The Whole package-Synergistic effects

This below is an Abstract from Article that shows that healing and protecting properties of the carotenoids from tomatoes working in the best way when those  are in the combination, as God created them!

“For My hand made all these things, Thus all these things came into being,” declares the LORD Isaiah 66.2

Synergistic effects

Lycopene is the major carotenoid in tomatoes. Tomatoes contain a matrix of many bioactive components, including vitamin C, vitamin E, other carotenoids (a-, β-, γ- carotene, lutein), and flavonoids. Their synergistic interactions, when used in combination, may be responsible for the observed beneficial effects of tomato-based products. This study investigated the synergistic antioxidant activity of lycopene in combination with β-carotene, vitamin E, and lutein. A liposome system was used to test the synergistic antioxidant activity. The carotenoid mixtures were more efficient in protecting liposome from oxidation than the individual carotenoid .Research Article

Authors: Shi, John | Kakuda, Yukio | Yeung, David

Can we eat to starve cancer?

How can we conquer one of the most tragic conditions ?

William Li presents a new way to think about treating cancer and other diseases: anti-angiogenesis, preventing the growth of blood vessels that feed a tumor. The crucial first (and best) step: Eating cancer-fighting foods that cut off the supply lines and beat cancer at its own game. Witness William Li’s interesting talk at TED (c).

WHO stuft verarbeitetes Fleisch als krebserregend ein

processedMeat1

Wahnsinn, jetzt ist es offiziell so. Die WHO stuft – basierend auf 800 Studien – verarbeitetes Fleisch als krebserregend ein: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/who-fleisch-krebs-101.html

“Das Risiko steigt demnach umso stärker, je mehr Fleisch ein Mensch isst. “Jede verzehrte Portion verarbeiteten Fleischs von täglich 50 Gramm erhöht das Darmkrebsrisiko um 18 Prozent”, hieß es in der IARC-Studie. Eine Arbeitsgruppe aus 22 Experten hatte mehr als 800 Studien über die Folgen des Fleischkonsums ausgewertet. (…) Es gebe “starke Anzeichen” für einen direkten Zusammenhang zwischen dem Konsum von rotem Fleisch und dem Risiko, an Darm-, Bauchspeicheldrüsen- und Prostatakrebs zu erkranken.”

The Okinawa Diet: Living to 100

What would happen if you centered your diet around vegetables, the most nutrient-dense food group?

“The plant-based nature of the diet may trump the caloric restriction, though, since the one population that lives even longer than the Okinawa Japanese don’t just eat a 98% meat-free diet, they eat 100% meat-free. The Adventist vegetarians in California, with perhaps the highest life expectancy of any formally described population.”

New Cancer Therapy “Dissolves” Woman’s Tumor In 3 Weeks

In medicine, there is often the concern that a patient will not respond to a particular treatment, but in a turn for the books, physicians are now worried that a new cancer treatment might be so effective at eliminating tumors that it does more harm than good.After receiving a single treatment of a novel combination therapy, a woman’s tumor seemingly “dissolved” from her chest in just three weeks, leaving her with a gaping hole in its place. The patient received the same cocktail of skin cancer drugs as almost 150 individuals enrolled in a clinical trial designed to test whether one of the therapies worked better on its own or when combined with another. While most patients did significantly better on the combination therapy, researchers were left gobsmacked by this woman’s rapid and dramatic response and have consequently described her case in the New England Journal of Medicine, alongside the trial results.The therapies the scientists were investigating were the FDA-approved melanoma drugs Yervoy (ipilimumab) and Opdivo (nivolumab), which are both antibodies …

More: New Cancer Therapy “Dissolves” Woman’s Tumor In 3 Weeks | IFLScience

Vegetarian Dietary Patterns and the Risk of Colorectal Cancers

Michael J. Orlich, MD, PhD1,2; Pramil N. Singh, DrPH1; Joan Sabaté, MD, DrPH1,2; Jing Fan, MS1; Lars Sveen1; Hannelore Bennett, MS1; Synnove F. Knutsen, MD, PhD1,2; W. Lawrence Beeson, DrPH1; Karen Jaceldo-Siegl, DrPH, MS1,2; Terry L. Butler, DrPH1; R. Patti Herring, PhD1; Gary E. Fraser, PhD, MD1,2

 

Importance  Colorectal cancers are a leading cause of cancer mortality, and their primary prevention by diet is highly desirable. The relationship of vegetarian dietary patterns to colorectal cancer risk is not well established.

Objective  To evaluate the association between vegetarian dietary patterns and incident colorectal cancers.

