DOCSLIB.ORG

Red Meat and Processed Meat Volume 114

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Red Meat and Processed Meat Volume 114 RED MEAT AND PROCESSED MEAT volume 114 This publication represents the views and expert opinions of an IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans, which met in Lyon, 6–13 October 2015 LYON, FRANCE - 2018 iarc monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans 3. CANCER IN EXPERIMENTAL ANIMALS No long-term bioassays of full carcino- and colon/caecum. Mice fed the modified diet genicity with red meat or processed meat were containing beef had a greater number of tumours available to the Working Group; however, the in the small intestine compared with mice fed Working Group considered a variety of animal the control diet, with the difference being signif- bioassays. icant in the distal small intestine (P = 0.009) (Mutanen et al., 2000). [The Working Group 3.1 Mouse noted that the tumour data were confounded by the fact that the beef diet contained considerably See Table 3.1 more fat (274.8 g/kg diet) than the control diet (70.0 g/kg diet). The control diet contained 3.1.1 Red meat calcium at a concentration of 5.1 g/kg diet, and did not contain fibre; however, there was no Groups of seven to nine male C57Bl/6J- increase in the incidence of tumours of the small ApcMin mice (age, 6–8 weeks), a strain primarily intestine in a separate non-fibre, high-fat group.] susceptible to spontaneous adenomas of the Groups of six to eight male and six to eight small intestine, were fed American Institute female C57Bl/6J-ApcMin mice (age, 5 weeks) were of Nutrition (AIN-93G)–based diets, either a transferred from a standard rodent chow diet semisynthetic control diet or a modified diet in and fed AIN-93G–based diets, either a semi- which casein, the protein source, was replaced synthetic control diet or a modified diet in which with beef (24%), for 5–6 weeks. The beef was casein was replaced with beef. The control diet minced and freeze-dried before being added to contained 40% fat and a fatty acid profile similar the diet. [The authors did not specify whether to that of a “Western-type” (i.e. enriched in fat and the meat had been cooked before being minced cholesterol) diet. The carbohydrate and protein and freeze-dried.] The control diet contained sources were provided by dextrose and casein, calcium at a concentration of 5.1 g/kg diet, and respectively. The beef diet contained freeze- fat was obtained from sunflower and rapeseed dried, low-fat ground beef instead of casein as oil. In the modified diet, fat was provided by the protein source. The other ingredients were beef, butter, and sunflower and rapeseed oil. The adjusted to keep the proportions of energy from energy content was similar for both diets. The carbohydrate, protein, and fat similar to those extent of intestinal neoplasms was determined in the control diet. [The authors did not specify by light microscopy. Statistical analyses were whether the low-fat ground beef had been cooked conducted. Mean body weight (bw) was similar before being freeze-dried.] The number and size for mice given the control or modified diet. of intestinal adenomas, as determined by light Tumours were observed in the small intestine 389 390 IARC MONOGRAPHSIARC 114 – Table 3.1 Studies of carcinogenicity in mice fed diets containing red meat or processed meat Species, Dosing regimen Results Significance Comments strain (sex) Animals/group at start For each target organ: Age at start No. surviving animals incidence (%) and/or Duration multiplicity of tumours Reference Mouse, Full carcinogenicity study Small intestine Limitations: tumour data were C57Bl/6J- AIN-93G–based control diet or Total tumours, mean (SD): NS confounded by the fact that the beef ApcMin (M) modified AIN-93G diet in which 24% 35.3 (11.6), 52.8 (13.2) diet contained considerably more fat Age 6–8 wk beef replaced casein as the protein Colon and caecum (274.8 g/kg diet) than the control diet 5–6 wk source, fed ad libitum (70.0 g/kg diet); histopathological Tumour incidence: 88%, NS Mutanen 7–9 mice/group examination not conducted 89% et al. (2000) 7, 7 Total tumours, mean (SD): NS 1.8 (0.9), 3.2 (2.3) Distal small intestine Total tumours, mean (SD): *P = 0.009 (ANOVA with Tukey 