So, let's be clear: the chance for a man to get colorectal cancer over his lifetime in the U.S. is 4.7%.
If we assumed that was the baseline (which it is not), an 18% increase in that chance would bring us to 5.55%.
The problem is, that 18% increase is already baked in to the 4.7% number. And, it's actually in there as a much higher percentage because no one eats just 50 grams of meat, unless you are a waifish supermodel. So, theoretically, someone who was eating the 106.6 lbs of meat a year, on average, is actually consuming 132 grams of meat a day.
Except, that 106.6 lbs of meat a year is for all Americans, so let's factor out the vegetarians. There's not a ton of them in the U.S., but it does bring our average meat-eater total consumption to 137 grams a day.
So, it terms of 50 gram portions, that is a multiplier of 2.74,
which would mean that the 18% PER 50 gram portion becomes 49.3% higher chance.BUT...
Another study from Harvard says that a vegetarian diet only reduces the risk of colon cancer by 22%. (
http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/vegetarian-diet-linked-to-lower-colon-cancer-risk-201503117785)
Let's take a quick look at these two numbers, shall we?
If your chance was 1%, and the first study was right, your chance would go to 1.493%. Ok.
If your chance was 1% and the second study was right, your chance would go to .78%. Hm.
OK, what if we baseline at the higher chance of 1.493%? In that case, a 22% reduction on meat-eaters only comes out to 1.165%. Still not 1%
Bottom line: one of these studies has it's numbers very, very wrong since there is little correlation between the two final results. (Even though I fudged things a bit to keep it simple.)
My guess is that it is the study that makes the stronger case for eating less meat since we already know that is the agenda the lying left wants to push.