EATING five portions of fruit and vegetables a day may do little to stop people from getting cancer, a study claims.
American scientists say the benefits of a high intake of fruit and vegetables in protecting against cancer have been exaggerated.
The study of 500,000 Europeans joins a growing body of evidence undermining the high hopes that pushing “five-a-day” might slash Western cancer rates.
The international team of researchers estimates only around 2.5% of cancers could be averted by increasing intake.
But experts stress eating fruit and vegetables is still key to good health.
In 1990, the World Health Organization recommended that everyone consume at least five portions of fruit and vegetables a day to prevent cancer and other chronic diseases.
The advice has formed a central plank of public health campaigns in many developed countries. It has been promoted in the UK since 2003 and in the US for nearly two decades.
But research has failed to substantiate the suggestion that as many as 50% of cancers could be prevented by boosting the public’s consumption of fruit and vegetables.
It has been a shibboleth of healthy living for decades: eat more fruit and vegetables to beat cancer. Now, scientists have found that the anti-carcinogenic properties of such a diet are weak at best.
It remains possible that specific foods have preventive effects against specific cancers, and that the overall effect of a diet high in fruit and vegetables is greater in younger people. In an accompanying editorial in the JNCI, Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health singles out lycopene, a constituent of tomatoes, for which there is “considerable evidence” of a protective effect against prostate cancer. Many other foods including blueberries, broccoli and strawberries are also said to have anti-cancer properties.
“The findings add further evidence that a broad effort to increase consumption of fruit and vegetables will not have a major effect on cancer incidence,” Professor Willett concludes. “Such efforts are still worthwhile because they will reduce risks of cardiovascular disease, and a small benefit for cancer remains possible. Research should focus more sharply on specific fruits and vegetables and their constituents and on earlier periods of life.”
- Similar posts
- Pure fruit juice is healthier (18.9%)
- Latest on cancer busting foods (14.7%)
- Regular exercise keeps dementia at bay (13.9%)
- Five a day message not getting through (13.7%)
- Some antidepressants may reduce cancer risk (13.1%)
- It's now 8 a day (12%)
- Pulses lower bowel cancer risk (10.6%)
3 Responses to “5 a day may not combat cancers”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
April 26th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
Eating your five-a-day? Good for you. But are they the right five-a-day?
Researchers say we should ditch carrots and oranges and buy some sweet potatoes and papaya instead.
Our favourite fruits and vegetables are not necessarily the best for us, they claim.
Rather than making up our five-a-day with foods we know and like, we should broaden our tastes and stock up on kale and blueberries, as well as sweet potatoes and papaya.
Not only will our palates appreciate the variety, they are better for us than carrots, oranges and other favourites.
The researchers focused on phytonutrients – plant compounds believed to boost the health of the eyes, bone, heart, brain and immune system, cutting the risk of heart disease, cancer and diabetes.
They say that although carrots are rich in beta-carotene – a building block of flu-fighting vitamin A – sweet potatoes contain nearly twice as much.
Similarly, while it is easy to start the day with a glass of orange juice, a handful of papaya contains 15 times more beta-cryptoxanthin – another vitamin A building block.
Dr Keith Randolph, of U.S. vitamin pill manufacturer Nutrilite, said that while it was well known that many people do not eat enough fruit and vegetables, even those who ate the recommended five-a-day could do better.
‘This data highlights the importance of not only the quantity but the significant impact that quality and variety of the fruits and vegetables can have.’
But Dr Emma Williams, of the British Nutrition Foundation, said: ‘No food is a superfood if it is not part of a healthy, varied and balanced diet.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1268972/You-eating-WRONG-day-fruit-veg-doctors-say.html
May 1st, 2010 at 10:46 pm
People in the UK have a higher risk of early death than those in many other wealthy countries, a study shows.
While deaths before the age of 60 in the UK have nearly halved in the past 40 years, the rate for women remains similar to Slovenia’s and Albania’s.
Experts said the large inequality gap was to blame for the findings, which were reported in the Lancet journal.
Globally, men in Iceland and women in Cyprus had the lowest risk, the Washington University-led team found.
Researchers looked at data, including censuses, death registrations and surveys, to compile the estimated number of early deaths in 187 countries in 1970, 1990 and 2010.
During the period the overall risk fell by 34% in women and 19% in men, reflecting the progress in medicine and rising level of affluence.
South Asia saw the most rapid decline for women and Australasia for men.
Sub-Saharan Africa currently has some of the highest rates with half of people dying early, compared to one-in-20 in some developed countries.
Some parts of the continent even saw rates get worse, reflecting the spread of HIV in recent years, the report said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8652074.stm
May 6th, 2010 at 4:54 am
Women in high-pressure jobs face up to twice the normal risk of developing heart problems as a direct result of work-related stress, doctors reveal today.
Those who report feeling work pressures to an excessive degree are at some increased danger of developing ischaemic heart disease, according to new research in the medical journal Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
While the link between stress and cardiac disease is well-known, most previous studies have concentrated on its impact on men’s health.
The new findings, based on a long-term study of 12,116 female nurses in Denmark, are among the first to assess if there is a similar link in women.
The nurses in the Danish Nurse Cohort study were aged 45 to 64 at first assessment in 1993. When their health was checked again in 1998, 580 had been hospitalised because of reduced blood supply to their heart muscle. Of those, 369 had angina and 138 had suffered a heart attack.
Participants who said their work pressures were a little too high were found to be at 25% greater risk of ischaemic heart disease than those who found their workload manageable.
However, nurses who described their work pressures as much too high were almost 35% more likely to develop the condition, even when other risk factors, such as smoking and lifestyle, were taken into account.
Surprisingly, those who said they felt under only moderate pressure were at highest risk of all, being 60% more likely to develop the condition.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/05/women-heart-attack-stress