Virginia Messina, R.D.,
The Vegan RD.com
August 2011
Red meat has a bad PR problem. Two recent meta-analyses—one published in
2009 and one in 2011—linked red meat consumption to increased colon cancer
risk. In May, the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World
Cancer Research Fund reaffirmed conclusions from an earlier comprehensive
report, saying that the evidence for a relationship between red meat and
colon cancer is “convincing.”
And it’s not just cancer; a study published just last week found that adults
who consume 4 ounces of red meat per day have a 20 percent increased risk
for developing diabetes.
The evidence strongly suggests that it’s a good idea for everyone to reduce
their intake of red and processed meats. But from the animals’ perspective,
this is not necessarily great news. That’s because many of these studies
find that other animal foods—which can easily replace red meat in the
diet—don’t carry the same risks. There is no compelling body of evidence to
suggest that eating white meat raises cancer risk and, some research
suggests that replacing red meat with white meat lowers risk. (This is not
to say that white meat is itself protective or has any particular health
benefits. It’s probably neutral and therefore lowers risk when it replaces
harmful red meat.)
People are likely to react to news about the dangers of red and processed
meats by replacing these foods with other meats—from fish and chickens—and
in the process cause suffering to many, many more animals.
Assuming that one steer provides around 450 pounds of meat, a person eating
a pound of beef per week would be responsible for the death of one steer
every 8 ½ years or so. Replace that pound of beef a week with a pound of
chicken (assuming that the average chicken yields 2 pounds of meat) and the
number of animals killed would be about 220 chickens over the same time
period. In fact, even if the health-conscious, meat-shunning consumer chose
to reduce her meat intake by 75 percent—eating just 4 ounces of meat per
week and getting all of it as chicken flesh—she would still be responsible
for the death of more than 50 birds over that 8 ½ year period.
And not only do more animals die when people replace red meat with chicken
in their diet, but chickens and other birds live and die under conditions
that are horrible even by the usual horrible standards of modern farming.
Red and processed meat consumption is a serious public health concern, and
people need to know about the importance of reducing these foods in their
diets. But publicizing every new study about the hazards of red meat doesn’t
promote veganism; it promotes animal suffering. A message about a vegan
ethic, on the other hand, is a double win. It helps reduce animal suffering
while also encouraging people to eliminate hazardous foods from their diets.
Edited on 3/13/12: A study just published online in the
Archives of Internal Medicine found that all types of red meat are
associated with increased risk for cancer and heart disease. Just 3 ounces a
day of red meat was associated with a 13% increased risk of dying during the
course of the study. The researchers also found that replacing red meat with
poultry or low-fat dairy foods decreased risk as much or more than replacing
it with legumes. This is another example of how a focus on the health risks
of red meat in particular doesn’t necessarily translate to a positive vegan
message.
Return to Animal Rights Articles
Read more at The Meat and Dairy Industries