Schwägele F, Speer K, Jira W. Contents of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and phenolic substances in Frankfurter-type sausages depending on smoking conditions using glow smoke. Meat Sci. 2012;90:176-84. Pomerleau J, McKee M, Lobstein T, Knai C. The burden of disease attributable to nutrition in Europe Public. Health Nutrition 2003;6:453–61. Pou SA, Diaz MD, Osella AR. Applying multilevel model to the relationship of dietary patterns and colorectal cancer: an ongoing case-control study in Cordoba, Argentina. European Journal of Nutrition 2012;51: 755-64. Powell TW, Lenton TM. Future carbon dioxide removal via biomass energy constrained by agricultural efficiency and dietary trends Energy and Environmental Science 2012;5:8116-33. Programme National Nutrition Santé. Nutrition & Prévention des cancers :des connaissances scientifiques aux recommandations. France;2009. Available from : URL :< http://www.hnpcc-lynch.com/INCa_brochure_pnns_nutrition160209.pdf> Prynne CJ, Wagemakers JJ, Stephen AM, Wadsworth ME. Meat consumption after disaggregation of meat dishes in a cohort of British adults in 1989 and 1999 in relation to diet quality. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2009;63:660–66. Puangsombat K, Gadgil P, Houser TA, Hunt MC, Scott SJ. Occurrence of heterocyclic amines in cooked meat products. Meat science 2012;90:739-46. − 87− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Purchas RW, Rutherfurd SM, Pearce PD, Vather R, Wilkinson BH. Cooking temperature effects on the forms of iron and levels of several other compounds in beef semitendinosus muscle. Meat Science 2004;68:201–7. Qian J, Song ZF, Lv YX, Huang XF. CYP2E1 T7632A and 9-bp insertion polymorphisms and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis based on 4,592 cases and 5,918 controls. Tumor Biology 2013; 34:2225-31 Qian SY, Buettner GR. Iron and dioxygen chemistry is an important route to initiation of biological free radical oxidations: An electron paramagnetic resonance spin trapping study. Free radical biology and medicine 1999; 26(11-12):1447-56. Qiao L,Feng Y. Intakes of heme iron and zinc and colorectal cancer incidence: a metaanalysis of prospective studies. Cancer Causes & Control 2013; 24:1175-83. Raes K, De Smet S & Demeyer D. Effect of dietary fatty acids on incorporation of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid in lamb, beef and pork meat: a review. Animal feed science and technology 2004;113:199-221. Rainis T, Maor I, Lanir A, Shnizer S, Lavy A. Enhanced Oxidative Stress and Leucocyte Activation in Neoplastic Tissues of the Colon. Dig Dis Sci 2007; 52:526–30. Rakoff-Nahoum S, Medzhitov R. Innate immune recognition of the indigenous microbial flora. Mucosal Immunol 2008;S10–S4. Ramos A, Cabrera MC, Saadoun A. Bioaccessibility of Se, Cu, Zn, Mn and Fe, and heme iron content in unaged and aged meat of Hereford and Braford steers fed pasture. Meat science 2012;91:116-24. Randi G, Edefonti V, Ferraroni M, La Vecchia C, Decarli A. Dietary patterns and the risk of colorectal cancer and adenomas. Nutrition reviews 2010;68:389-408. Reedy J, Wirfalt E, Flood A, Mitrou PN, Krebs-Smith SM, Kipnis V et al. Comparing 3 Dietary Pattern Methods-Cluster Analysis, Factor Analysis, and Index Analysis-With Colorectal Cancer Risk. American Journal of Epidemiology 2010;171:479-87. Rémond D, Machebeuf M, Yven C, Buffière C, Mioche L, Mosoni L et al. Postprandial wholebody protein metabolism after a meat meal is influenced by chewing efficiency in elderly subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 2007;85:1286-92. Rodriguez-Sanchez DG, Pacheco A,Garcia-Cruz MI,Gutierrez-Uribe JA ,Benavides-Lozano JA, Hernandez-Brenes C . Isolation and Structure Elucidation of Avocado Seed (Persea americana) Lipid Derivatives That Inhibit Clostridium sporogenes Endospore Germination. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2013;61:7403-11. Rohrmann S, Overvad K, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Jakobsen MU, Egeberg R, Tjønneland A et al. Meat consumption and mortality - results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. BMC Medicine 2013;11:63. Rohrmann S, Hermann S, Linseisen J. Heterocyclic aromatic amine intake increases colorectal adenoma risk: findings from a prospective European cohort study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2009;89:1418-24. Rohr-Udilova NV, Stolze K, Sagmeister S, Nohl H, Schulte-Hermann R, Grasl-Kraupp B. Lipid hydroperoxides from processed dietary oils enhance growth of hepatocarcinoma cells. Mol Nutr Food Res 2008;52:352-59. Romaguera D, Angquist L, Du HD, Jakobsen MU, Forouhi NG, Halkjaer J et al. Food Composition of the Diet in Relation to Changes in Waist Circumference Adjusted for Body Mass Index. PLoS ONE 2011;6:Article No e23384. Rooke JA, Flockhart JF, Sparks NH. The potential for increasing the concentrations of micronutrients relevant to human nutrition in meat, milk and eggs.The Journal of Agricultural Science 2010;148:pp 603-14. Rosato V, Bosetti C, Levi F, Polesel J, Zucchetto A, Negri E et al. Risk factors for young-onset colorectal cancer. Cancer Causes and Control 2013;24:335-41. Ross HD, Henion J, Babish J, Hotchkiss JH. Nitrosating Agents from the Reaction Between Methyl Oleate and Dinitrogen Trioxide: Identification and Mutagenicity. Food Chemistry 1987;23:207-22. − 88− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Rounds L, Havens CM, Feinstein Y, Friedman M, Ravishankar S.Concentration-dependent inhibition of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and heterocyclic amines in heated ground beef patties by apple and olive extracts, onion powder and clove bud oil. Meat Science 2013; 94: 461-467. Ruder EH, Thiebaut AC, Thompson FE, Potischman N, Subar AF, Park Y et al. Adolescent and mid-life diet: risk of colorectal cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2011;94:1607-19. Rywotycki R. Meat nitrosamine contamination level depending on animal breeding factors. Meat Science 2003;65:669-75. Rywotycki R. The effect of baking of various kinds of raw meat from different animal species and meat with functional additives on nitrosamine contamination level. Food Chemistry 2007;101:540–48. Saebo M, Skjelbred CF, Li KB, Lothe IM, Hagen PC, Johnsen E et al. CYP1A2 164 A -> C polymorphism, cigarette smoking, consumption of well-done red meat and risk of developing colorectal adenomas and carcinomas. Anticancer research 2008;28:2289-95. Saffhill R, Margison GP, Oconnor PJ. Mechanisms of carcinogenesis induced by alkylatingagents 1985. Sainani K. The Limitations of Statistical Adjustment. PM and R 2011;3:868-72. Sanford KW, McPherson RA. Fecal Occult Blood Testing. Clin Lab Med 2009;29:523–41. Santarelli RL, Naud N, Taché S, Guéraud F, Vendeuvre J-L, Zhou L et al. Calcium Inhibits Promotion by Hot Dog of 1,2-Dimethylhydrazine-Induced Mucin-Depleted Foci in Rat Colon. International Journal of Cancer 2013. Santarelli RL ,Pierre F, Corpet DE. Processed meat and colorectal cancer: A review of epidemiologic and experimental evidence. Nutrition and Cancer International Journal 2008;60:131-44. Santarelli RL, Vendeuvre JL, Naud N, Tache S, Gueraud F, Viau M et al. Meat Processing and Colon Carcinogenesis: Cooked, Nitrite-Treated, and Oxidized High-Heme Cured Meat Promotes Mucin-Depleted Foci in Rats. Cancer Prevention Research 2010;3:852-64. Satia JA, Tseng M, Galanko JA, Martin C & Sandler RS (2009) Dietary Patterns and Colon Cancer Risk in Whites and African Americans in the North Carolina Colon Cancer Study Nutrition and cancer-an international journal 61 (2) 179-193 Sato Y, Nakaya N, Kuriyama S, Nishino Y, Tsubono Y, Tsuji I. Meat consumption and risk of colorectal cancer in Japan: The Miyagi cohort study. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2006;15:211-18. Scarborough P, Allender S, Clarke D, Wickramasinghe K, Rayner M. Modelling the health impact of environmentally sustainable dietary scenarios in the UK European. Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012;66:710-15. Schipper HM. Neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation Clinical syndromes and neuroimaging. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta-Molecular Basis of Disease 2012;1822:SIPages:350-60. Schmid A, Badertscher R, Scherrer D, Portmann R, Dubois S, Spahni M et al. Nutrient composition of Swiss cured cooked meat. Fleischwirtschaft 2011;91:97-100. Schönfeldt HC, Hall NG. Determining iron bio-availability with a constant heme iron value. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2011;24:738–40. Schönfeldt HC, Hall NG. Consumer education on the health benefits of red meat - A multidisciplinary approach. Food Research International 2012;47:SI152-5. Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition. Iron and Health Report UK;2010. Available from: URL:<http://www.sacn.gov.uk/pdfs/sacn_iron and_health_report_web.pdf > Selgas MD, Salazar P, Garcia ML. Usefulness of calcium lactate, citrate and gluconate for calcium enrichment of dry fermented sausages. Meat science 2009;82:478-80. Sesink AL, Termont DS, Kleibeuker JH, Van der Meer R. Red meat and colon cancer: The cytotoxic and hyperproliferative effects of dietary heme. Cancer Research 1999;59:5704-09. − 89− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Sesink AL, Termont DS, Kleibeuker JH, Van der Meer R. Red meat and colon cancer: dietary haem-induced colonic cytotoxicity and epithelial hyperproliferation are inhibited by calcium. Carcinogenesis 2001;22:1653-59. Shahidi F, Rubin LJ, Wood DF. Control of lipid oxidation in cooked ground pork with antioxidants and dinitrosyl ferrohemochrome. Journal of Food Science 1987;52:564-67. Shaughnessy DT, Gangarosa LM, Schliebe B, Umbach DM, Xu ZL, MacIntosh B et al. Inhibition of Fried Meat-Induced Colorectal DNA Damage and Altered Systemic Genotoxicity in Humans by Crucifera, Chlorophyllin, and Yogurt. PLOS ONE 2011;6:Art.No.e18707. Shena X, Zhoua J, Donga J, Dinga W, Wu J. Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis Dietary intake of n-3 fatty acids and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of data from 489 000 individuals. British Journal of Nutrition 2012;108:1550-56. Shin A, Joo J, Bak J, Yang HR, Kim J, Park S et al. Site-Specific Risk Factors for Colorectal Cancer in a Korean Population. PLoS ONE 2011;8:Art.No.e23196. Sindelar JJ, Milkowski AL. Human safety controversies surrounding nitrate and nitrite in the diet Nitric Oxide. Biology and Chemistry 2012;26: SI259-66. Sinha R, Graubard BI, Cross AJ, Leitzmann MF, Schatzkin A. In reply. Arch intern med 2009;169:1539. Sinha R, Kulldorff M, Gunter MJ, Strickland P, Rothman N. Dietary Benzo[a]Pyrene Intake and Risk of Colorectal Adenoma Cancer. Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:2030-4. Sirota R, Gorelik S, Harris R, Kohen R, Kanner J. Coffee polyphenols protect human plasma from postprandial carbonyl modifications Molecular Nutrition & Food Research 2013; 57: 916919. Skibsted LH. Nitric oxide and quality and safety of muscle based foods. Nitric Oxide 2011;24:176–83. Smith JS, Ameri F, Gadgil P. Effect of marinades on the formation of heterocyclic amines in grilled beef steaks. Journal of Food Science 2008;73 :T100-T05. Smolinska K & Paluszkiewicz P. Risk of colorectal cancer in relation to frequency and total amount of red meat consumption. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Archives of Medical Science 2010;6:605-10. Spencer EA, Key TJ, Appleby PN, Dahm CC, Keogh RH, Fentiman IS et al. Meat, poultry and fish and risk of colorectal cancer: pooled analysis of data from the UK dietary cohort consortium. Cancer Causes and Control 2010;21:1417-25. Squires J, Roebothan B, Buehler S, Sun ZY, Cotterchio M, Younghusband B et al. Pickled meat consumption and colorectal cancer (CRC): a case-control study in Newfoundland and Labrador. Cancer Causes and Control 2010;21:1513-21. Steinberg P. Endogenously formed N-nitroso compounds: A new group of colon carcinogens relevant to man? Ernahrungs-Umschau 2009;56:332-37. Stoltzfus RJ. Defining Iron-Deficiency Anemia in Public Health Terms: A Time for Reflection. J. Nutr. 2001;131: 565S–7S. Stuff JR, Goh ET, Barrera SL, Bondy ML, Forman MR. Construction of an N-nitroso database for assessing dietary intake. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2009;22S:S42–S47. Sugimura T. Overview of carcinogenic heterocyclic amines. Mutation Research 1997;376:211– 19. Sun WQ, Zhou GH, Xu XL, Peng ZQ. Studies on the structure and oxidation properties of extracted cooked cured meat pigment by four spectra. Food Chemistry 2009;115:596–601. Sun ZY, Liu L, Wang PP, Roebothan B, Zhao J, Dicks E et al. Association of total energy intake and macronutrient consumption with colorectal cancer risk: results from a large population-based case-control. Study in Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario, Canada. Nutrition Journal 2012;11:Art. No.18. SHC – Superior Health Council & SciCom FASFC – Scientific Committee of the Federal Agency for the Safety of the Food Chain. Joint advisory report. Reformulation