19.6 (6.8), 36.6 (9.4)* post hoc test) Mouse, Full carcinogenicity study Small intestine Diets were balanced for carbohydrates, C57Bl/6J- Mice were fed a control diet (AIN-93G Adenoma multiplicity, Decrease; *P < 0.01 (multiple linear protein, and fat ApcMin (F) diet with 40% fat) or diet containing mean (SEM): 72.3 (15.27), regression) Age 5 wk low-fat ground beef (AIN-93G with 30.9 (4.90)* 15 wk 40% fat, 27% beef), fed ad libitum Total adenomas, mean Decrease; *P < 0.01 (multiple linear Kettunen 6–8 mice/group (SEM): 55.8 (8.46), 28.7 regression) et al. (2003) 6, 6 (3.77)* Small intestine Medium adenoma, Decrease; *P < 0.05 (both sexes incidence, mean (SEM): combined, multiple linear 30.1% (3.8), 22.6% (3.3)* regression) Mouse, Full carcinogenicity study Small intestine Mice were fed a modified AIN-93G C57Bl/6J- Control diet or diet containing beef Medium adenoma Decrease; *P < 0.05 (both sexes containing 40% fat or low-fat ground ApcMin (M) (g/kg diet), fed ad libitum incidence, mean (SEM): combined, multiple linear beef instead of casein as the protein Age 5 wk 6–8 mice/group 44.3% (2.9), 36.3% (4.6)* regression) source. Diets were balanced for 15 wk 8, 8 carbohydrates, protein, and fat Kettunen et al. (2003) Table 3.1 (continued) Species, Dosing regimen Results Significance Comments strain (sex) Animals/group at start For each target organ: Age at start No. surviving animals incidence (%) and/or Duration multiplicity of tumours Reference Mouse, Initiation–promotion study Colon Limitations: tumour incidence in BALB/c (M) Diet containing low milk protein with Tumour incidence: 23/38 Decrease; *P ≤ 0.05 (test for the the control groups was not reported; Age 5 wk low fat or low beef protein with low fat, (60.5%), 4/23 (17.4%)* equality of two proportions) the duration of this experiment (54 54 wk fed ad libitum wk) was probably not sufficient to Nutter et al. 100 mice/group determine if the diets by themselves (1983) 38, 23 were tumorigenic; histopathological Diet containing low milk protein with Colon examination not conducted high fat or low beef protein with high Tumour incidence: 19/24 Decrease; *P ≤ 0.05 (test for the Mice were allocated to six isocaloric fat, fed ad libitum (79.2%), 6/28 (21.4%)* equality of two proportions) diet groups that differed in protein 100 mice/group source (milk or beef), protein level 24, 28 (11% or 33%), and fat level (5% or Diet containing high milk protein with Colon 30%), and injected with DMH (11 weekly injections of 20 mg/kg bw) low fat or high beef protein with low Tumour incidence: 19/29 Decrease; *P ≤ 0.05 (test for the fat, fed ad libitum (65.5%), 5/44 (11.4%)* equality of two proportions) 100 mice/group 29, 44 *, statistically significant; AIN, American Institute of Nutrition; ANOVA, analysis of variance; DMH, dimethylhydrazine; F, female; M, male; NR, not reported; NS, not significant; SD, standard deviation; SEM, standard error of the mean; wk, week Red meat and processed meat processed and meat Red 391 IARC MONOGRAPHS – 114 microscopy, were assessed when the mice were mice fed the corresponding diets containing placed on the control and beef diets, and then milk protein and fat. When assessed at 59 weeks assessed after they were fed the test diets for of age, DMH-injected mice fed the beef protein 3 weeks or 10 weeks. Statistical analyses were diets had a significantly lower incidence of colon conducted. Male mice fed the control diet gained tumours than DMH-injected mice fed the milk less weight than male mice fed the beef diet. This protein diets, irrespective of the percentage of difference in body weight was not observed in the protein or fat (P < 0.05) (Nutter et al., 1983). female mice. Female mice fed the beef diet had [Tumour incidence in the control groups was significantly fewer intestinal adenomas P( < 0.01) not reported. The duration of this experiment (54 and a significantly lower tumour burden (meas- weeks) was probably not sufficient to determine ured as mm2; P < 0.01) when assessed after 15 if the diets by themselves were tumorigenic.] weeks of feeding. Mice fed the beef diet also had significantly fewer medium-sized (1.0–1.5 mm) 3.2 Rat adenomas than did mice fed the control diet when both sexes were combined (P < 0.05) See Table 3.2 (Kettunen et al., 2003). 