Study reveals that meat-eating animals like wolves, leopards, and foxes are more likely to develop CANCER than herbivores such as sheep or antelopes.

  • Southern Denmark researcher studied the cancer rate in zoo-kept mammals
  • They looked at health data on 110,148 individuals from across 191 species in total
  • The risk of developing cancer is omnipresent in every mammal species, so it was not surprising that this disease has been identified.
  • Mammals that eat meat may be more at risk because they have less diversity in the microbiome
  • Alternatively, they said, it may be a product of zoo animals getting less exercise










Study has found that carnivorous animals, such as wolves and leopards are more vulnerable to cancer than plant-eating counterparts like sheep or antelopes.

Researchers led from the University of Southern Denmark studied cancer incidence in more than 110,000 zoo-kept mammals from nearly 200 different species.

The findings, the team said, highlight how cancer is not just a human affliction — and may help scientists working to develop anti-cancer treatments for humans.

Carnivorous animals like foxes, leopards (pictured) and wolves are more susceptible to cancer than their plant-earing counterparts like antelopes and sheep, a study had found

Study has found that carnivorous animals, such as leopards, foxes, andwolves, are more vulnerable to cancer than plant-eating counterparts like sheep or antelopes.

Researchers led from the University of Southern Denmark studied cancer incidence in more than 110,000 zoo-kept mammals from nearly 200 different species — including bat-eared foxes (pictured)

Their findings, the team said, highlight how cancer is not just a human affliction — and may help scientists working to develop anti-cancer treatments. Pictured: Red wolves were among the mammals studied

Researchers led from the University of Southern Denmark studied cancer incidence in more than 110,000 zoo-kept mammals from nearly 200 different species — including bat-eared foxes (left) and red wolves (right). Their findings, the team said, highlight how cancer is not just a human affliction — and may help scientists working to develop anti-cancer treatments

POTENTIAL HEALTH BENEFITS  

According to the team, better understanding of levels of resistance and risk across all animal species may lead to many advantages.

These, for example may be helpful in the pursuit of new anticancer defenses or improved cancer medicine.

The attractiveness of developing natural, biomimetic treatment options for cancer is that they are unlikely to be toxic to patients, which is unlike other treatments. 

The study was undertaken by mathematician Fernando Colchero of University of Southern Denmark and his colleagues.

“Overall, our study shows that animal welfare could be at risk from cancer,” [one] that needs considerable scientific attention,’ Professor Colchero said.

He stated that such a change is essential, particularly in the light of recent environmental changes made by humans.

In their investigation, Professor Colchero and his team analysed data on 110,148 individual, zoo-based mammals — representing a total of 191 species.

Working with animals at zoos gave the team a greater understanding of their age. It is crucial because, although cancer is a disease that affects the elderly, it is difficult to know and estimate wild animal’s age.

This is in addition to the fact that it can be difficult to determine cancer rates or impacts on natural animal populations. Serious illnesses are often fatal due to starvation and predation. 

Although cancer is widespread in mammals and affects everyone, the researchers also found that all individuals are not equally susceptible to it.

Specifically, the team’s analysis revealed that the carnivorans — a group of mammals that, as their name suggests, are chiefly meat-eaters — are particularly prone to the disease. 

More than half of all the red wolves, bat-eared and clouded leopards in the study died from cancer.

In contrast, the ungulates — or hooved mammals, who are typically herbivorous — all appear to be highly resistant to the disease.

In their investigation, Professor Colchero and his team analysed data on 110,148 individual, zoo-based mammals — representing a total of 191 species. Pictured: cancer mortality risk across the different mammalian subgroups

In their investigation, Professor Colchero and his team analysed data on 110,148 individual, zoo-based mammals — representing a total of 191 species. The cancer mortality risks across different subgroups of mammalian mammals is shown in the picture. 

Ungulates — or hooved mammals, who are typically herbivorous — all appear to be highly resistant to the disease. Pictured: sheep are examples of ungulates

Ungulates — or hooved mammals, who are typically herbivorous — all appear to be highly resistant to the disease. Illustration: Ungulates are sheep, which is an example of an ungulate.

According to the researchers, their results indicate that zoo-based mammals that consume animals — in particular, other mammals — are at an increased cancer risk.

The team speculated that this could be due to the low diversity of microbiome in carnivores, their limited exercise while under human care or the vulnerability to viral infections that can cause cancer. 

Nature published the full results of this study. 

EXPLORING PETO’S PARADOX 

According to the researchers, the data collected in their study allowed them to explore a puzzling evolutionary question known as Peto’s paradox. 

Tumours are diseases that result from detrimental mutations — and mutations usually arise during the division of cells.

Therefore, it is obvious that larger animals that live longer and undergo greater cell division will be at higher risk for developing cancer.

Several studies have supported this theory in humans — with, for example, a higher risk of cancer having been associated with a greater height (and therefore body size).

However, this correlation does not seem to hold across different species — with both elephants and mice have a similar likelihood of developing cancer, even though the former are considerably larger and live for far longer.

This is Peto’s paradox — named in honour of its discoverer, the British statistician and epidemiologist Richard Peto.

Professor Colchero and colleague’s data further affirms that cancer risk across different mammals is largely independent of body mass and life expectancy, as the paradox maintains. 

The team suggested that it appears that increasing efficiency in tumour suppression mechanisms has accompanied the development of bigger bodies and longer life expectancies.

Advertisement