Taking Supplements

Public Archive
21

Hi I agree entirely with JaneRA.

Ms Plant’s claims are not scientific. Her reasoning is faulty - she is basically saying that western women have a higher incidence of breast cancer and drink more milk and therefore the two must be related.

What we can say is that European adults drink more milk than Japanese adults probably because European adults unusually retain beyond childhood an enzyme which digests milk protein. The majority of the world’s adults don’t have this enzyme and drinking milk makes them feel ill.

I met a Japanese oncologist recently who told me that that Japanese women have a much higher incidence of stomach cancer than western women. Is this because they don’t drink enough milk? Who knows? Don’t believe all this stuff on ‘food magic’ unless it is backed up by scientific evidence. The quote from p122 of Ms Plant’s book is downright nasty and manipulative.

In the 1950s Dr Richard Doll demonstrated a link between smoking and lung cancer. He and colleagues at the Medical Research Council interviewed hundreds of lung cancer patients. Doll thought that the increasing incidence of the disease might owe something to the hundreds of tonnes of tarmac being laid down across Britain at this time, but soon discovered that in 649 lung cancer cases there were only two non-smokers. Even with this evidence he organised a huge follow-up study using a sample of 40,000 doctors. He meant to study their mortality rates for twenty years but it soon became apparent that the smokers were contracting and dying from lung cancer in much higher numbers than non-smokers. He studied doctors because he knew they would react to any findings quickly. Indeed as soon as the results became available many doctors immediately gave up smoking and advised their patients to do the same.

All this makes Ms Plant’s circumstantial ‘evidence’ using a total of 68 women under non-scientific circumstances look a little weedy. I hope that she is using the profits from her book to fund some proper independent scientific research.

Best wishes,

Sue

22

J Plant cont -Hi

I have read this thread with real interest (thanks to all the contributors) and have been fascinated by the J Plant debate.

I have been on the diet for about 2 years now and really don’t find it a problem. I am persuaded by the IGF-1 argument (having a hormone responsive cancer) sufficiently so to do my best to avoid dairy produce. I agree that dairy on its own is unlikely to be the whole story but it is a start and, perhaps more importantly, gives me a feeling of control over this disease.

Part of the problem is that we talk of BC as one cancer but it a multi-headed beast and no one treatment regime works for all. Is it any wonder that a vegan can get BC whilst having never taken dairy? That does not negate the possibility that dairy might be the ‘final straw’ for other people’s BC and, yes, I think that environmental factors (whatever they are) may play a part too.

What saddens me is that no data on the diet and lifestyle of BC patients appears to be taken, at diagnosis, by the hospitals. No one ever asks me what I am doing for myself. I have done really well to have survived 12 years with an aggressive HER2 cancer (3 years with liver mets) but have I just been lucky - relatively speaking! - or have I been doing something right? We don’t know because all that valuable information is not recorded and compared to survival rates.

Yes Jane Plant is only(!) a geologist but she has drawn attention to the importance of diet and lifestyle and hopefully the interest it has raised will encourage the medical profession to devote more time to its investigation - but not at the expense of my Herceptin please!

Blondie

23

Blondie I agree. Many people feel Jane Plant’s evidence for giving up dairy is circumstantial - I agree - it is, but she raises questions that aren’t being satisfactorily answered. Similarly questions about environmental factors aren’t being satisfactorily answered.

I hope the Breakthrough Generations study will answer some of these questions, though I’m not convinced and agree with your point about there being a missed opportunity to record details of diet and lifestyle when people are diagnosed with breast cancer.

I’m a bit wary though that breast cancer is always said to be a complex disease with a variety of possible causes. Maybe it is, but I’d hate that to be used as an excuse to not properly investigate things like lifestyle, diet & environment.

