Here, we show that high-fat diets (HFDs) derived from lard, beef tallow or butter accelerate tumour growth in a syngeneic model of melanoma, but HFDs based on coconut oil, palm oil or olive oil do not, despite equivalent obesity.

  • sanity_is_maddening@piefed.socialEnglish
    8·
    4 days ago

    If anyone here can find it, a few years ago there was also a meta study that evaluated the aggregate information provided by zoos and found that carnivore animals are a lot more likely to develop cancer than omnivore animals and herbivores. Herbivores, the least likely. Which from a trophic balance makes absolute sense. Given that a large predator without self regulation would require other population control occurrences to be in place from a meta-space perspective. And amino acid density doesn’t really discriminate what is growing, anyway. So, it all makes sense. As it’s supposed to.

    And speaking of this, us Humans have to develop our own self-regulation at an individual level and species level combined or we’ll continue to predate on the environment and each other as a result of our own devised resource scarcity. The fact we fight viruses and cancer better and better only makes it more necessarily so. Lack of self regulation always leads to scarcity. It is how the initial predation systems were formed to begin with. Ambulant organisms reproduced and consumed without any inhibitors or restrictions, leading them to prey on each other when the lower trophic levels were no longer available to sustain their numbers and consumption. Again, it all makes sense. As it’s supposed to.

    • multifariace@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      2 days ago

      Great points. I was wondering why you didn’t go into biomagnification. That would contribute to explaining more cancers in higher consumer levels. This feels like it’s on its way to useful theory.

      • sanity_is_maddening@piefed.socialEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Oh, absolutely. Biomagnification is inherent to the logic of raising through the trophic levels. So even if we forego the zoo experiment as a setting, in theory any time there’s a toxin or a man-made hazardous chemical due to pollution in the wild, we are bound to find higher levels of either due to the concentration effect alone.

        We can even point that back to the study, as the zoo animals were eating domestic raised animals by humans and the inherent hazards of that practice surely increase the risk of cancer, not lower it. Maybe they can even start a lab grown meat trial with carnivorous zoo animals and see if the cancer rate actually lowers from that alone. In theory, it should.