of foodstuffs – salt reduction. Brussels: SHC; 2012. Advisory report n°8663. − 90− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Symons TB, Sheffield-Moore M, Wolfe RR, Paddon-jones D. A Moderate Serving of HighQuality Protein Maximally Stimulates Skeletal Muscle Protein Synthesis in Young and Elderly Subjects. J Am Diet Assoc 2009;109:1582-86. Szterk A, Roszko M, Malek K, Kurek M, Zbiec M, Waszkiewicz-Robak B. Profiles and concentrations of heterocyclic aromatic amines formed in beef during various heat treatments depend on the time of ripening and muscle type. Meat Science 2012;92:587-95. Tabatabaei SM, Fritschi L, Knuiman MW, Boyle T, Iacopetta BJ, Platell C et al. Meat consumption and cooking practices and the risk of colorectal cancer. European Journal of clinical nutrition 2011;65:668-75. Tabatabaei SM, Heyworth JS, Knuiman MW, Fritschi L. (2010) Dietary Benzo[a]pyrene Intake from Meat and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19:3182-84. Takachi R, Tsubono Y, Baba K, Inoue M, Sasazuki S, Iwasaki M et al. Red meat intake may increase the risk of colon cancer in Japanese, a population with relatively low red meat consumption. Asia pacific journal of clinical nutrition 2011;20:603-12. Takahashi M, Nishikawa A, Furukawa F, Hasegawa T, Hayashi Y. Dose-dependent promoting effects of sodium chloride (NaCI) on rat glandular stomach carcinogenesis initiated with Nmethyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine. Carcinogenesis 1994;15:1429-32. Temme EH, van der Voet H, Roodenburg AJ, Bulder A, van Donkersgoed G, van Klaveren J. Impact of foods with health logo on saturated fat, sodium and sugar intake of young Dutch adults. Public health nutrition 2011;14:635-44. Terzic J, Grivennikov S, Karin E, Karin M. Inflammation and Colon Cancer Gastroenterology 2010;138:2101-U119. Thiebaud HP, Knize MG, Kuzmicky PA, Hsieh DP, Felton JS. Airborne mutagens produced by frying beef, pork and a soy-based food. Food and chemical toxicology 1995;33:821-28. Toden S, Belobrajdic DP, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. Effects of Dietary Beef and Chicken With and Without High Amylose Maize Starch on Blood Malondialdehyde, Interleukins, IGF-I, Insulin, Leptin, MMP-2, and TIMP-2 Concentrations in Rats Nutrition and cancer. International journal 2010; 62:454-65. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. High red meat diets induce greater numbers of colonic DNA double-strand breaks than white meat in rats: attenuation by high-amylose maize starch. Carcinogenesis 2007;28:2355-62. Tomovic VM, Petrovic LS, Tomovic MS, Kevresan ZS, Dzinic NR. Determination of mineral contents of semimembranosus muscle and liver from pure and crossbred pigs in Vojvodina. Food Chemistry 2011;124:342-48. Tricker AR, Preussmann R. Carcinogenic n-nitrosamines in the diet - occurrence, formation, mechanisms and carcinogenic potential. Mutation research 1991;259:277-89. Tricker AR. N-nitroso compounds and man: sources of exposure, endogenous formation and occurrence in body fluids. European Journal of Cancer prevention 1997;6:226-68. Tudek B, Speina E. Oxidatively damaged DNA and its repair in colon. Carcinogenesis Mutation Research-Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis 2012;736:SI8292. Tussing-Humphreys L, Pustacioglu C, Nemeth E, Braunschweig C. Rethinking Iron Regulation and Assessment in Iron Deficiency, Anemia of Chronic Disease, and Obesity: Introducing Hepcidin. Journal of the academy of nutrition and dietetics 2012;112:391-400. Valencia-Martin JL, Galan I, Rodriguez-Artalejo F. The Association Between Alcohol Consumption Patterns and Adherence to Food Consumption. Guidelines Alcoholism-Clinical and experimental research 2011;35:2075-81. van den Brandt PA, Goldbohm RA. Nutrition in the prevention of gastrointestinal cancer. Best practice & research in clinical gastroenterology 2006;20:589-603. van Grinsven HJM, Rabl A, de Kok TM. Estimation of incidence and social cost of colon cancer due to nitrate in drinking water in the EU: a tentative cost-benefit assessment. Environmental health 2010;9:Article Nr. 58. − 91− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be van Leeuwen FX. Health impact of chemicals in food. WHO Consultation on Global Burden of Foodborne Diseases. Geneva; 2006. Van Lieshout EM, Van Doesburg W, Van der Meer R. Real-time PCR of host DNA in feces