3.2.1 Red meat 3.1.2 Red meat with known carcinogens A study was conducted to investigate the Groups of 100 male BALB/c mice (age, 5 effects of a “complete human diet” prepared weeks) were allocated to one of six isocaloric diet under normal household conditions. Male and groups that differed in protein source (milk or female Wistar rats (age, 4 weeks) were placed on beef), protein level (11% or 33%), and fat level (5% one of five diets (50 males and 50 females per diet): or 30%). [The authors did not state whether the Diet A, a commercial semisynthetic rodent diet; meat had been cooked and/or freeze-dried before Diet B, a semisynthetic rodent diet supplemented being added to the diet.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To Eat Or Not to Eat Red Meat. a Closer Look at the Relationship Between Restrained Eating and Vegetarianism in College Females
    W&M ScholarWorks Psychological Sciences Articles & Book Chapters Psychological Sciences Fall 11-2-2011 To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females Catherine A. Forestell College of William and Mary, [email protected] Andrea M. Spaeth College of William and Mary Stephanie A. Kane College of William and Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/psychologypub Part of the Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Forestell, Catherine A.; Spaeth, Andrea M.; and Kane, Stephanie A., To eat or not to eat red meat. A closer look at the relationship between restrained eating and vegetarianism in college females (2011). Appetite, 58(1), 319-325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2011.10.015 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychological Sciences at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Psychological Sciences Articles & Book Chapters by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Our reference: APPET 1355 P-authorquery-v10 AUTHOR QUERY FORM Journal: APPET Please e-mail or fax your responses and any corrections to: E-mail: [email protected] Article Number: 1355 Fax: +31 2048 52799 Dear Author, Please check your proof carefully and mark all corrections at the appropriate place in the proof (e.g., by using on-screen annotation in the PDF file) or compile them in a separate list. Note: if you opt to annotate the file with software other than Adobe Reader then please also highlight the appropriate place in the PDF file.
    [Show full text]
  • 32. Game Meats II
    32. Game Meats II Peter Wynn and Nicole Spiegel Learning objectives On completion of this topic you should have an understanding of: • The commercial potential for species other than kangaroo and deer to contribute to the supply of animal protein for human food • Methods of farming and harvesting that are unique to each species. • Quality control and potential risks to human health associated with different species • The sources of information available on game meat production and factors influencing its quality. Key terms and concepts: • 1 Carcase composition and leanness • 2 Utilisation of exotic meat species • 3 Maintaining food hygiene standards • 4 Exploiting these resources to meet world demand for dietary protein. • 5 Animal health and the disease risk to humans 32.1 Introduction Alternative meat producing species Alternative meat producing species can often provide the required dietary nutrients for humans with the added benefit of offering some meat quality characteristics that are unique to that species: taste, flavour, colour, texture and favourable nutritional factors can all be important to the consumer. A selection of non-conventional and bush meat species, all of which have something different to offer, are detailed in this lecture. There are many more species utilised for their meat that will not be covered in these notes, such as: • In Australia: Brushtail possum, rabbits & hares, and wild horses & donkeys • Outside Australia: Grouse, partridges, pheasants, snipes, woodcock and wild ducks Just as the quality attributes of the meat these alternative species offer is important, so too is the health and disease risk and status of these species. Potential disease risks should always be taken into account when developing new and exotic meats for human consumption; this will become apparent in the following lecture material.
