@dmccarthy104 These are correlation studies, and, as I mentioned, often unreproduceable, as was the case with the 2011/12 Richman study on eggs and prostate cancer.

Dr Walsh addresses correlation studies in his prostate cancer book (where he does advise limiting process meats, because that correlation has been consistently reproduced under many different circumstances). If you want to dive into the weeds on how difficult it is to interpret correlation studies, this might help:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6130913/
It's not that they're all wrong or unimportant; it's just that even when a correlation is reproduceable, it's not clear exactly what it means without a lot of additional research. They're correct within the very narrow scope of the study, but it's a huge leap of faith (not science) to jump straight from that to "if I eat less of X, I'm less likely to get cancer" (like concluding if you don't eat ice cream, you're immune from shark attacks 😉).

p.s. I hope my point that the prostate is not directly exposed to possible carcinogens your eat, like the liver is, but only sees them indirectly in the bloodstream after regulation and filtering is uncontroversial, but I can dig up sources for that too.