Meat consumption and mortality - results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

Results

As of June 2009, 26,344 deaths were observed. After multivariate adjustment, a high consumption of red meat was related to higher all-cause mortality (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.28, 160+ versus 10 to 19.9 g/day), and the association was stronger for processed meat (HR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.66, 160+ versus 10 to 19.9 g/day). After correction for measurement error, higher all-cause mortality remained significant only for processed meat (HR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.25, per 50 g/d). We estimated that 3.3% (95% CI 1.5% to 5.0%) of deaths could be prevented if all participants had a processed meat consumption of less than 20 g/day. Significant associations with processed meat intake were observed for cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and 'other causes of death'. The consumption of poultry was not related to all-cause mortality.

Conclusions

The results of our analysis support a moderate positive association between processed meat consumption and mortality, in particular due to cardiovascular diseases, but also to cancer.

Keywords:

diet;meat; mortality; cohort; Europe; cardiovascular; cancer

Pancreatic cancers

Annual Incidence 43,000 new cases a year in the United States.
Annual Mortality 35, 000, making one of the deadliest cancer in the United States.
There are suggestions that Tobacco may play a role in the Occurrence.
BRCA1 and BRCA 2 have been implicated in familial cases.  Other Hereditary cases involve the HNPCC genes, p16, Ataxia Telangiectasia and Peutz-Jeghers syndrome)
KRAS, IGFR-1,DCP4, p16, p53 and BRCA2 have been implicated.
No screening method has been recommended.
The disease is clearly unresectable when Mesenteric vessels are involved or when evident metastasis are seen.

Random News: MELATONIN and NIH GrantsInfo

RANDOM NEWS

*Melatonin which helps with sleep at 3mg, was tested at 20 mg to see if it could help to stop or delay cachexia.  It was not different then placebo.  Case closed. IT FAILED!

*IT IS ESTIMATED THAT 12000 DEATHS COULD BE PREVENTED WITH AN INSTITUTION OF AN AGGRESSIVE LUNG CANCER SCREENING IN THOSE WITH HISTORY OF 1 PACK/DAY FOR 30 YEARS OF MORE!

*We have shown that in the united states more than 3000 African women could be saved yearly if the Breast cancer paradox (low incidence, but high mortality) was corrected by the institution of a comprehensive prevention program.  Well, things are getting worse as recent studies continue to show a decrease of screening in world of corruption and politics.  At CPRIT, they want Commercialization.  The NIH is heavily political.  Just look at a recent submission response:

Thank you for your e-mail to GrantsInfo at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).  We provide general information about NIH extramural medical and behavioral research, research training programs, and the grant application process.

I suggest you discuss potential funding of your project with the appropriate Scientific/Research staff linked in the announcement’s Section VII:  http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-260.html#_Section_VII._Agency

Regards from GrantsInfo
Web:   http://www.nih.gov

Linking you to NIH Funding

This is an automatic reply when you submit a project
no referral to some review board
they will keep you going here and there
leading nowhere because they have their political friends to award money to. another example, not here go somewhere else!

Dear Dr. Kankonde,

In the table shown below, you will find all currently active NIH funding opportunities related to support of tissue, specimen, and biospecimen banks.  It does not appear that there is any specific funding opportunity that will work for your purposes.  You can search further in the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts by going to http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/search_guide.htm.  You might also try to connect and collaborate with scientists and pathologists who have mutual interests to find out if your proposed tissue bank might be supported through affiliation with a large research program (e.g., medical center, cancer center, program project, clinical trials network/consortium, special program of research excellence, epidemiology/population cohort, etc.)

Good luck with your efforts.

Comment: and it goes on and on, you get nowhere and after many attempts, you just give up (but at the CRBCM, we do never give up!)

It is a rough world, and they claim to help, but indeed they try to discourage any pursuit of new research and prevention with good old political tactics!