    [Show full text]
  • REDUCTION of PURINE CONTENT in COMMONLY CONSUMED MEAT PRODUCTS THROUGH RINSING and COOKING by Anna Ellington (Under the Directio
    REDUCTION OF PURINE CONTENT IN COMMONLY CONSUMED MEAT PRODUCTS THROUGH RINSING AND COOKING by Anna Ellington (Under the direction of Yen-Con Hung) Abstract The commonly consumed meat products ground beef, ground turkey, and bacon were analyzed for purine content before and after a rinsing treatment. The rinsing treatment involved rinsing the meat samples using a wrist shaker in 5:1 ratio water: sample for 2 or 5 minutes then draining or centrifuging to remove water. The total purine content of 25% fat ground beef significantly decreased (p<0.05) from 8.58 mg/g protein to a range of 5.17-7.26 mg/g protein after rinsing treatments. After rinsing and cooking an even greater decrease was seen ranging from 4.59-6.32 mg/g protein. The total purine content of 7% fat ground beef significantly decreased from 7.80 mg/g protein to a range of 5.07-5.59 mg/g protein after rinsing treatments. A greater reduction was seen after rinsing and cooking in the range of 4.38-5.52 mg/g protein. Ground turkey samples showed no significant changes after rinsing, but significant decreases were seen after rinsing and cooking. Bacon samples showed significant decreases from 6.06 mg/g protein to 4.72 and 4.49 after 2 and 5 minute rinsing and to 4.53 and 4.68 mg/g protein after 2 and 5 minute rinsing and cooking. Overall, this study showed that rinsing foods in water effectively reduces total purine content and subsequent cooking after rinsing results in an even greater reduction of total purine content.
    [Show full text]
  • Using of Horsemeat As an Additional Source of Raw Materials for Expanding the Range of Meat Products
    38 Specialized and multidisciplinary scientific researches Volume 2 . DOI 10.36074/11.12.2020.v2.10 USING OF HORSEMEAT AS AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF RAW MATERIALS FOR EXPANDING THE RANGE OF MEAT PRODUCTS ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6591-0414 Ihor Strashynskyi Ph.D, Associate Professor, Associate Professor Departmentof Meat and Meat Products Technology National University of Food Technologies ORCID ID: 0000-0002-8816-0388 Oksana Fursik Assistant Departmentof Meat and Meat ProductsTechnology Educational and Scientific Institute of Food Technologies National University of Food Technologies UKRAINE Today, due to the extensive development of intensive industrial growing of farm animals, such as poultry, pigs and, to a lesser extent, cattle, the production of horse meat almost all over the world, with the exception countries and regions with traditionally developed herd horse breeding, is inferior to the production of these animals meat and it is mainly used in the manufacture certain varieties of sausages to improve the structural and mechanical properties of finished products, as well as their piquant taste. There are regions in the world where horse meat is widely used as the main meat food product. Horse meat is now available in France, Belgium and Sweden, where horse meat sales outnumber mutton meat sales. In France, horse meat consumption is 0.4% of all meat consumed. There are about 750 horse meat butchers in the country and about 11,000 farmers who raise horses for sale for meat. The main part of horse meat products that produced in France are exported to Italy. Italians consume twice as much horse meat as the French and love the meat of young horses, while the French prefer red meat from older horses [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Promoting Kangaroo As a Sustainable Option for Meat Production on the Rangelands of Australia
    Promoting kangaroo as a sustainable option for meat production on the rangelands of Australia N. B. Spiegel* and P. C. Wynn† *Department of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry, Agri-Science QLD, Australia †Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation, Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/af/article/4/4/38/4638811 by guest on 28 September 2021 ally, public concern for the protection of kangaroos was raised, and in the Implications 1950s and 1960s, legislation was enacted to control rather than encourage the destruction of kangaroos and wallabies. The responsibility for controls • As kangaroo meat is sourced from native wildlife, conservation of was assumed by the federal government, passing a national law for the the species is important in developing sustainable meat harvest- protection of all species of native fauna, which also encompassed controls ing. Landholders, conservationists, and commercial meat produc- on exports of wildlife or wildlife-derived products; today in effect under ers need to work together to achieve this goal. the Australian Wildlife Protection Act 1982. These acts extended to the • The production of high quality meat products from field-harvest- implementation of policies to allow for the regulated harvesting of abun- ed carcasses can be augmented through a better understanding of dant species. Accordingly, the kangaroo industry of Australia emerged, the impact that field conditions and carcass handling have on final based on a legislated harvest of wild populations. meat eating quality. Interest in kangaroo as a source of red meat is increasing (Wilson and Ed- • Food safety is also paramount, with measures taken to minimize wards, 2008; Spiegel et al., 2010) not only because of the increased muscle the impacts of parasitism and microbial contamination.