to study differential exfoliation of colonocytes between rats and humans. Scand J Gastroenterol 2004;39:852-7. Van Winckel M, Van de Velde SV, De Bruyne R, Van Biervliet S. Clinical practice: Vegetarian infant and child nutrition. European Journal of Pediatrics 2011;170:1489-94. Vandendriessche F. Meat products in the past, today and in the future. Meat Science 2008;78:104-13. Vandevijvere S, Van Oyen H. Sodium intake in the Belgian population - Research limitations and policy implications. Arch Public Health 2008;66:187-95. Vandevijvere S, De Keyzer W, Chapelle JP, Jeanne D, Mouillet G, Huybrechts I et al. Estimate of total salt intake in two regions of Belgium through analysis of sodium in 24-h urine samples. Eur J Clin Nutr 2010;64:1260-5. Vandevijvere S, De Vriese S, Huybrechts I, Moreau M, Temme E, De Henauw S et al. The gap between food-based dietary guidelines and usual food consumption in Belgium 2004. Public Health Nutrition 2009;12:423-31. Vanhaecke L, Derycke L, Le Curieux F, Lust S, Marzin D, Verstraete W et al. The microbial PhIP metabolite 7-hydroxy-5-methyl-3-phenyl-6,7,8,9-tetrahydropyrido [3_,2_:4,5]imidazo[1,2a]pyrimidin-5-ium chloride (PhIP-M1) induces DNA damage, apoptosis and cell cycle arrest towards Caco-2 cells. Toxicology Letters 2008;178:61-9. Vanham D, Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY. The water footprint of the EU for different diets Ecological Indicators 2013; 32: 1-8. Vanhauwaert E. De actieve Voedingsdriehoek. Uitgeverij Acco, Leuven. 2012. Available from: URL:<http://issuu.com/vigez/docs/de_actieve_voedingsdriehoek> van Meer S, Leufkens AM, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, van Duijnhoven FJB, van Oijen MGH, Siersema PD. Role of dietary factors in survival and mortality in colorectal cancer: a systematic review. Nutrition Reviews 2013 ;71 :631-41. Vaucher P, Druais PL, Waldvogel S, Favrat B. Effect of iron supplementation on fatigue in nonanemic menstruating women with low ferritin: a randomized controlled trial. CMAJ 2012. Ventanas S, Ventanas J, Jurado A, Estévez M. Quality traits in muscle biceps femoris and back-fat from purebred Iberian and reciprocal Iberian x Duroc crossbred pigs. Meat Science 2006;73:651-59. Verginelli F, Bishehsari F, Napolitano F, Mahdavinia M, Cama A, Malekzadeh R et al. Transitions at CpG Dinucleotides, Geographic Clustering of TP53 Mutations and Food Availability Patterns in Colorectal Cancer. Plos One 2009; 4: Art.No.e6824. Viegas O, Amaro LF, Ferreira IM, Pinho O. Inhibitory Effect of Antioxidant-Rich Marinades on the Formation of Heterocyclic Aromatic Amines in Pan-Fried Beef. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2012a;60:6235-40. Viegas O, Novo P, Pinto E, Pinho O, Ferreira IM. Effect of charcoal types and grilling conditions on formation of heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) in grilled muscle foods. Food and Chemical Toxicology 2012;50:2128-34. Vinnari M, Montonen J, Harkanen T, Mannisto S. Identifying vegetarians and their food consumption according to self-identification and operationalized definition in Finland. Public Health Nutrition 2009;12:481-88. VLAM - Vlaams Centrum voor Agro- en Visserijmarketing. Marktinfo: vlees. Belgische vleessector in cijfers. Available from: URL: <http://www.vlam.be/facts/info nl.phtml?id=7> Vossen E, Doolaege EH, Moges HD, De Meulenaer B, Szczepaniak S, Raes K et al. Effect of sodium ascorbate dose on the shelf life stability of reduced nitrite liver pates. Meat science 2012;91:29-35. − 92− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Voutsinas J, Wilkens LR, Franke A, Vogt TM, Yokochi LA, Decker R et al. Heterocyclic amine intake, smoking, cytochrome P450 1A2 and N-acetylation phenotypes, and risk of colorectal adenoma in a multiethnic population. Gut 2013;62:416-22. Wadge A, Pennington H, Usborne WR. Perspectives food safety challenges. Journal of the Science of Food And Agriculture 2004;84:1079-82. Waegeneers N, Thiry C, De Temmerman L, Ruttens A. Predicted dietary intake of selenium by the general adult population in Belgium. Food Additives and Contaminants Part A. Chemistry Analysis Control Exposure and Risk Assessment 2013;30:278-85. Wang J, Joshi AD, Corral R, Siegmund KD, Le Marchand L, Martinez ME et al. Carcinogen metabolism genes, red meat and poultry intake, and colorectal cancer risk. Int J Cancer 2012;130:1898–1907. Wang Y, Beydoun MA. Meat consumption is associated with obesity and central obesity among US adults. International Journal of Obesity 2009;33:621-28. Watson AJM, Collins PD. Colon Cancer: A Civilization Disorder. Digestive diseases 2011;29:222-8. WCRF - World Cancer Research Fund. WCRF global network's diet and cancer report. 