Alcohol is a proven risk factor for 7 cancer types, and our evidence clearly shows there is no safe level of consumption when it comes to preventing cancer. Each year 17,000 people – 46 people every day – are diagnosed with a cancer caused by alcohol.

Alcohol deaths in England reached nearly 10,500 in 2023, a massive 42% increase since 2019. Despite these tragic statistics, alcohol policy across the UK remains woefully inadequate, doing very little to mitigate its significant harms, including cancer, and the immense burden it places on the NHS.

Making the case for change

Which cancers are linked to alcohol?

That’s why this year, our flagship campaign – Cancer Prevention Action Week – focuses on the links between alcohol and cancer, aiming to ensure that everyone can make informed decisions about their alcohol consumption. While raising awareness is important, it must be combined with evidenced-based polices that enable and support people to make healthier choices.

As many aspects of alcohol policy are the responsibility of the devolved administrations, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales all have alcohol strategies in place. In contrast, England has not had a National Alcohol Strategy since 2012.

We’re calling on the UK government to introduce a long overdue National Alcohol Strategy for England without delay. The Strategy must introduce policies on labelling, pricing and marketing – 3 interventions that have strong evidence of positive impact. Crucially, it must also remain independent of industry influence.

1) Labelling

Despite being carcinogenic, alcohol is exempt from mandatory health warning labels. Unlike other food and drinks, alcohol labels are also not required to include information on nutritional content or calories. As the Alcohol Health Alliance puts it, there is more product information on a bottle of orange juice than on a bottle of beer. In fact, alcoholic drinks only have to display to display minimal information such as the name, strength as alcohol by volume (but only if over 1.2%), allergen information and the best before date (if the drink’s strength is under 10%). Even pregnancy and drink driving warnings are voluntary.

Consumers have a right to know about every product’s health risks and harms. Introducing health warning labels on alcohol that highlight cancer risk, alongside information on nutrition and calories, is an easy and effective way to ensure this. Evidence shows that effective labelling can prompt behaviour change and lead to reduced consumption.

For labelling to be effective, it must be clear, plain, distinct and mandatory. Additionally, labels should not include ambiguous language such as “drink responsibly”. Our policy position on alcohol explains that the use of QR codes to link to health information must be prohibited as, rather than informing people about risks, they provide marketing opportunities by redirecting consumers to producers’ websites.

2) Pricing

Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) has been introduced in Scotland and Wales, but not in England or Northern Ireland. It sets a baseline price at which a unit of alcohol can be sold and targets cheap, strong alcohol that is often consumed by adolescents and other vulnerable groups.

Public Health Scotland’s review indicates that MUP has reduced alcohol-specific deaths by 13% and averted over 800 hospitals admissions every year since its introduction in 2012. MUP was found to have the most impact on those living in the 40% most deprived areas of Scotland, helping to reduce health inequalities. The Welsh government has also seen the benefits of MUP, which it introduced in 2020. Northern Ireland has consulted on proposals to introduce MUP.

England must follow suit, introducing MUP at 65p and adjusted for inflation thereafter. Without MUP in England, a 2.5 litre bottle of cider containing 19 units of alcohol can be bought for as little at £5.25. Under a 65p minimum unit price, this would rise to £12.19. Industry opposes MUP, arguing that it would damage sales in pubs and restaurants. However, most alcohol sold in these settings is already above minimum unit prices.

3) Marketing restrictions

Marketing restrictions on alcohol remain woefully inadequate. Advertising regulations prohibit linking alcohol with youth, irresponsible behaviour or social success, but enforcement is ineffective. The Advertising Standards Agency has no power to issue fines or sanctions, and often rules on complaints only after a campaign has ended. Like labelling, advertising is not a devolved issue, meaning the picture across the UK is largely the same.

Alcohol advertising is widespread, despite strong evidence linking exposure to alcohol marketing with young people drinking more and at an earlier age. The UK’s insufficient restrictions must be addressed by classifying alcohol as an “unhealthy product” under high fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) marketing restrictions. This would limit its promotion, particularly to vulnerable populations including children and adolescents.