    [Show full text]
  • Don't Fall for Tricky Meat & Poultry Claims
    Lean? here do Wthe bro- chures, posters, and voluntary labels for meat get their num- bers? In most Don’t fall for tricky meat cases, from the USDA’s data- & poultry claims base. And where does the USDA BY LINDSAY MOYER & JENNIFER URBAN gets its numbers? 0" trim? Fat chance. It’s no secret that Americans need to cut back on meat. While we Mostly from, or now eat more chicken than beef, we still eat too much red meat, with funding from, the beef and pork industries. Hmm... especially beef. That’s bad news for our health and for the planet. The USDA’s database has numbers for beef that has had People who eat more red meat—especially processed meat—have the fat around its edges trimmed down to just ⁄8” or 0”. a higher risk of colon cancer, heart disease, and stroke. (The pork industry never even says how much its cuts were trimmed.) And it doesn’t help that misleading information about meat or The USDA also has numbers for what’s called “separable poultry can trick even the most careful shoppers. Here’s what to lean.” That’s after scalpel-wielding technicians trim off the watch out for. “separable fat”—every bit of fat except marbling within the muscle. Missing labels? All that trimming (where do you keep your scalpel?) helps explain how the beef industry’s website can end up touting voluntarily, you’re 38 cuts of “lean” beef. The list even includes fatty cuts like stuck with a brochure New York strip steak and brisket.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing Patterns of Meat Consumption and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Australia: Will Kangaroo Meat Make a Difference?
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Changing patterns of meat consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in Australia: Will kangaroo meat make a difference? Shyama Ratnasiri*, Jayatilleke Bandara Department of Accounting Finance and Economics, Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia * [email protected] a1111111111 a1111111111 a1111111111 Abstract a1111111111 a1111111111 The Australian per capita consumption of ruminant meat such as beef and lamb has declined over the last two decades. Over the same period, however, per capita consumption of non-ruminant meat such as chicken and pork has continued to increase. Furthermore, it is now observed that the human consumption of kangaroo meat is on the rise. This study OPEN ACCESS investigates the implications of these changes in meat consumption patterns on Green House Gases (GHGs) emission mitigation in Australia using a Vector Auto Regression Citation: Ratnasiri S, Bandara J (2017) Changing patterns of meat consumption and greenhouse gas (VAR) forecasting approach. Our results suggest that the increase will continue in non-rumi- emissions in Australia: Will kangaroo meat make a nant meat consumption and this will not only offset the decline in ruminant meat consump- difference? PLoS ONE 12(2): e0170130. tion, but will also raise the overall per capita meat consumption by approximately 1% doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0170130 annually. The per capita GHGs emissions will likely decrease by approximately 2.3% per Editor: George-John Nychas, Agricultural annum, due to the inclusion of non-ruminant meat in Australian diets. The GHGs emissions University of Athens, GREECE can further be reduced if the average Australian consumer partially replaces ruminant meat Received: August 15, 2016 with kangaroo meat.