Until the scientists can give us some answers, I think we have to do what we think necessary to protect ourselves. Like you, not consuming dairy is one of the ways I try to protect myself. I also avoid non organic cosmetics and try to minimise exposure to chemicals. For example, I don’t use garden chemicals and I wear protective gloves when decorating. I also use Ecover cleaning products in the house.

24

value of supplements An interesting abstract on the value of supplements:

Self-reported quality of life in users and nonusers of dietary supplements in cancer
Christopher G. Lis1, Jerrilyn A. Cambron1, James F. Grutsch1, Joel Granick1 and Digant Gupta1

(1) Cancer Treatment Centers of America (CTCA) at Midwestern Regional Medical Center, Zion, IL, USA

Received: 29 April 2005 Accepted: 19 July 2005 Published online: 30 July 2005

Abstract
Goals of work To describe the Quality of Life (QoL) characteristics of users of dietary supplements vs nonusers.
Patients and methods A survey of 225 cancer patients presenting for treatment at Cancer Treatment Centers of America was completed between November 2001 and October 2003. A validated instrument assessed the use of 56 dietary supplements in the past month. Two validated questionnaires assessed QoL. Mean QoL scores were compared between the users and nonusers using univariate and multivariate linear regression.
Results Of 225 patients, 91 (40%) were males and 134 (60%) females. Sixty seven (30%) had breast cancer, 40 (18%) colorectal cancer, and 32 (14%) lung cancer. One hundred sixty four (73%) had used dietary supplements in the past month, while 61 (27%) had not. Mean European Organization for Research Treatment of Cancer QoL scores were significantly better among the users for physical and emotional function scales and fatigue, nausea, appetite loss, and constipation symptom scales adjusting for tumor site. In the stratified analysis, lung cancer patients did not show any statistically significant differences in QoL scores between the users and nonusers. Colorectal cancer patients demonstrated statistically significant differences in constipation symptom, with dietary supplement users having better QoL. Breast cancer patients demonstrated statistically significant differences in several QoL scale scores between users and nonusers.
Conclusions Contrary to some of the previously published research, this study, conducted at a community hospital comprehensive cancer center that combines alternative treatment approaches with conventional cancer care, found better self-reported QoL among the users of dietary supplements, as compared to nonusers. The next step in this research is to prospectively evaluate the patterns of changing QoL in relation to dietary supplement use across the entire duration of cancer diagnosis and treatment.

25

supplements/diet I have found this thread very interesting. Since my diagnosis at the end of November several of my friends have given me articles and books about diets/ supplements etc for ‘beating’ cancer. I have not read the book by Jane Plant (because I love cheese!), but so far what I have read makes me think - well I have been eating all these things all my life and look what happened anyway… I think there was a post by someone vegan who got breast cancer as well.
I think everyone should try to eat a healthy diet, because it makes you feel better, and reduces the risk of heart disease, which is still the biggest killer in our society. As for supplements - I am due to start chemo next week, and am going to see a natural medicine practitioner with a view to reducing the side effects of the chemo - so I was interested to read that research.
I also think that complementary therapies such as reflexology can help you deal with the negative feelings and the fear brought on by cancer and the treatments we have to undergo. What worries me is that there are a lot of people out there (especially on the internet) who prey on these fears and use pseudo science to bamboozle and ‘trick’ you out of a lot of money. Everything in moderation, from diet to drink to supplements.

26

question 4 dark lady Thanks for your knowledgeable post. I have looked at your profile and see you have reseacrhed this in great depth.

Can you give some more details about CoQ10. I have heard about taking this as a supplement to help agaisnt possible heart problems with Herceptin. But would like to know more about the german trial and whether CoQ10 is helpful in other ways

Thanks

Sue M

27

IGF-1 and effect on tumour growth For info - IGF-1 can initiate and promote tumour growth, irrespective of hormonal status of the cancer. This is a scientific fact, many papers have been published on the subject. It can do this for very many cancers, not just breast cancer. It would seem prudent to therefore avoid dairy food, whatever type of cancer is diagnosed. Mine is HER2 pos and everything else negative. I still avoid dairy.