The time to act is now

No family should have to endure the devastating trauma of alcohol-related cancer. Yet, as a result of the rise in high-risk drinking since the coronavirus pandemic, the UK could see more than 18,000 additional cancer cases by 2035.

Join us this Cancer Prevention Action Week to demand action. Sign and share our petition today, calling for a National Alcohol Strategy for England.

• The Alcohol Health Alliance, which we are a member of, has more information on MUP, labelling and marketing restrictions.

Seed oils are made by extracting oil from the seeds of various plants, such as:

• Sunflower
• Rapeseed (also known as canola oil)
• Sesame
• Grape
• Flax
• Soybean
• Safflower

These oils are versatile and many are budget-friendly choices in the kitchen. Most have a neutral flavour and a high smoke point, which means they can handle high cooking temperatures – like when you’re frying or roasting – without breaking down or producing unpleasant flavours or potentially harmful compounds. This makes them a safer and more reliable option for everyday cooking.

A particular benefit of seed oils is that they are high in unsaturated fat – the type we should eat more of – and low in saturated fat, which we should eat less of. This makes them a healthier alternative to animal fats like butter and ghee.

Importantly, seed oils provide essential omega-6 fats, which our bodies can’t make so we need them from our diet. These fats support healthy skin, and help build and maintain our cells.

Seed oils and inflammation

You may have seen claims that seed oils cause inflammation. This is mainly because they contain an omega-6 fat called linoleic acid, which can be converted in small amounts into another fat called arachidonic acid – a compound involved in the body’s inflammatory response.

Some people worry that eating too much omega-6 could compete with omega-3 fats, which support heart and brain health, and have anti-inflammatory properties. The concern is that both fats share some pathways in the body, so too much omega-6 may reduce the impact of omega-3s and promote inflammation.

But research doesn’t support this idea. In fact, studies show that people who eat more linoleic acid – the type found in seed oils – often have lower levels of inflammatory markers in the body. Instead of cutting back on omega-6, it’s more important to focus on getting enough omega-3s in your diet by eating oily fish (like salmon), green leafy vegetables (like brussels sprouts) and nuts (like walnuts).

What about cancer risk?

When it comes to cancer, there’s no strong evidence to show that seed oils increase risk. What matters most is your overall diet – we recommend you eat a diet rich in fruit, vegetables, wholegrains, pulses, nuts, seeds and lean proteins like fish and chicken to support your long-term health and reduce cancer risk.

Seed oils in processed foods

Seed oils can be found in ultra-processed products like:

• shop-bought salad dressings
• mayonnaise
• cakes
• biscuits
• crisps
• sweet and savoury pastries

These foods are typically high in salt and sugar, and low in fibre, vitamins and minerals – not ideal for our health.

In fast food restaurants, oils may be reheated multiple times at very high temperatures, which can produce potentially harmful compounds. Most of us don’t cook like that at home.

But it’s important to remember – seed oils themselves aren’t the problem. The real issue is the overall quality of the processed foods that contain them. It’s these foods that are linked to a higher risk of obesity, heart disease, type 2 diabetes and some cancers.

That’s why one of our Cancer Prevention Recommendations is to limit fast food and processed foods that are high in saturated fat, salt and sugar.

So, should I avoid seed oils?

Not at all – and there’s no need to fear them. Seed oils can be part of a healthy, balanced diet. They’re low in saturated fat, provide essential omega-6 fats and offer useful nutrients like vitamins E and K, which support immune health and normal blood clotting.

As with all fats, it’s about using them wisely. They’re high in calories, so stick to small amounts – a teaspoon or a light spray is often all you need. Seed oils are versatile in the kitchen, perfect for roasting, stir-fries, baking, homemade salad dressings or as a healthier alternative to butter or ghee.

Action needed on NCDs – now

Much work needs to happen between now and the HLM in September. We’re attending the Multi-stakeholder Hearing in New York this week to engage Member States and share our priorities. Our advocacy will continue through our annual participation at the 78th WHO World Health Assembly this month, as we promote the benefits of cancer prevention policy.

We’ll participate in advocacy activities and side-events, promoting our HLM policy brief, which outlines our key messages. Civil society must continue its vital role in pushing for change and shaping an impactful Political Declaration.

