For many in the meat business, September 25th was going to be Black Thursday, the day that beef was going to get the final push off the dining tables of the world. Two reports on diet and cancer were due to be published on the same day, with red meat destined to feature in both.

Of most concern was the deliberations of one of Britain's most authoritative scientific committees. The other was a World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) evaluation of the link, looking at 4,000 studies. Together, the two had the potential to deliver the fatal blow.

The meat business has become expert in anticipation. BSE and Ecoli 0157 have at least taught it to challenge contention when the latest food scare or scientific report surfaces in a seemingly relentless tirade against beef.

The Irish food marketing body, Bord Bia, which includes meat as a major part of its brief, pondered how it might counteract the onslaught for months in advance. It so happened it was a heavy news day on both sides of the Irish Sea. The story was off the front pages.

In any event, the Committee on the Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition (Coma) dithered in the face of intense friction between political and scientific interests within it, so much so that only its recommendations were issued by the Department of Health.

The Irish Times understands from sources close to the four-year-long deliberation that the clear view was that it should target heavy meat eaters - a view endorsed among its most expert section within a working group. But a debate then ensued over what constituted high intake.

In the light of evidence showing increasing risk of cancer with rising consumption, the full committee decided to extend the advice to cut down beyond the biggest eaters. Many scientists regret the political agenda had a last-minute say, particularly as Coma had gone beyond just incorporating eminent people in the study but had the best expertise on board.

Coma, which gives independent advice on food safety, says in its final version that people eating between eight and 10 portions of red/processed meat a week (90g per day - equivalent to a quarter pound hamburger) "should consider a reduction". Those with high intakes in the order of 12 to 14 portions per week (140g per day - equivalent to a 6-7oz steak) "should reduce their consumption".

WCRF says people should not eat more than one portion of red meat a day and a diet based on foods of plant origin is vital to cancer prevention.

Nutritionists, medics and politicians rowed over emphasis that day. The killer blow did not materialise, but the findings by any reading bring little consolation to the beef sector. This week, it has been back to the usual slow kill. Two other reports provide as near to conclusive proof as you will get that BSE causes "new variant" CJD. And then the British public was confronted by newspaper ads from the Vegetarian Society "feeding you the facts".

The cancer link to meat is undeniable, if not overwhelming, the text implies, below graphic pictures of scars after colon, prostate and breast cancer treatment. It was a modern morality tale, presenting susceptible victims and those coming to the rescue.

"It's much easier to cut out meat . . . Now that the government has issued a warning that eating meat can increase your risk of cancer, while eating more fresh fruit and vegetables can help . . . a British Medical Journal study estimates that vegetarians have up to 40 per cent less risk of becoming victims," was the key message.

"You might decide that meat, like cancer, is best avoided," it concludes. If only it was so easy. For diet, like cancer, is part of the endlessly complex side of life. But first some basic science.

Eat vast quantities of any foodstuff and there are health consequences, often culminating in cancer - a useful start-out point in dietary debate.

It's reinforced by the leading Irish expert on nutrition, Prof Mike Gibney of Trinity College. Drinking alcohol to excess gives you liver cancer. A diet dominated by peanuts, beans or soft drinks would have obvious consequences too. "There is probably a link between very high consumption of many foods and cancer, and meat is unquestionably one of those foods."

For average Irish people striving for a mixed diet between meat, fish, chicken and days of no animal food, there is absolutely nothing to worry about. Those who relish their red meat and two servings of vegetables? "I cannot see any data saying there is cause for concern."

We may be a leading European meat producer but we are not among the heavier meat-eating nations. We do consume, nonetheless, more than Britain; average consumption of red meat here is 61kg a year per person, compared to 53kg there. Austria at 89kg, Germany at 83kg and France at 72kg are among the big consumers.

Bord Bia says it advocates meat consumption in the context of a balanced diet. "It is clear that eating meat three times a day is unacceptable."

Many of Europe's big red-meat consumers, however, have much lower colorectal cancer levels than Ireland, which may be due to us being the lowest consumer of fruit and vegetables. Bord Bia detects an overdue emphasis on meat in the coverage, possibly because of beef's recent troubled history. It features in only one of the 14 WCRF recommendations.

Prof Gibney, who sits on many EU regulatory bodies on nutrition, has grave reservations about putting figures on meat consumption or any food. "Quantitative guidelines are very dangerous."

They imply a tremendous knowledge of a food; of the relationship between dose/intake and response. If Coma goes down that road, it should list quantities of cereal/fibre and fruit/vegetable to be eaten in the interests of being fair and honest, he says. "Putting a figure on meat" was to suggest a kind of relationship with cancer that in his view does not exist.

He points to words like "probable" and "possible" in the WCRF report. That does not amount to indisputable need to reduce average meat consumption. He prefers to concentrate on the undeniables; the merits of plant-based food in a balanced diet and including meat when it comes to cancer prevention.

September 25th was a day when sheer science was coloured by other factors. The balance in the ongoing balanced diet equation was temporarily upset. It will be restored in time, as science usually wins out in the end.