Interpretation that WCRF is anti-farming was not intended says NBA

February 19th 2010

Interpretation that WCRF is anti-farming was not intended, says NBA.

The World Cancer Research Fund has asked the National Beef Association to clarify comments it made last week on WCRF’s Expert Report which was published two years ago.

It has not criticised the NBA for highlighting errors and omissions in its Expert Report – which have still to be inserted in a review - or for raising doubts about its conclusion that there is convincing evidence that red meat increases cancer.

However WCRF believes the NBA has implied that the Fund, or some who finance it, have anti-livestock farming attitudes which make it appear that WCRF is either itself biased, or has accepted money from lobbyists to influence its scientific findings.

The NBA would like to make clear that it used its press release to advise the public that cash accumulated by campaigning vegetarians is regularly used to attack meat production – most commonly through arguments that livestock farming contributes to accelerated climate change, or by linking meat eating with fear of disease, of which cancer is one example.

At no stage were these general comments intended to refer specifically to WCRF and any impression that that WCRF, or its advisors, were expressly anti-farming, pursued a vegetarian agenda, or deliberately presented information which was misleading, was entirely unintended.

It was not the NBA, but other parties, that said WCRF seems to be following an anti-meat crusade by writing its research conclusion first - then looking for supportive evidence.

The NBA is pleased to note that two of the 53 main course recipes published by WCRF on its website highlighted beef alongside 28 that are vegetarian and 13 focussed on fish.

It looks forward to reading the update of the WCRF Expert Report when it is released later this year.

For more information contact:
Kim Haywood, NBA director.    Tel. 0131 336 1754