We’ll collaborate with our longstanding partners such as NCD Alliance, UICC, World Obesity Federation and Movendi International to support the cancer and NCD prevention policy agenda. In the lead-up to the HLM in September, we’ll continue this series doing a deeper dive into each of these policy asks, and share our reflections as progress develops.

If you would be interested in supporting these advocacy asks, please reach out to policy@wcrf.org.

• Report provides further clarity on dietary and lifestyle pattern (DLP) recommendations for breast and colorectal cancer prevention following a comprehensive review of 170 global studies
• Adopting a healthy DLP could also have important environmental and societal benefits, say report authors, and more can be done by policymakers to support adopting a healthy, cancer preventative DLP adoption globally

World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) International has released a major new report on DLPs and their role in cancer prevention – out today (9 April 2025).

Today’s report emphasises that studying DLPs together, rather than looking at single foods or behaviours, can help researchers and the public to better understand how all these factors together play a role in reducing cancer risk.

An independent panel of experts reviewed the available global evidence on dietary and lifestyle patterns and breast and colorectal cancer. The evidence – which was judged to be strongly associated with cancer risk – was used to develop our new recommendation of a cancer preventative DLP.

We’ve come across many examples of human rights being used to advance cancer prevention at the McCabe Centre – whether through public interest litigation by civil society in south Asia to introduce smoke-free public places, or through incorporating non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention and healthy diets into regional human rights strategies and reporting to UN human rights bodies in the Pacific.

We were therefore pleased to see World Cancer Research Fund International’s recently launched Policy Blueprint recognise the co-benefits of cancer prevention and the fulfilment of human rights.

This blog aims to explain what these co-benefits are, and how those working in cancer prevention can make the most of them.

Cancer prevention is part of our human rights

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights establishes that people have a right, and countries have a duty, to prevention, treatment and control of disease as part of the right to health. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which is established under the Covenant to assist in its interpretation, outlines that in order to protect, promote and fulfil the right to health, countries need to regulate health-harming products and make preventive health services and health information available, accessible, acceptable and good quality. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, an independent expert on human rights whose mandate is established under the UN Human Rights Council, has endorsed a number of cancer prevention measures as a means of fulfilling this right, most specifically in relation to front-of-pack food labelling and promoting and supporting breastfeeding.

Likewise, the Committee on the Rights of the Child states that children’s right to health in the Convention on the Rights of the Child includes government obligations to address childhood obesity. This includes limiting children’s exposure to fast foods that are high in fat, sugar and salt or energy dense and nutrient poor, and regulating their marketing and availability in schools and other public places.

Grounding prevention policies in human rights

In many countries, human rights law can provide a valuable framing for engagement with ministries outside of health. In Argentina, civil society organisations successfully advocated for front-of-pack food labelling in parliament using a campaign strongly grounded in human rights. This included emphasising consumers’ right to information on whether foods had levels of sugar, fat and sodium that would harm health, and the right to healthier food environments as a component of the rights to food and health.

In Norway, the WHO’s guideline on policies to protect children from the harmful impact of food marketing, which is aligned with obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, has been important to the Ministry of Health’s recent announcement of its plans to ban the marketing of junk foods to children.

The Committee on the Rights of the Child has raised concerns about commercial marketing in digital environments, including the profiling of children’s personal data for targeted marketing and the use of manipulative advertising techniques. The Committee has made recommendations that have been incorporated into UNICEF/WHO tools to support Member States to address the marketing of unhealthy foods to children. These connections between the marketing of unhealthy foods to children and a broader range of problematic digital commercial practices provide an opportunity to connect cancer prevention challenges to broader issues of online privacy, digital surveillance, and the rights of children in online spaces, and build alliances on these issues.

Cancer places an unequal burden on already marginalised or under-served communities, who are also more exposed to many cancer risk factors. A human rights approach, with its emphasis on ensuring that no one is left behind, and community participation and accountability, is a way of making sure that we have an equitable response that respects, protects and fulfils the rights of each individual to health. In her report on food, nutrition, and the right to health, the UN Special Rapporteur, Tlaleng Mofokeng, describes how disadvantaged groups are targeted in food marketing, and calls for more attention to be given to the relationship between NCDs, racial discrimination and gender.