As for Jane Plant’s argument that because Western Europeans eat a lot of dairy, and that the high BC rate is a result of this - is that not what epidemiology is all about? Wasn’t this how Richard Doll found the connection between smoking and lung cancer? It is well known among prostate cancer surgeons (here, anyway) that the fall in meat consumption has seen a corresponding decline in the incidence of prostate cancer. The two are connected they say, but studies are too small to come to a definitive conclusion as yet.

My sister who lives in the US has just told me of the news that cattle are now routinely fed landfill. Just think, plastic, the contents of your cat litter tray, spoiled food, cardboard wrappers, and goodness knows what else - all ground up, made into small pellets with additives and binder, then fed to animals destined for the table. No wonder people get degenerative disease after eating that sort of filth.

All power to Prof Epstein I say. Long may he continue to ask these awkward quesiotns. (And so gald to see he is British - the best brains hail from over here.)

28

— “My sister who lives in the US has just told me of the news that cattle are now routinely fed landfill. Just think, plastic, the contents of your cat litter tray, spoiled food, cardboard wrappers, and goodness knows what else - all ground up, made into small pellets with additives and binder, then fed to animals destined for the table. No wonder people get degenerative disease after eating that sort of filth.”

I would be really interested to see a link to this news story, as I have never ever seen anything that states that household waste is being converted into cattle feed

Are you sure its not an intem relating to the ban on the use in human and animal food of brains, spinal cords and other high-risk tissue from animals older than one year? There has also been a recommendation by the committee looking at BSE, for a ban on the use of all mammal and bird protein in cattle feed.

At the moment, while cattle protein from risk material can be fed to chickens and pigs, and vice versa, the recommendation would ban it in cattle feed.
The committee’s report said eliminating animal-based feeds from cattle diets will eliminate the risk that cattle will accidentally be fed protein supplements contaminated at feed mills that also produce pig or chicken feed, which can legally contain cow parts.

The feed restrictions could produce a hefty disposal problem for 50 billion pounds of bones, brains, spinal cords and other byproducts produced by slaughterhouses each year.

Rendering plants currently convert those tissues to protein powder that is put back into animal feeds.

“We’re talking about 360,000 pounds of stuff to go to the landfill every week and we’re a relatively small processor,” Pedhirney said.

Landfills might not accept the material, because it is about half water, said National Renderers Association president Tom Cook.

29

chickens**t I found this on the internet in a BSE report from 2002 - produced by Priondata.org. TSEs are “transmissible spongiform encephalopathies”.

I have heard about this before, Don’t you just love being at the top of the foodchain? Don’t you just love what human beings get up to as well?

"Chicken litter may carry TSEs into cattlefeed

American dairy research scientists have questioned the safety of chicken shed waste when used as cattle feed. Acknowledging that, since the 1950s, recycled poultry bedding has been used as an economical feedstuff for beef cattle, they say that the implementation of a ban on the incorporation of mammalian-derived protein feeds into ruminant diets has raised concerns over the content of the chicken bedding. Beef cattle producers must sign affidavits indicating that they have met their obligations regarding mammalian protein, but some poultry companies use ruminant meat and bone meal in broiler diets. This has raised the question of whether chicken waste exposes the cattle to mammalian proteins.

It has also raised concerns over the use of chicken waste for the fertilisation of pastures, and whether this practice could expose cattle to further risk. Because of the importance of pasture fertilisation as a waste disposal solution for the poultry industry, it is likely that the potential threat will be resolved by omitting the ruminant meat and bone meal from poultry diets"

30

— I absolutely abhor the practice of feeding cr*p to animals. The whole problem of BSE was because of what the animals were being fed. However, your report dates back to 2002, and I believe that following BSE strict new legislation was introduced into the USA. What DarkLady has said is that household refuse is fed to animals, which I find difficult to believe, hence I would like to see the reports.