As promised, a little more news from AACR. There were some interesting items about lifestyle choices, adding to that study about drinking more wine.
Those wacky folks from Yale who say I should drink more wine also say I should exercise more. A study from Yale's School of Public Health says that oncologists should recommend exercise to their patients, since it results in better quality of life and better prognosis. However, they also suggest that oncologists stop recommending supplements (vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, etc.), since there is little evidence that they help make cancer better. All that said, I still plan keep up with both anyway. I'm not yet willing to give up hope on my omega-3 fish oil (there's an interesting study I'm following that seems to show that omega-3's help combat inflamation associated with prostate cancer and helps keep the cancer from growing). It seems to me that even if there is no effect on my NHL, there is plenty of evidence that omega 3's will keep my heart healthy, which is just as important a long-term health issue (especially if I'm still doing all of that running).
Of course, there was also a study from AACR that looked at a whole bunch of other studies about diet, nutrition, and cancer. The author of that one says that we can't really trust any single studies on the subject. His team looked at some of the research that's been done on cancer and lifestyles that has gotten a lot of media play, and found that once multiple follow-up studies are done, the results of that research look cloudier. For example, the idea that grilling meat to the point of charring may create carinogens has been around for a long time. It may be true, but if you look at all of those studies together, there has been nothing to show more than a "mild to moderate" effect in causing cancer. Then he specifically questions that Yale study on wine drinking, and says that while this small study shows some promise for NHL patients, other studies show that even moderate alcohol consumption can increase breast cancer risk. So, looking at the big picture, drinking wine may end up causing problems as it helps others.
He really didn't need to burst my bubble that way.
All of that really sums up the difficulty of "lifestyle" research, I think. Unlike testing for the effects of a specific drug, for example, there just seem to be so many variables to take into account. Not that I would want to discourage such studies. But we're fooling ourselves if we think there are easy answers -- a bottle of wine, a piece of dark chocolate, and you're safe.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Here's my take on the charred-meat issue: many of those studies raising the alarm are based on animal testing. However, unlike rats, we're descended from people who have been charring meat for about 100,000 years or more. That suggests that we've probably developed somewhat more resistance than rats have to the chemicals produced by burning meat, just like using antibiotics widely promotes resistance in bacteria.
Very nice. Can you help me figure out an excuse for the wine drinking?
Post a Comment