Challenging the co-option of human rights by unhealthy industries

Despite human rights bodies’ recommendations to prevent cancer and regulate third parties’ impact on health, commercial interests such as the tobacco, alcohol or food industries are often more adept and better resourced at using this body of law than cancer prevention advocates. Unhealthy industries often invoke rights in litigation against public health laws, as part of a trend to launch legal challenges under trade, investment and constitutional law as a means of blocking public health policy. In Mexico, food companies launched a constitutional challenge to front-of-pack food labelling, arguing that it discriminated against food companies and restricted their right to trade.

Courts consistently reject these arguments, recognising that the rights of commercial actors must be balanced against other societal interests, including the rights of people to health, and that it does not enhance rights if we leave the marketing of harmful products by powerful commercial entities unchecked. The Supreme Court of Mexico upheld the front-of-pack labelling law, finding that the labels furthered the right to health and did not present a barrier to commerce. These challenges demonstrate the importance of proactively engaging with human rights and the law as part of a broader strategy on cancer prevention, so that lawyers representing commercial entities are less able to co-opt human rights to block public health policy.

A need for strategic alliances

Human rights are ultimately allies in implementing evidence-based laws to fulfil people’s right to health, with legal principles that emphasise equity, the right of consumers to be informed, and government obligations to regulate commercial actors that may harm human rights all fitting in well with public health objectives. Recalling these principles and building strategic alliances with human rights groups means we can better realise the potential of cancer prevention policies to promote and fulfil human rights for all.

The author would like to acknowledge Hayley Jones and Clare Slattery for comments on an earlier draft of this article.

In almost every region of the world, overweight and obesity among children and adolescents is a public health problem. There has been no progress in stemming the rate of overweight and obesity in children under 5 years in nearly 20 years, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

This is a problem, because we know that when people live with overweight or obesity near the start of their lives, it often becomes a challenge throughout their adult lives.

What’s the problem with being inactive?

Young people may not be thinking very much about their risk of developing cancer. But the habits laid down in youth can last a lifetime. Our evidence shows that being active reduces the risk of colon (part of the bowel), post-menopausal breast and womb cancers.

Perhaps more importantly, being physically active also helps reduce our risk of living with overweight and obesity – a cause of at least 13 different types of cancer. Put simply, excess weight results from an imbalance between the energy we take in through our diet, and the energy we expend through being active (and other bodily functions). While we need to consider wider issues related to our ability to access a healthy diet, and managing stress and sleep levels, part of the solution involves being more active.

Are screens a particular problem?

Screens, and particularly mobile phones, have been blamed for a range of social and health problems among young people, including:

• short-sightedness
• mental ill health
• bullying
• poor sleep

Evidence from our 2018 Diet and Cancer Report revealed convincing evidence that more screen time for children (from mobile phones but also using computers at school and watching devices during leisure time) makes weight gain more likely, as well as overweight and obesity.

The reasons for this are mixed. We tend to watch screens while sitting down, which uses less energy. Watching screens can also encourage us to eat more than is needed, not least because of exposure to adverts for unhealthy food and drinks, which young people may be particularly susceptible to.

The WHO lists limiting screen time as one of the ways to prevent and manage overweight and obesity in young people – but it’s only one.

What are the barriers to getting more active?

Young people’s experiences differ but, looking at the evidence and talking to parents and teenagers in the UK, a few common problems are highlighted:

• Underfunded / poor-quality equipment in public spaces (that may also feel unsafe to use).
• Cost – young people often don’t have a steady income, and gyms/clubs/sports can be expensive. Young people need access to parks and sports fields in their neighbourhoods.
• Travel – young people are often dependent on others for travel, which makes active travel – including safe routes to walk or cycle to school – and good public transport infrastructure so important (see below).
• Lack of options – children and young people in the UK are often offered activities such as football, netball and cross-country, but many want to try out less conventional sports such as yoga, dodgeball or trampolining.
• Gender – there is a significant decline in young girls taking part in sport, and parents of girls highlighted particular barriers to participation around body image, concerns about sweating and clothing, and lack of private changing spaces.

