Talk:Diet and cancer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Alternative medicine (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 

Fiber and Colon Cancer[edit]

This article cites a reference from 1990 for the preventive effects of fiber on colon cancer. However more recent studies have repeatedly disproved this claim. Please see these links: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/12/14/doubts_cast_on_fibers_effect_on_cancer/?rss_id=Boston+Globe+--+National+News http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/333/7228/300409.html

The fiber theory was promoted by Dr. Denis Burkitt, starting in the 1970's to explain the much lower incidence of GI diseases in the developing world. For 3 decades, researchers have used a circular argument, citing the epidemiology of these diseases as proof that diet must be responsible. Correlation does not prove causation and in this case, even the correlation has not been proven.

But Burkitt had a secondary theory, which, now that the first one has been discredited, seems much more plausible. In the developing world people squat to defecate, so they empty the colon more completely. A cleaner colon is less prone to inflammation and cancer.

This article needs to be drastically revised to avoid the false claim that dietary fiber reduces the risk of colon cancer. The claim that it prevents other cancers also needs to be more closely examined. In the case of breast cancer, the wearing of bras also distinguishes the western world, and would be a much more plausible explanation. See this link: http://chetday.com/breastcancerandbras.htm

A good theoretical discussion of how squatting would prevent colon cancer and other diseases is at my website: http://naturesplatform.com/health_benefits.html

--Jonathan108 17:31, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

incomplete[edit]

This article is obviously incomplete. There're far more risk factor apart from alchohol, for example, aflatoxins, acrylamide, etc.--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 07:17, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Please feel free to add that to the article. To be sure someone doesn't delete it though, also add the details of high quality sources that support your text between <ref> and </ref> after your text, and a citation will be automatically created. This guideline WP:MEDRS describes ideal sources for Wikipedia medical articles; and this site http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed is a great searchable database for biomedical sources. Any queries, ask here or at the medicine project. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 12:50, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Actually I knew all these formats...as you can see from the article azathioprine that I am working to GA. But thanks a lot anyway!--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 06:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

The paragraph on medicinal mushrooms also does not reflect the cited source accurately. If you read the CancerUK page cited, it says exactly what's written here, but it goes on to list several mushrooms that, in early studies, may very well have anti-carcinogenic properties, or at least ameliorate the affects of chemotherapy. They just need further research. Another Wiki page on mushrooms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grifola_frondosa#Maitake_research) also cites several sources, including a phase I/II human trial conducted by Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center where maitake mushrooms showed some promise, and others published in Biological & Pharmaceutical Bulletin and the Society of Integrative Oncology Journal in which showed the same. IMO the sentence in this article should be qualified to reflect the wider reality that medicinal mushrooms are being studied and *may* be effective, rather than asserting that mushrooms are 100% ineffective and useless. (unsigned, Nov 14)

Softened, but this is all early stage research. Wiki CRUK John (talk) 09:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Rewrite?[edit]

This could do with a rewrite. An awful lot of it seems to be based on synthesis of primary sources. Food, Nutrition, physical activity and the Prevention of Cancer by the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research looks like a good resource to start from. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 07:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Diet and cancer[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Diet and cancer's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "aa21":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 11:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

AICR external link[edit]

I removed [1] an external link to AICR's Foods That Fight Cancer page. Given the content, it appears to have been added to provide a different viewpoint than what we have in the article, in violation of WP:ELPOV and as a way around WP:MEDRS requirements for this article's contents. --Ronz (talk) 01:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

"Given the content" is your personal opinion, which should not taint this article. A "viewpoint" is propaganda.
AICR is a highly regarded and quoted research institute. Their work is quite usable (extensively used) in cancer topics in wiki.
You are grossly mistaken to say the link is in violation of ELPOV or especially MEDRS. And I asked that you not be vague (you need to provide the specific section violation, not just the whole wp article).
I left the external link out of Healthy Diet, because the information was, in fact, more pertinent to Diet and cancer. But in general, if a food helps fight cancer, it's healthy! You need to further justify that revert.
I'll give you a day or so to research the AICR, and research the specific information in that external link, but then that link is going back in.32cllou (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)32cllou (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
Please WP:FOC
The link stays out until there is consensus to include it per WP:ELBURDEN.
To clarify further: The link itself is not an MEDRS violation. MEDRS applies to sources and content within the article body, not the External links section. Adding the external link appears to be a way around MEDRS by linking to information that isn't included in this article because the supporting sources they use don't meet MEDRS. We simply don't link to websites that provide alternative viewpoints when those viewpoints don't deserve mention in the article body. That's why it violates ELPOV. If there is information currently on the webpage that belongs in this article's body, it should be added to the article with MEDRS sources. --Ronz (talk) 04:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Pulses and methionine[edit]

Alexbrn, the reference review on pulses is quite good ... clearly usable per MEDRS.