    [Show full text]
  • Variation of Amino Acids in White and Red Meat of Skipjack Tuna (Katsuwonus Pelamis) Caught from Arabian Sea
    ISSN: 2319-8753 International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology Vol. 2, Issue 7, July 2013 VARIATION OF AMINO ACIDS IN WHITE AND RED MEAT OF SKIPJACK TUNA (KATSUWONUS PELAMIS) CAUGHT FROM ARABIAN SEA Remya James1, Vineeth Kumar T V2 Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, St. Joseph‟s College for Women, Alappuzha, Kerala, India1 Research Scholar, Chemical Biology Laboratory, Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India2 Abstract: Amino acid profile of the white and red (dark) meat in Katsuwonus pelamis, a tuna fish, caught from Arabian Sea in the month of January, was estimated using gas chromatography. There was no significant variation between red and white meat samples for the total percentage of essential and non-essential amino acids which constitute 52.3% and 47.7% respectively. Non essential amino acids asparagine and glutamine, and semi essential amino acid cysteine were not detected in both, red meat and white meat samples. Glutamate makes up approximately 13% in both samples which can be considered the highest. Certain individual amino acids, histidine, lysine and arginine showed variation between red and white meat samples. Keywords: red meat; white meat; amino acid; lysine; Katsuwonus pelamis I. INTRODUCTION Fish protein, like that of meat, is easily digestible and favorably complements dietary protein provided by beef, pork, chicken, cereals and legumes that are typically consumed in many developing countries (Winton and Winton, 2000). The protein in fish makes up complete protein source and tuna is a good source of high quality proteins. Tuna have white flesh and flesh that is pink to dark red.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prospective Study of Red Meat Consumption and Type 2 Diabetes in Middle-Aged and Elderly Women the Women’S Health Study
    Epidemiology/Health Services/Psychosocial Research ORIGINAL ARTICLE A Prospective Study of Red Meat Consumption and Type 2 Diabetes in Middle-Aged and Elderly Women The Women’s Health Study 1,2 1,2,4 YIQING SONG, MD JULIE E. BURING, SCD suspected as an important and indepen- 1,2,3 1,2 JOANN E. MANSON, MD, DRPH SIMIN LIU, MD, SCD dent contributor to risk of type 2 diabetes. This hypothesis was first generated based on the evidence from ecologic and mi- grant studies (2,3) and subsequently sup- OBJECTIVE — The aim of this study was to prospectively assess the relation between red ported by several cross-sectional and meat intake and incidence of type 2 diabetes. prospective studies of dietary patterns and diabetes (4–6). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS — Over an average of 8.8 years, we evaluated Since the Seventh Day Adventists 37,309 participants in the Women’s Health Study aged Ն45 years who were free of cardiovas- Study first reported a positive association cular disease, cancer, and type 2 diabetes and completed validated semiquantitative food fre- between total meat intake and risk of type quency questionnaires in 1993. 2 diabetes in a population with a large proportion of vegetarians (7), few studies RESULTS — During 326,876 person-years of follow-up, we documented 1,558 incident have specifically assessed this relation be- cases of type 2 diabetes. After adjusting for age, BMI, total energy intake, exercise, alcohol intake, cigarette smoking, and family history of diabetes, we found positive associations between intakes tween meat consumption and incidence of red meat and processed meat and risk of type 2 diabetes.