Elsewhere, a 2022 study looking at Botswana, Ethiopia, South Africa and Zimbabwe identified barriers around funding, but also highlighted community safety and a general lack of infrastructure as challenges.

What solutions are working around the world?

When developing ideas and designing policies to tackle overweight and obesity among children and young people, one voice is often unheard – that of young people themselves. From 2018–23, World Cancer Research Fund was involved in an innovative EU-funded project called CO-CREATE, which aimed to change that by putting young people at the forefront of tackling the obesity epidemic in Europe. The youth representatives on the project came up with 4 demands to policymakers, including “Offer all children and adolescents free, organized physical activities at least once every week.”

Using what they learned as part of the CO-CREATE project, our Policy team have devised a policy factsheet on physical activity, outlining the best ways to meet our Cancer Prevention Recommendation to be physically active.

Of all the information in the factsheet, some policy recommendations would specifically benefit children and young people, if acted on by governments around the world. These include:

• Initiatives that optimise opportunities for physical activity (including walking and cycling to and from school).
• Active play before and after school, as well as during recess and lunch breaks.
• Reduce sitting during classes.
• Policies to priorities active urban design, like ensuring access to open/green space or walking and cycling infrastructure where people live.

To keep people informed about both the need to be active, and the opportunities available to them, we also recommend:

• High quality physical education in school curricula.
• Enhanced physical activity training for all teachers.

And some of these innovative policies are already being undertaken in parts of the world. There are many policies recorded in our MOVING database mandating physical activity in schools, broadly ranging from 2–4 hours per week, depending on age and country.

And it’s not just dedicated PE sessions. Italy’s Scuola attiva kids aims to promote a culture of wellbeing and movement among not only students but teachers and families as well. In Finland, the Students on the Move programme encourages young people to sit less and move between breaks. Belgium’s Adventurous Activity initiative offers young people the chance to try out high and low ropes, tree climbing, rowing, BMX, skiing and orienteering.

Yet parents we spoke to suggested that there also needs to be a reframing of how PE is seen in school. One parent in Surrey, UK, said: “If you’re really good, you tend to do loads as part of a club, but there seems to be very little for those who aren’t any good.”

“There’s different aspects of sports. There’s one where you’re trying to create lifelong fitness for young people to engage in sport as part of a healthy lifestyle. And there’s another part where you need competitive sport to provide appropriate challenge” – Jennifer Cole, teacher and parent of 3, Brunei

“Emphasise fun so everyone can join in. Let people compete and win something but focus on beating personal bests rather than being top of the class so it’s not exclusive. Why not offer points or vouchers for those who increase their steps the most, not the ones with the overall highest numbers, so you’re encouraging people who don’t do anything?” – Mike, parent of 3 including 2 teenage girls, UK

Active travel was another key concern for parents – and is also one of our policy recommendations, including:

• Transport policies, systems and infrastructure that prioritise walking, cycling and use of public transport.
• Road safety actions for pedestrians and cyclists.

Active travel, which has the additional benefit of helping countries meet climate commitments, is already being promoted in many European countries. Austria’s Kindergarten Mobility Box aims to make walking and cycling the norm from a young age, and Belgium has similar scheme.

Perhaps, rather than just focusing on crisis-driven solutions to an increasingly inactive world, we need to listen more to young people about the changes they want to see in their world, alongside implementing policies that make it easier for everyone – especially young people – to move more and sit less as part of their everyday lives.

National Cancer Control Plans (NCCPs) are overarching strategic frameworks developed by governments to establish priorities for cancer, including:

• Prevention
• Diagnosis
• Treatment
• Survivorship
• Palliative care

Crucially, their potential to drive meaningful improvements in cancer outcomes has been proven.

Prevention is a glaring omission

The International Cancer Control Partnership’s most recent global review of NCCPs found that only 30% of all cancer plans address prevention. This is a glaring omission, especially given that the cancer burden is already unsustainable – placing increasing pressure on over-stretched health systems and economies. Nearly half (40%) of all cancer cases are preventable by addressing modifiable risk factors including diet, weight, activity, alcohol, smoking and sun exposures, underscoring the fact that prevention is the sustainable way forward.