The existing (what you reverted to) sentence on methionine does not reflect the information in the reference. Specifically, : "Abstract

Methionine is an essential amino acid with many key roles in mammalian metabolism such as protein synthesis, methylation of DNA and polyamine synthesis. Restriction of methionine may be an important strategy in cancer growth control particularly in cancers that exhibit dependence on methionine for survival and proliferation. Methionine dependence in cancer may be due to one or a combination of deletions, polymorphisms or alterations in expression of genes in the methionine de novo and salvage pathways. Cancer cells with these defects are unable to regenerate methionine via these pathways. Defects in the metabolism of folate may also contribute to the methionine dependence phenotype in cancer. Selective killing of methionine dependent cancer cells in co-culture with normal cells has been demonstrated using culture media deficient in methionine. Several animal studies utilizing a methionine restricted diet have reported inhibition of cancer growth and extension of a healthy life-span. In humans, vegan diets, which can be low in methionine, may prove to be a useful nutritional strategy in cancer growth control. The development of methioninase which depletes circulating levels of methionine may be another useful strategy in limiting cancer growth. The application of nutritional methionine restriction and methioninase in combination with chemotherapeutic regimens is the current focus of clinical studies."

You will also see my writing (now reverted back) accurately reflects the reference.32cllou (talk) 19:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't think the pulse diet material is in a reputable enough journal for the claims made; I have raised a query at WT:MED since you are inserting this material in 3 locations. For Methionine, you are using the abstract; I am summarizing from the conclusions of the full article. It is important to avoid relying on abstracts but to summarize the entire paper properly (do you have it?). It concludes (in part): "there is still insufficient knowledge to give reliable nutritional advice" - so it would be quite wrong for us to make it seem otherwise. Alexbrn talk|contribs|COI 06:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Use this review (in addition) for the pulses text[1] When we state basic research, and clinical trials needed for humans, that means it does not seem otherwise (not giving nutritional advise). Note that pulses are specifically mentioned here[2]
You are grossly misusing the methionine review to misstate it's conclusions. Please read the article.
  1. ^ Vucenik, I1; Shamsuddin AM. (2006). "Protection against cancer by dietary IP6 and inositol". Nutr Cancer. PMID 17044765.  Cite uses deprecated parameter |coauthors= (help)
  2. ^ "Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective" (PDF). Washington DC: AICR, 2007. ISBN 978-0-9722522-2-5. 

32cllou (talk) 23:28, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

contradiction in the lede[edit]

I think second and third sentence are contradiction... which is fine... just needs bit more clarification in the lede... 178.221.220.214 (talk) 07:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Addition of Specific Diet in Cancer Recurrence[edit]

I think an addition of specific diets related to cancer recurrence would benefit the page. Possibly the addition of research performed in the WINS and WHEL studies. For example the WINS study showed positive results with regard to restriction of dietary fat in cancer recurrence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lgedminas (talkcontribs) 00:25, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Removal[edit]

This was removed today:

Almost all cancers (80–90%) are caused by environmental factors,[1] and of these, 30–40% of cancers are directly linked to the diet.[2]

References

  1. ^ Abdulla, M.; et al. (2000). "Role of diet modification in cancer prevention". BioFactors. 12 (1–4): 45–51. doi:10.1002/biof.5520120108. PMID 11216504. 
  2. ^ "Food, nutrition, physical activity, and the prevention of cancer:a global perspective.". World Cancer Research Fund & American Institute for Cancer Research. August 19, 2009. 

These sources might be somewhat elderly by WP:MEDRS standards. If memory serves, they were taken from other articles. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Possible ref on Reservatrol[edit]

I don't have access to the following. I may have updated info on studies on reservatrol for cancer prevention or treatment in humans.

Gagliano, N; Aldini, G; Colombo, G; Rossi, R; et al. (2010). "The potential of resveratrol against human gliomas". Anti-Cancer Drugs. 21 (2): 140–50. doi:10.1097/CAD.0b013e32833498f1. PMID 20010425. 

- - MrBill3 (talk) 09:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)