    [Show full text]
  • LABELLING REVIEW RECOMMENDATION 40 Analysis of Primary Food Products That Do Not Require Country of Origin Labelling 1 Introduction
    LABELLING REVIEW RECOMMENDATION 40 Analysis of primary food products that do not require country of origin labelling 1 Introduction In 2009, the COAG Legislative and Governance Forum on Food Regulation (then the Australian and New Zealand Ministerial Council for Food Regulation) agreed to a comprehensive independent review of food labelling law and policy. An expert panel, chaired by Dr Neal Blewett, AC, undertook the review and the panel’s final report, Labelling Logic: Review of Food Labelling Law and Policy (2011) (Labelling Logic) was publicly released in January 2011. In Labelling Logic, the review panel recommended: That Australia’s existing mandatory country-of-origin labelling requirements for food be maintained and be extended to cover all primary food products for retail sale (recommendation 40). In the government response to recommendation 401, it was noted that at the time (December 2011), Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) was assessing a proposal that would (if agreed) largely implement this recommendation by extending country of origin labelling requirements to unpackaged beef, veal, lamb, hogget, mutton and chicken. FSANZ was asked to continue its existing process for the proposal and to develop a further proposal to extend country of origin labelling to all other primary food products. It should be noted that most packaged primary food products currently require country of origin labelling. Following consideration of Proposal P1011 – Country of Origin Labelling – Unpackaged Meat Products, the FSANZ Board approved draft variations to Standard 1.2.11 – Country of Origin Labelling of the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code) to extend country of origin labelling requirements to unpackaged beef, veal, lamb, hogget, mutton and chicken sold in Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Commercial Options for Management of Feral Camels
    Chapter 9: Review of commercial options for management of feral camels B Zeng M McGregor Managing the impacts of feral camels in Australia: a new way of doing business Desert Knowledge CRC 221 Contents 1. Summary .......................................................................................................................................... ��������������������� 225 1.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ ��������������������� 225 1.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... ��������������������� 226 2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... ��������������������� 227 3. Camel products and uses .................................................................................................................. ��������������������� 227 3.1 Meat ................................................................................................................................... ��������������������� 227 3.2 Milk ..................................................................................................................................... ��������������������� 228 3.3 Medicine ............................................................................................................................. ��������������������� 228 3.4 Other products
    [Show full text]
  • Biomarkers of Meat and Seafood Intake: an Extensive Literature Review Cătălina Cuparencu1*† , Giulia Praticó1†, Lieselot Y
    Cuparencu et al. Genes & Nutrition (2019) 14:35 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12263-019-0656-4 REVIEW Open Access Biomarkers of meat and seafood intake: an extensive literature review Cătălina Cuparencu1*† , Giulia Praticó1†, Lieselot Y. Hemeryck2†, Pedapati S. C. Sri Harsha3†, Stefania Noerman4, Caroline Rombouts2, Muyao Xi1, Lynn Vanhaecke2, Kati Hanhineva4, Lorraine Brennan3 and Lars O. Dragsted1 Abstract Meat, including fish and shellfish, represents a valuable constituent of most balanced diets. Consumption of different types of meat and fish has been associated with both beneficial and adverse health effects. While white meats and fish are generally associated with positive health outcomes, red and especially processed meats have been associated with colorectal cancer and other diseases. The contribution of these foods to the development or prevention of chronic diseases is still not fully elucidated. One of the main problems is the difficulty in properly evaluating meat intake, as the existing self-reporting tools for dietary assessment may be imprecise and therefore affected by systematic and random errors. Dietary biomarkers measured in biological fluids have been proposed as possible objective measurements of the actual intake of specific foods and as a support for classical assessment methods. Good biomarkers for meat intake should reflect total dietary intake of meat, independent of source or processing and should be able to differentiate meat consumption from that of other protein-rich foods; alternatively, meat intake biomarkers should be specific to each of the different meat sources (e.g., red vs. white; fish, bird, or mammal) and/or cooking methods. In this paper, we present a systematic investigation of the scientific literature while providing a comprehensive overview of the possible biomarker(s) for the intake of different types of meat, including fish and shellfish, and processed and heated meats according to published guidelines for biomarker reviews (BFIrev).
    [Show full text]