World Cancer Research Fund are on a mission to wave the flag for primary prevention. First off, Rachael Gormley, acting president of World Cancer Research Fund International, took part in a roundtable event about NCCPs at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Rachael took full advantage of this important platform to emphasise why prevention must be central to all cancer strategies.

We also welcomed the UK government’s call for evidence on the National Cancer Plan for England. Our primary goal is to ensure that the new plan places prevention and survivorship at its heart. We’ll be sharing our written submission in due course and look forward to collaborating with organisations across sectors to amplify our calls.

Plans can be force for positive change

The International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership has examined the relationship between cancer policies and survival rates. It found significant potential for NCCPs to improve cancer diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes when applied strategically and successively.

Countries that adopt this approach have experienced the greatest improvements in cancer survival. For example, Denmark, which implemented 4 consecutive plans between 2000 and 2020, has significantly improved the survival rates for multiple cancers, including an 19% increase in the 1-year survival rate for lung cancer over 15 years.

Prevention is crucial to the success of NCCPs as it offers the most effective and affordable long-term method of cancer control. Prevention policies range from interventions aimed at reducing risk factors, such as helping smokers quit, and policies to reduce overweight and obesity, to actions that tackle cancer-causing infections, such as human papilloma virus vaccination programmes.

While NCCPs are not a silver bullet, they present a unique opportunity to implement targeted, context-specific actions on a national scale. This is particularly important for prevention, where wide-ranging strategies can benefit from the streamlined and coordinated structure of NCCPs, which can set out a roadmap of action across the entire prevention continuum.

Bottom line is rising cancer burden

The growing global cancer burden is why NCCPs focused on prevention are needed.

The WHO estimates that nearly 1 in 6 deaths globally are caused by cancer each year, meaning that annually around 10 million people lose their lives to cancer. The latest statistics on global cancer rates also show that in 2022, there were 20 million new cancer diagnoses, and 53.5 million people living with or beyond cancer.

The enormity of these figures can make it difficult to remember that they represent real people who have had their lives turned upside down by cancer.

It isn’t only the human cost of cancer that is immense. The social and economic costs are also undeniable, making it particularly concerning that globally new cases are expected to skyrocket to 35 million annually by 2050. This increase will be felt most acutely in low- and middle-income countries, which are expected to experience a more rapid rise in cancer rates in the coming decades.

Fortunately, this worrying trajectory is not inevitable. A focus on cancer prevention in NCCPs would allow millions more people to live cancer free. It is also the most cost-effective way to tackle cancer and, crucially, reduces the need for expensive later stage treatments that are often inaccessible to many. In addition, it could lead to an array of co-benefits such as the prevention of other non-communicable diseases and a reduction in health inequalities.

While this shift to prevention requires systemic change coupled with sustained investment, the challenge is not insurmountable. Ultimately investment in prevention will have the highest pay off for governments and the good news is that we already know the integrated policy approach needed to make this a reality.

NCCPs are a meaningful tool to prevent cancer and improve survivorship, support health systems, and promote economic growth. We will continue making the case for prevention to ensure that NCCPs fulfil their potential to reduce the cancer burden. Alongside working to ensure the National Cancer Plan for England prioritises prevention, we will be calling for all countries to develop NCCPs that include meaningful prevention measures at the UN High-Level Meeting on non-communicable diseases in September.

The UK’s National Day of Reflection takes place on 9 March 2025, as an opportunity to come together to remember those who died as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to honour the tireless work and acts of kindness shown during this unprecedented time.

World Cancer Research Fund are proud to be involved in this day and extend it into an opportunity to remember all of those we love who have died. We know many of our fantastic supporters welcome our innovative and groundbreaking work in memory of someone special.

Remembering Mary Towsey

Mary’s family kindly shared this tribute to her, as a supporter of World Cancer Research Fund.

