ExRx.net

Exercise Prescription on the Net
It is currently Thu Sep 18, 2014 10:54 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:00 am 
Offline
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:25 am
Posts: 47
http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20061207/hl ... cancerrisk


any comments?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:03 pm 
Offline
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Va Beach, Va
I couldn't get the link to open, but I probably know what it says, I've been seeing this stuff for close to 40 years now, and unless you're stuffing yourself all day and night with nothing but protein foods, it's bunk. Even on a high protein diet, I rarely go over 1.5 gr P / lb bodyweight, but even up to 2 or a bit more, nothings going to happen, the cancer gods aren't going to come down out of the sky and swallow you up. One note though, I also eat tons of fibrous veg each (broccolli, cauliflower, carrots, etc) and don't shy away from legumes (beans, peas) although I don't use large does of legumes and low GI grains (barley, kashi in its raw form). You do need fiber in your system and all the colored fibrous veg for good colon health.
Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:07 pm 
Offline
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:25 am
Posts: 47
High Protein Diets May Boost Cancer Risk By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter
Thu Dec 7, 4:02 PM ET



THURSDAY, Dec. 7 (HealthDay News) -- Eating a low-protein diet may protect against certain cancers, while a diet high in protein may increase the risk for malignancies, a new study suggests.


The results of this preliminary study show that lean people on a long-term, low-protein, low-calorie diet or who participate in regular endurance exercise training have lower levels of plasma growth factors and certain hormones such as insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). These substances have been linked to an increased cancer risk, especially premenopausal breast cancer, prostate cancer and certain types of colon cancer.


"We know there is a link between nutrition and cancer," said lead author Dr. Luigi Fontana, an assistant professor of medicine at Washington University in St. Louis. "There are certain cancers that are linked with levels of IGF-1, which is an important growth factor that stimulates the proliferation of cells."


If there are high levels of IGF-1, there's a greater chance that mutated cells will become cancer cells, said Fontana, who's also an investigator at Istituto Superiore di Sanita, in Rome, Italy. "We found that people following a low-calorie, low-protein diet have lower IGF-1 than lean athletes who eat a Western diet. This suggests that low protein intake may reduce IGF-1, independent of body weight," he said.


The study is published in the December issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.


For the study, Fontana's team looked at three groups of people. The first, made up of 21 lean men and women, ate a low-protein, low-calorie, raw food, vegetarian diet. The second group of 21 people did regular endurance running, averaging about 48 miles a week. These runners ate a standard Western diet that included more calories and protein than the first group. The third group included 21 sedentary people who also consumed a standard Western diet, higher in sugars, processed refined grains and animal products.


People in the first group averaged a daily intake of 0.73 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. The runners ate 1.6 grams, and sedentary people ate 1.23 grams of protein a day. The recommended daily allowance for protein intake is 0.8 grams, Fontana said. That's about three ounces of protein per day for a 220-pound man.


The researchers found that people in the first group had significantly lower blood levels of IGF-1 compared with the runners or the sedentary people. High levels of IGF-1 have been linked to premenopausal breast cancer, prostate cancer and certain types of colon cancer.


In addition, lower IGF-1 levels are associated with increased life span in animals, Fontana noted.


Fontana thinks that if people ate more whole grains, beans, fruits and vegetables and far fewer animal products, they would be healthier. He recommends fish, low-fat dairy products and, occasionally, some red meat. This type of diet reduces total calories and the amount of protein consumed, and it also might result in lower levels of IGF-1.


"Many people in the United States and Italy are eating 50 percent more protein than what is recommended," Fontana said. "If we eat 50 percent more calories than recommended, we become overweight and obese. What happens if you eat 50 percent more protein than required -- we don't know."


He speculated that eating too much protein increases the risk for cancer and also accelerates aging, "but we need more studies to see if my hypothesis is true or false."


One expert also thinks that a high-protein diet increases the risk for certain cancers.


"We recently published a paper that also shows that a high-protein diet is bad for you. It reduces survival; it increases the risk of cancer," said Dr. Dimitrios Trichopoulos, the Vincent L. Gregory Professor of Cancer Prevention at the Harvard School of Public Health's Department of Epidemiology.


In that study, published online in the Nov. 29 issue of the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, the researchers collected data on the diets of 22,944 healthy adults and found that eating diets low in carbohydrates and high in protein was associated with increased mortality.


Trichopoulos thinks that levels of IGF-1 may be the reason for the increased cancer risk. However, other factors may be at work, he added.


Despite his and Fontana's findings, Trichopoulos isn't ready to recommend a low-protein diet to reduce the risk of cancer or to live longer. Another recent study contradicted this finding, Trichopoulos said. "At this stage, we should wait for clarification," he said.


More information

The American Cancer Society can tell you more about cancer and diet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:15 pm 
Offline
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Va Beach, Va
Again, that argument has been around for years. In the 1980's, the American Cancer society had people switching to hi carb, very low fat, low protein. The result, an increase in heart disease, diabetes type II, and America got to be the most obese nation in the world. Now, the American Diabetes society and others are in fact encouraging all, especially the young, to switch over to something closer to the South Beach, Zone or Protein power. These are labeled Hi Protein diets, but in fact are not really, maybe in comparison to what the average person eats, but the protein %'s are around 40% of daily calorie intake. Carbs are fiocused on fruits and veg, fat is focuse on the natural fats high in omega 3's. Processed foods and refined sugars are discouraged. The problem, they are pissing off the food manufacturers, and they have MAJOR control over things. You really got me on a rant right now, but I think you get the drift.
Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 1:27 pm 
Offline
Rookie
Rookie

Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2006 1:25 am
Posts: 47
yes, from time to time various "studies" come out and encourage or discourage people to use various diets.
almost all of them end like this:

"Another recent study contradicted this finding, XYZ said. "At this stage, we should wait for clarification," he said. "


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:26 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3986
The problem is groups 2 and 3 didn't just eat more protein. They were eating junk food.

"The second group of 21 people did regular endurance running, averaging about 48 miles a week. These runners ate a standard Western diet that included more calories and protein than the first group. The third group included 21 sedentary people who also consumed a standard Western diet, higher in sugars, processed refined grains and animal products."

As you can see sugars and refined grains. Might they have been getting trans fats in their diet also? If so, that tells us nothing. We already know trans fats cause cancer.

Looks like junk food plus junk science. It looks very much like a case of engineering the experiment to get the desired results. No wonder another study conflicts with it. The other study probably didn't have one group eating junk food.

We might as well have a study like this. One group will eat a low fat diet and the other group will have typical western habits. You know like eating high protein, plenty of junk food and smoking 3 packs of cigarettes a day, plus a couple cases of of beer and 3 bottles of Jack a week.

That stuff just cracks me up. People just don't want to except the idea that you can loose weight without being hungry. Just like they can't handle the idea that sweet stuff can be sugar free (hence all the artificial sweetener urban legends).

I think it all boils down to a psychological concept handed down from puritanical days. When it was possible to flavor medicine so it didn't taste bad, people wouldn't buy it, because they thought it was not effective. Also quiet vacuum cleaners have been possible for many many years, but people thought they wouldn't clean as well. So to this day, as far as I know Oric is the only company that makes a quiet vacuum. It is a simple concept I learned in high school psychology, but it seems to have a very large impact on humanity.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 10, 2006 2:35 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 9:41 pm
Posts: 667
Location: Davis, California
Not to mention all of the subjects are lean which is hard to extrapolate to a nation full of non-lean people.

Also, where does resistance training enter the study?

Looks like they have no control at all and therefore any results they get are complete junk. I agree with Ironman, that is junk science.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 


All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group