3 ms·

Title says read meat, article says it’s actually the iron and genetic factors?

ericmcer 2y ago
Also it doesn't cause the cancer, but iron expedites growth of colorectal cancer cells? Seems clickbaity if I am reading it right.
SoftTalker 2y ago
Iron is an essential part of your diet if you want to continue living. So it boils down to genetics, which is probably most cancers.
- mattmaroon 2y ago
  A lot of things that are necessary for living to become harmful in too high of a quantity.
- sevensor 2y ago
  There are lots of different irons though, as I recall from chemistry class. I wouldn’t assume that every form of iron you ingest is equally carcinogenic.
- lizknope 2y ago
  Of course you need iron to live but many times too much of something leads to bad consequences. The previous studies I have looked at point to heme vs non-heme iron sources. The heme iron comes from animal sources and is easier for the human body to absorb than plant based non-heme iron but the heme iron may be leading to cancer growth.
  - SoftTalker 2y ago
    Toxicity from too much iron is something different and very well known for a long time.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  Next step is genetic statistical analysis of the cohorts susceptible to iron induced cancer to determine gene therapy targets.
aabhay 2y ago
> So, to reiterate, the researchers found that the iron in red meat reactivated telomerase in colorectal cancer cells, thus driving the progression of the cancer.
vharuck 2y ago
Researchers have long known about the positive correlation between how much red meat a person eats and that person's chance of developing colorectal cancer. There are plenty of large behavioral health surveys that show this. So the audience for this article will understand the context. Heck, they might even find this article by searching "red meat colorectal cancer" in a database.
mfer 2y ago
It's more complicated than that. For example, why do those who eat mostly plant based (I mean real plants and not processed foods) have lower rates of cancer if both sides get iron? Iron is essential to live. It could have something to do with amount. For example, Iron from animal products is easier for the body to absorb and there are MUCH higher levels per gram (e.g., beef has 7x the iron kale does). Is it too much iron? It could be type. You have FE2+, FE3+, heme iron, non-heme iron, etc. This article points to FE3+. Is there something more there? Is it some combination of things? There's a lot we don't know.
- adrian_b 2y ago
  The study says only the oxidized Fe(III) ions are harmful. Most iron in food, except that from blood or red muscles is in the form of reduced Fe(II) ions.
adrian_b 2y ago
The study says that only the Fe(III) ions are harmful. Most iron that can be found in water or in food is in the form of Fe(II) ions, because all minerals that contain Fe(III) ions are insoluble. The only components of food that are rich in Fe(III) are the hemoglobin from blood and the myoglobin from the "red" muscles, which are used by all vertebrates to transport or store oxygen.

Also it doesn't cause the cancer, but iron expedites growth of colorectal cancer cells? Seems clickbaity if I am reading it right.

SoftTalker 2y ago

Iron is an essential part of your diet if you want to continue living. So it boils down to genetics, which is probably most cancers.

mattmaroon 2y ago
A lot of things that are necessary for living to become harmful in too high of a quantity.
sevensor 2y ago
There are lots of different irons though, as I recall from chemistry class. I wouldn’t assume that every form of iron you ingest is equally carcinogenic.
lizknope 2y ago
Of course you need iron to live but many times too much of something leads to bad consequences. The previous studies I have looked at point to heme vs non-heme iron sources. The heme iron comes from animal sources and is easier for the human body to absorb than plant based non-heme iron but the heme iron may be leading to cancer growth.
- SoftTalker 2y ago
  Toxicity from too much iron is something different and very well known for a long time.
toomuchtodo 2y ago
Next step is genetic statistical analysis of the cohorts susceptible to iron induced cancer to determine gene therapy targets.

aabhay 2y ago

> So, to reiterate, the researchers found that the iron in red meat reactivated telomerase in colorectal cancer cells, thus driving the progression of the cancer.

vharuck 2y ago

Researchers have long known about the positive correlation between how much red meat a person eats and that person's chance of developing colorectal cancer. There are plenty of large behavioral health surveys that show this. So the audience for this article will understand the context. Heck, they might even find this article by searching "red meat colorectal cancer" in a database.

mfer 2y ago

It's more complicated than that. For example, why do those who eat mostly plant based (I mean real plants and not processed foods) have lower rates of cancer if both sides get iron? Iron is essential to live. It could have something to do with amount. For example, Iron from animal products is easier for the body to absorb and there are MUCH higher levels per gram (e.g., beef has 7x the iron kale does). Is it too much iron? It could be type. You have FE2+, FE3+, heme iron, non-heme iron, etc. This article points to FE3+. Is there something more there? Is it some combination of things? There's a lot we don't know.

adrian_b 2y ago
The study says only the oxidized Fe(III) ions are harmful. Most iron in food, except that from blood or red muscles is in the form of reduced Fe(II) ions.

adrian_b 2y ago

The study says that only the Fe(III) ions are harmful. Most iron that can be found in water or in food is in the form of Fe(II) ions, because all minerals that contain Fe(III) ions are insoluble. The only components of food that are rich in Fe(III) are the hemoglobin from blood and the myoglobin from the "red" muscles, which are used by all vertebrates to transport or store oxygen.