Born in Epsom on 24 July 1936 to Freda and Norman Prideaux, Mary grew up in a loving household with her younger sisters, Jane and Jill. After the war, they all settled into what was to become a bustling, lively, family home in Hampshire filled with grandparents, friends, dogs, cats, geese, heifers, chickens and, most importantly, love and laughter.

Her favourite expression was “Find a way, make a way”. She could make something from nothing, whether an impromptu meal or a beautiful and cosy room in her house. She often saw beauty where others didn’t, and had a gift for showing others the world through her eyes.

Mary started her own very successful art school in Cobham, Surrey, where she would share her skill and knowledge with many aspiring artists. As was so typical of her, she often said she learned as much from her students as they did from her.

When she finally retired from teaching and moved to a smaller house, Mary continued to paint, having made a small studio in her attic, and she continued to socialise with her many friends. Still being full of energy and wanting to do more, she started going to a Pilates class for the more mature woman. There she met a lovely group of women with whom she spent most of her time laughing.

In her quiet moments, Mary would enjoy sitting in her conservatory, drinking coffee while watching the birds feast from the bird table. Mary was an active person, filled with energy who kept gardening and painting until the end of her life.

World Cancer Research Fund is humbled to receive gifts in memory of special people, like Mary.

We have a tailored in memory programme where we supply forget me not seeds in the spring, and memorial baubles at Christmas, as well as online ways to share your loved one’s life. Visit Give in memory for more information.

Would you like to share your loved one’s story? We’d love to hear from you. Please telephone our in memory team on 020 7343 4293 or e-mail tributes@wcrf.org.

The term “plant-based diets” has become popular in recent years. These types of diets, which are traditional for some parts of the world (eg in Asia and the Mediterranean region), are rich in vegetables and fruits, plant oils (mainly olive oil), and fish, but consumption of meat and dairy products is traditionally low. Numerous studies have shown that these types of diets are beneficial for human health.

On the other hand, diets of affluent western societies have changed significantly during the past 60 years towards a diet that is rich in meat, refined carbohydrates, sugar, and saturated fats. This type of diet is not only associated with a higher risk of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and several types of cancer, but it also has a strong impact on our planet’s climate.

Production of animal products such as meat and dairy needs more energy than the production of plant products, hence, by reducing our consumption of animal products, we can save significant amounts of energy. For example, in Switzerland, about 30% of environmental impacts are due to food production, transportation and consumption (PDF).

An international group of nutrition scientists has proposed a diet that meets most nutrition requirements, while simultaneously taking sustainability and planetary health into account. This diet is often called the “EAT-Lancet Reference Diet” or “Planetary Health Diet”. It’s mainly plant-based, meaning that carbohydrates come from whole grains, proteins are mainly from legumes (such as beans, lentils, peas, but also soy food and peanuts), and fats are mostly unsaturated plant oils. Animal products are not forbidden, but their consumption is recommended to be limited.

Our research group at the University of Zurich, in collaboration with colleagues from other universities, was interested as to whether this type of diet, which is thought to reduce the damaging impact of food on our environment, also has beneficial effects on our health, particularly regarding the risk of cancer.

To try to answer our question, we needed a dataset in which the food consumption of the participants was assessed, but in which participants were also followed up for a number of years so that we could know how many of them were diagnosed with cancer. The UK Biobank is a large cohort in the UK that includes more than half a million people. Using data from this large cohort, we have examined how closely people were following the recommendations of the EAT-Lancet Reference Diet in 2005–07, and how many of them had been diagnosed with cancer until 2019.

Sustainability lowers cancer risk, too

When we compared those participants whose diet was closest to the EAT-Lancet Reference Diet with those who ate a less sustainable diet, we saw that an environmentally friendly diet was indeed associated with a lower risk of cancer. Better adherence was linked to a 10% lower cancer risk. However, we did not see a particularly strong protective effect for a specific type of cancer.

The results of our study are consistent with those of other groups trying to answer the same research question using different data sets. This strengthens our conclusions that a planet-healthy, plant-based diet can promote health.

In fact, plants are excellent sources of most of the essential vitamins and minerals in our diet. When a plant-based diet is balanced, products of animal origin are only needed in moderation to provide us with the few essential vitamins that cannot be found in plant sources (eg vitamin B12).