2012. Available from: URL<http://www.dietandcancerreport.org/index.php> WCRF/AICR - World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. Second expert report- Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global perspective. Research Methodology 2007a. Available from: URL:<http://www.dietandcancerreport.org/expert_report/scientific_process/methodology.php> WCRF/AICR - World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. WCRF/AICR Systematic Literature Review Continuous Update Project Report. 2011. Available from: URL:< http://www.wcrf.org/PDFs/Colorectal-cancer-CUP-report-2010.pdf> WCRF/AICR - World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. 2007. Available from: URL:<http://www.dietandcancerreport.org/cancer_resource_center/downloads/ Second_Expert_Report_full.pdf> Weiss G. Iron metabolism in the anemia of chronic disease. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 2009;1790:682–93. Westbrook A.M, Szakmary A, Schiestl RH. Mechanisms of intestinal inflammation and development of associated cancers: lessons learned from mouse models. Mutat Res 2010;705:40–59. WHO – World Health Organisation. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases. Report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation. WHO 2003;919:148. WHO – World Health Organisation. Vitamin B12, Vitamin and mineral requirements in human nutrition. WHO 2004;279-88. Available from: URL:<(http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2004/9241546123.pdf> Wicki A, Hagmann J. Diet and cancer. Swiss Med Wkly 2011;141:w13250. Williams CD, Satia JA, Adair LS, Stevens J, Galanko J, Keku TO et al. Associations of Red Meat, Fat, and Protein Intake With Distal Colorectal Cancer. Risk Nutr Cancer 2010;62:701-9. Windey K, De Preter V, Verbeke K. Relevance of protein fermentation to gut health. Molecular nutrition and food research 2012;6:184-96. Windey K, De Preter V, Louat T, Schuit F, Herman J. Modulation of protein fermentation does not affect fecal water toxicity: a randomized cross-over study in healthy subjects. PLoS ONE 2012a;7:e52387. Winter J, Nyskohus L, Young GP, Hu Y, Conlon M, Bird A et al. High Red Meat-Induced Promutagenic Adducts in the Mouse and Human Colon and Their Inhibition by Resistant Starch. Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis 2012;53: S1-S26. − 93− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Winter J, Nyskohus L, Young GP, Hu Y, Conlon MA, Bird AR et al. Inhibition by Resistant Starch of Red Meat-Induced Promutagenic Adducts in Mouse Colon. Cancer Pevention Research 2011;4:1920-28. Woolford G, Cassens RG. The fate of sodium nitrite in bacon. Journal of Food Science 1977;42:586-9. Wu MC, Ma CY, Yang CC, Kao WC, Shen SC. The formation of IQ type mutagens from Maillard reaction in ethanolic solution. Food chemistry 2011;125:582-7. Wu SJ, Feng B, Li K, Zhu X, Liang SH, Liu XF et al. Fish Consumption and Colorectal Cancer Risk in Humans: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. American Journal of Medicine 2012;125:551-69. Xu XD, Yu ED, Gao XH, Song N, Liu LJ, Wei XB et al. Red and processed meat intake and risk of colorectal adenomas: A meta-analysis of observational studies. International Journal of Cancer 2013;132:437-48. Yarnall JM, Crouch DJM, Lewis CM. Incorporating non-genetic risk factors and behavioural modifications into risk prediction models for colorectal cancer Cancer Epidemiology 2013; 37: 324-329. Yoshida K, Osawa K, Kasahara M, Miyaishi A, Nakanishi K, Hayamizu S et al. Association of CYP1A1, CYP1A2, GSTM1 and NAT2 gene polymorphisms with colorectal cancer risk and smoking. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention 2008;8:438-44. Yu H, Pardoll D, Jove R. STATs in cancer inflammation and immunity: a leading role for STAT3. Nat Rev Cancer 2009;9:798–809. Yurchenko S, Mölder U. Volatile N-nitrosamines in various fish products. Food Chem 2006;96:325-33. Yurchenko S, Mölder U. The occurrence of volatile N-nitrosamines in Estonian meat products. Food Chemistry 2007;100:1713-21. Zanardi E, Ghidini S, Battaglia A, Chizzolini R. Lipolysis and lipid oxidation in fermented sausages depending on different processing conditions and different antioxidants. Meat Sci 2004;66:415-23. Zhang JJ, Dhakal IB, Zhao ZJ, Li L. Trends in mortality from cancers of the breast, colon, prostate, esophagus, and stomach in East Asia: role of nutrition transition. European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2012;21:480-9. Zhang LQ, Zhou JN, Wang J, Liang GD, Li JY, Zhu YD et al. Absence of Association between N-Acetyltransferase 2 Acetylator Status and Colorectal Cancer Susceptibility: Based on Evidence from 40 Studies. PLoS ONE 2012a;7: e32425. Zhang XH, Giovannucci EL, Smith-Warner SA, Wu K, Fuchs CS, Pollak M et al. A prospective study of intakes of zinc and heme iron and colorectal cancer risk in men and women. Cancer Causes and Control 2011;22:1627-37. Zhang Y, Yu CD, Mei JB, Wang S. Formation and mitigation of heterocyclic aromatic amines in fried pork. Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-Chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment 2013;30:1501-07. Zhao Y, Han YS, Zhang L, Wang YC,Ma YS, Zhang F, Fu D, Wang XF. Quantitative Assessment of the Effect of Cytochrome P450 2C9 Gene Polymorphism and Colorectal Cancer. PLOS ONE 2013;8:Article Number:e60607. Zhao ZQ, Guan QK, Yang FY, Zhao P, Zhou B, Chen ZJ. System review and meta-analysis of the relationships between five metabolic gene polymorphisms and colorectal adenoma risk. Tumor biology 2012;33:SI - 523-35. Zheng W, Lee SA. Well-Done Meat Intake, Heterocyclic Amine Exposure, and Cancer Risk Nutrition and cancer. International Journal 2009;61:437-46. Zhong X, Fang YJ, Pan ZZ, Li B, Wang L,Zheng MC, Chen YM, Zhang CX. Dietary fat, fatty acid intakes and colorectal cancer risk in Chinese adults: a case-control study .European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2013;22:438-47. − 94− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be Zhu Y, Peng ZQ, Wang M, Wang RR, Rui LM. Optimization of extraction procedure for formaldehyde assay in smoked meat Products. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2012;28:1-7. Zhu Y, Wu H, Wang PP, Savas S, Woodrow J, Wish T et al. Dietary patterns and colorectal cancer recurrence and survival: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2013;3:e002270. zur Hausen H. Red meat consumption and cancer: Reasons to suspect involvement of bovine infectious factors in colorectal cancer. International Journal of Cancer 2012;130:2475-83. − 95− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Short of inconceivable randomized controlled clinical trials with colo-rectal cancer incidence as outcome, the colorectal carcinogenic effect of red meat and processed red meats has been demonstrated beyond doubt, both in epidemiology as well as in experimental work with both animals and humans. It seems clear that the major carcinogen involved is heme although considerable evidence points to the negative effect of heterocyclic amines formed by over-heating red meat and apparent from an extreme brown/charred appearance. It is not clear however why the carcinogenic effect of fresh red meats is only about half that of processed (cured) meats. In Belgium, cured meats are almost exclusively derived from pig meat and both the higher fat and salt content compared to fresh meat may be involved. Further research on the issue is clearly required. Also, in view of the newer insights: - contrasting health effects of individual foods vs. those of a dietary pattern both in intervention trials with animals or, preferably, humans using CRC markers and using in vitro digestive systems - the possibilities for animal production, meat processing and domestic food preparation to incorporate cancer mitigating components and /or processes (applied) research in these areas should be promoted. Work should preferably involve: - the development of « functional meat products » incorporating components mitigating carcinogenesis through animal (pig) feeding (e.g. plant derived antioxidants) and/or meat processing (e.g. Calcium salts, fibrous components, minor plant components, ..). - experiments testing such diets/products fed to animals (e.g. rodents, pigs) or to in vitro digestive systems evaluating colon epithelial changes and/or oxidative status of digestive