Design, Setting, and Participants  The Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2) is a large, prospective, North American cohort trial including 96 354 Seventh-Day Adventist men and women recruited between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2007. Follow-up varied by state and was indicated by the cancer registry linkage dates. Of these participants, an analytic sample of 77 659 remained after exclusions. Analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazards regression, controlling for important demographic and lifestyle confounders. The analysis was conducted between June 1, 2014, and October 20, 2014.

Exposures  Diet was assessed at baseline by a validated quantitative food frequency questionnaire and categorized into 4 vegetarian dietary patterns (vegan, lacto-ovo vegetarian, pescovegetarian, and semivegetarian) and a nonvegetarian dietary pattern.

Main Outcomes and Measures  The relationship between dietary patterns and incident cancers of the colon and rectum; colorectal cancer cases were identified primarily by state cancer registry linkages.

Results  During a mean follow-up of 7.3 years, 380 cases of colon cancer and 110 cases of rectal cancer were documented. The adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) in all vegetarians combined vs nonvegetarians were 0.78 (95% CI, 0.64-0.95) for all colorectal cancers, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.65-1.00) for colon cancer, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.47-1.06) for rectal cancer. The adjusted HR for colorectal cancer in vegans was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.59-1.19); in lacto-ovo vegetarians, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.65-1.02); in pescovegetarians, 0.57 (95% CI, 0.40-0.82); and in semivegetarians, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.62-1.37) compared with nonvegetarians. Effect estimates were similar for men and women and for black and nonblack individuals.

Conclusions and Relevance  Vegetarian diets are associated with an overall lower incidence of colorectal cancers. Pescovegetarians in particular have a much lower risk compared with nonvegetarians. If such associations are causal, they may be important for primary prevention of colorectal cancers.

Are Multivitamins Just a Waste of Money?

Are Multivitamins Just a Waste of Money?

About one in three Americans take a multivitamin. Is that helpful, harmful, or just a harmless waste of money? In 2011, the Iowa Women’s Health Study reported that multivitamin use was associated with a higher risk of total mortality, meaning that women who took a multivitamin appeared to be paying to live shorter lives. But this was just an observational study—researchers didn’t split women up into two groups and put half on multivitamins to see who lived longer. All they did was follow a large population of women over time, and found that those that happened to be taking multivitamins were more likely to die. But maybe they were taking multivitamins because they were sick. The researchers didn’t find any evidence of that, but ideally we’d have a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trial, where thousands were followed for over a decade, with half given a multivitamin and half a placebo. That’s what we got the following year in 2012 with theHarvard Physicians’ Study II. And after a decade, the researchers found no effect on heart attack, stroke, or mortality.

The accompanying editorial concluded that multivitamins are a distraction from effective cardiovascular disease prevention. The message needs to remain simple and focused: heart disease can be largely prevented by healthy lifestyle changes.

The researchers did, however, find that for men with a history of cancer, the multivitamin appeared to be protective against getting cancer again, though there was no significant difference in cancer mortality or cancer protection in those who’ve never had cancer before. Still, that’s pretty exciting. It is just one study, though. Ideally we’d have maybe 20 of these placebo-controlled trials and then compile all the results together. That’s what we got in 2013—a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that analyzed twenty-one trials and more than 90,000 individuals. The analysis found no influence on mortality either way. Some found more cancer mortality, some found less cancer mortality, but all in all it was a wash.

And that was heralded as good news. After the Iowa Women’s Health Study came out we were worried multivitamins could be harming millions of people, but instead they don’t appear to have much effect either way. The accompanying editorial asked whether meta-analyses trump observational studies. The Iowa Women’s Health Study followed tens of thousands of women for nearly 20 years. What if we put all the studies together, the big observational studies along with the experimental trials? And that’s what we got in December 2013. The reviewfor the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, highlighted in my video, Should We Take a Multivitamin? found that multivitamins appear to offer no consistent evidence of benefit for heart disease, cancer, or living longer.

But aren’t vitamins and minerals good for us? One explanation for this result could be that our bodies are so complex that the effects of supplementing with only one or two components is generally ineffective or actually does harm. Maybe we should get our nutrients in the way nature intended, in food.

The accompanying editorial to the December 2013 review concluded that enough is enough. We should stop wasting our money on vitamin and mineral supplements. Americans spend billions on vitamin and mineral supplements. A better investment in health would be eating more fruits and vegetables. Imagine if instead we spent those billions on broccoli?

I’ve previously addressed multivitamins in my videos Are Multivitamins Good For You? and Multivitamin Supplements and Breast Cancer (with a follow-up in my Q&A Is multivitamin use really associated to an increased risk of breast cancer?). I also touched on potential risks in Dietary Theory of Alzheimer’s.

With the exception of vitamins D and B12 (Vitamin Supplements Worth Taking), we should strive to get our nutrients from produce, not pills.

What about fish oil supplements? Check out Is Fish Oil Just Snake Oil?

-Michael Greger, M.D.