Greater focus should be given to exploring different plant-based foods, as well as on how to prepare plant foods – in particular legumes – so that more people are able to cook and enjoy these types of foods. Consumers, researchers and cooks need to team up to develop climate-friendly recipes. In Switzerland, we have published the first cookbook that only contains climate-friendly recipes. And recently World Cancer Research Fund developed Budget-friendly recipes: Good for you, good for the planet.

• Dr Nena Karavasiloglou, a researcher, was formerly a Postdoc at the University of Zurich. Dr Sabine Rohrmann is at the University of Zurich. Read more about their grant funded by World Cancer Research Fund, including papers published from this grant.

Siobhan McGeown

Siobhan was inspired to run by her parents (in main picture), who have both had cancer. She says: “After watching both my parents suffer from cancer (ovarian and prostate), as well as several other close family members, I want nothing more than to see better outcomes for cancer diagnoses, as well as better detection and testing before it gets to that stage.”

Angela Brooks (left, wearing cap)

Angela was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 aged only 33. ​She’s currently in remission but still living with the impact of cancer, including early menopause​. Angela told us about her training schedule: “Every 3 weeks, between rounds of chemotherapy, I set myself the goal of completing a 10k run.”

Sam Burton

Sam says: “The decision to run for World Cancer Research Fund is driven by my Father’s recent diagnosis with kidney cancer, an event that has reshaped my perspective on life and illuminated the critical importance of cancer research and advocacy.​”

Jack Gibbons and family

Jack Gibbons

This is Jack’s second marathon for us, having also run in 2018. He’s running in memory of his mum, Maggie, who received a diagnosis of very aggressive stage IV melanoma in late 2023 and passed away in January 2024.

Maggie was there to support Jack when he ran his first marathon and was there at the finish line of the London Landmarks half in 2023 to see him over the line. Her support meant the world to Jack and he’s proud to be able to run for her in 2025 and raise money for World Cancer Research Fund.

David Herlihy

David sadly lost his Dad to cancer in April 2024, and his Mum has been diagnosed with cancer for the second time in 5 years​. He’s dedicated to health and fitness, and has completed 5 marathons, an ironman and 2 ultra marathons​.

Hannah Stedman

Hannah is running in memory of her amazing Mum, who “had a very quick battle with lung cancer in October 2023. She was diagnosed on the 3rd and had passed by the 24th. To say this experience was the hardest thing of my life is an understatement.”​

George White

George is a mortgage broker based in the West Midlands and is motivated to run for us after recently losing his Godfather to cancer.

At an event to mark World Cancer Day, the Health and Social Care Secretary, Wes Streeting, announced the development of a National Cancer Plan for England.

He also launched of a new, world-leading trial that is testing AI tools to diagnose breast cancer cases earlier. More than 700,000 women are expected to take part.

Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer in women, with more than 59,000 people being diagnosed in the UK in 2021.

Alongside this, Streeting announced a new initiative called the UK Collaborative for Cancer Clinical Trial Research, which will help to maximise opportunities for the UK to lead in clinical research.

It is being hosted by the Association of Medical Research Charities, of which World Cancer Research Fund is a member.
Responding to the launch of the Government’s consultation on the National Cancer Plan for England, World Cancer Research Fund’s Executive Director of Research and Policy Dr Giota Mitrou, said:

“Around 40% of cancer cases can be prevented by making our lives and the environment we live in healthier.

“We therefore warmly welcome the UK Government’s consultation on the National Cancer Plan for England and commitment to publishing the Plan this year. Marking a pivotal opportunity to shift the dial from sickness to prevention, the Government must ensure the Plan is truly transformative and achieves a step change in cancer prevention so that more people can live free of cancer.

“The launch of a new UK Collaborative for Cancer Clinical Research also provides a welcome focus to maximise opportunities for cancer research. As a member of the Association for Medical Research Charities leading this work, we stand ready to share our expertise on research in cancer prevention and survivorship.

“Overall, the Government’s announcement is a huge step in the right direction. We look forward to working with the Health Secretary and others to make the Plan a reality.”