contents. - intervention experiments with humans involving testing of processed red meats, analogous to e.g. the recent work described in Windey et al (2012a) Also in Belgium, research along these lines has recently been initiated by the Federal Public Service (FPS) Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment: RF 11/6250 MEATNOX “Vorming en (geno)toxische activiteit van nitros(yl)atie- en oxidatieproducten in het gastrointestinaal stelsel: rol van nitrietgepekelde vleesproducten en preventie.” − 96− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be 6 COMPOSITION OF THE WORKING GROUP All experts joined the working group in a private capacity. The names of the members and experts of the Superior Health Council are indicated with an asterisk*. The following experts were involved in drawing up the advice : DE BACKER Guy* DE HENAUW Stefaan* DELZENNE Nathalie* DEMEYER Daniel DE SMET Stefaan HERMAN Lieve MAGHUIN-ROGISTER Guy* MERTENS Birgit PAQUOT Nicolas* PEETERS Marc VANCAMP John* Preventive medicine, public health, epidemiology Public health nutrition Nutrition, toxicology Nutrition, animal production&meat technology Animal nutrition and animal product quality Technology and food Food analysis Toxicology, genotoxicity Nutrition, metabolic and endocrine systems Oncology Nutritional value of food, nutrition and health UGent UGent UCL UGent UGent ILVO ULg WIV ULg UZA UGent The working group was chaired by Guy MAGHUIN-ROGISTER, the scientific secretary was Michèle ULENS. − 97− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be About the Superior Health Council (SHC) The Superior Health Council is a federal body that is part of the Federal Public Service Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment. It was founded in 1849 and provides scientific advisory reports on public health issues to the Ministers of Public Health and the Environment, their administration, and a few agencies. These advisory reports are drawn up on request or on the SHC's own initiative. The SHC takes no decisions on the policies to follow, nor does it implement them. It does, however, aim at giving guidance to political decision-makers on public health matters. It does this on the basis of the most recent scientific knowledge Apart from its 25-member internal secretariat, the Council draws upon a vast network of over 500 experts (university professors, members of scientific institutions), 200 of whom are appointed experts of the Council. These experts meet in multidisciplinary working groups in order to write the advisory reports. As an official body, the Superior Health Council takes the view that it is of key importance to guarantee that the scientific advisory reports it issues are neutral and impartial. In order to do so, it has provided itself with a structure, rules and procedures with which these requirements can be met efficiently at each stage of the coming into being of the advisory reports. The key stages in the latter process are: 1) the preliminary analysis of the request, 2) the appointing of the experts within the working groups, 3) the implementation of the procedures for managing potential conflicts of interest (based on the declaration of interest, the analysis of possible conflicts of interest, and a referring committee) and 4) the final endorsement of the advisory reports by the Board (ultimate decision-making body). This coherent set of procedures aims at allowing the SHC to issue advisory reports based on the highest level of scientific expertise available whilst maintaining all possible impartiality. The advisory reports drawn up by the working groups are submitted to the Board. Once they have been endorsed, they are sent to those who requested them as well as to the Minister of Public Health and are subsequently published on the SHC website (www.shc-belgium.be), except as regards confidential advisory reports. Some of them are also communicated to the press and to target groups among healthcare professionals. The SHC is also an active partner in developing the EuSANH network (European Science Advisory Network for Health), which aims at drawing up advisory reports at the European level. In order to receive notification about the activities and publications of the SHC, you can send a mail to [email protected] − 98− Superior Health Council rue de l’Autonomie 4 ● 1070 Brussels ● www.shc-belgium.be