Comments on: Do those antioxidants in food really prevent cancer?

By: Diana

Diana — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:29:21 +0000

I don’t see how a multitude of studies on antioxidants proves that they work in decreasing a risk of cancer. Science is prone to bandwagons. Take 10 years ago when if you could not get money for research unless it had to do with curing cancer. Are antioxidants good for you? Yes, I’m sure they are. However, I will agree that they are being overpublicized and eating antioxidants at every meal may be overdoing it. If you sit through and read peer-reviewed studies about antioxidants you will find, much like the author stated, that most of the studies in favor of antioxidants have been conducted in vitro. You will also find that many of the studies that show antioxidants prevent or halt cancer have not been conducted on normal human cells. They are usually conducted on HeLa cells. I recommend checking out pubmed.com .

By: Debbie

Debbie — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 05:37:31 +0000

I appreciate hearing both sides of the arguments from the author and the commentary from the readers.

By: Randolph Howes M.D., Ph.D.

Randolph Howes M.D., Ph.D. — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:18:13 +0000

The confusion and data inconsistencies of the results of the antioxidant studies is due to the fact that they are based on the disproven free radical theory of Harman. The free radical theory repeatedly fails the scientific method due to its lack of predictability. Prooxidants are essential for pathogen and neoplasia protection and are of low toxicity, since they are present in all aerobic cells in steady state levels. Please see details at http://www.thepundit.com or http://www.medi.philica.com. Antioxidants may serve as co-oxidants and are useful in that regard but randomized, controlled, blinded studies have shown the ineffectiveness of antioxidant supplementation and their potential to do harm by causing a prooxidant deficiency state. Randolph M. Howes M.D., Ph.D.

By: David L. Kern

David L. Kern — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:37:05 +0000

Oh dear! I’m sorry but I cannot let this misinformation go unchallenged.

The notion that “your body already make all the antioxidants it needs” is absurd and scientifically false. If it were true, there would be no requirement for vitamin C, which is not manufactured in the body, and which, when not provided in the human diet, results in death.

The author’s statement that “none of the studies that investigated the effects of dietary antioxidants have shown any significant benefit” is catastrophically wrong. There are hundreds of clinical trials showing clear benefits of dietary antioxidants and antioxidant supplementation.

Are there studies which reveal no benefit of antioxidants? Of course. There are many reasons for this, which should be part of any reasonable discussion on the science of antioxidants and human health. The assumptions and factual inaccuracies of this article, unfortunately, do not rise to the level of reasonable discussion.

A search on the term “antioxidant” today in the National Library of Medicine’s public database yields over 256,000 results. (For comparison, a search for “cholesterol” finds 167,651.) It is impossible for a clear-thinking person to dismiss this volume of research as unimportant, or some “media-created” phenomenon.

Mr. Fox’s assertion of “the failure of any live study to show any health benefits from antioxidant supplements” is a dangerous lie. I have to wonder if this blatant misrepresentation of scientific fact can be dismissed as mere delusion. It is irresponsible of Mr. Fox to mislead his readers on a subject so critical to their health and well-being. It is irresponsible of scienceonline.org to give such rubbish an aura of scientific respectability by its publication.

There isn’t room here to quote a hundred scientists, medical doctors, professors and biochemists on their opinions on the value of antioxidants. Here are only a few:

“We’re learning that antioxidants should be consumed with every meal. If you routinely skip antioxidants in your diet, over time, the excess number of free radicals being produced may begin damaging cellular components, ultimately leading to atherosclerosis, cancer, and other diseases.” – Ronald Prior, Ph.D., chemist at USDA’s Arkansas Children’s Nutrition Center

“When you study the medical literature, you understand, without a doubt, that patients who take a complete balance of optimal levels of high-quality nutritional supplements have a health benefit over those who don’t.” – Ray D. Strand, M.D

“There is overwhelming scientific evidence demonstrating that those of us who eat a diet rich in antioxidants and take antioxidant supplements will live longer, healthier lives.” –Lester Packer, Ph.D.

If your antioxidants don’t work, Mr. Fox, you’re taking the wrong ones.

By: Stuart Fox

Stuart Fox — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:53:05 +0000

I was a scientist, now I’m a journalist. You can follow the links in the piece to find where the information came from. Journalism pieces don’t traditionally have footnotes, but if you are interested in research I examined for this piece but did not explicitly cite, look at:
Rosen, G., Britigan, B., Halpern, H., Pou, S. Free Radicals: Biology and Detection by Spin Trapping. Oxford: Oxford Press, 1999
Harman, D., Journal of Gerontology 1956, 11 (3): 298-300
Halliwell and Gutteridge, Free Radicals In Biology and Medicine. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985
Seifried, et al. Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry 2007, 18 (9): 567-579
Sener, et al. Pulmonary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2007, 20 (6): 642-649
Tatsioni, et al. JAMA. 2007, 298(21): 2517-2526
Bjelakovik, et al. JAMA. 2007, 297(20): 842-857
Cao, et al. Free Radic Biol Med 1993, 14 (3): 303-311
Han, et al. International J. of Mol. Sci. 2007, 8 (9): 950-988
Mink, et al. Amer. J. of Clinical Nutrition 2007, 85 (3): 895-909
Takahama, et al. J. of Agricultural and Food Chem. 2007, 55 (22): 9251-9258
Trevithick, et al. British Medical Journal 1999, 319 (7225): 1600-1602
Greenberg, et al. New England Journal of Medicine 1994, 331(3):141-147
Kirsh et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:245-254
Kris-Etherton, et al. Circulation. 2004, 110:637-641
Age Related Disease Research Study Group 2000, Journal of Nutrition. 130:1516S-1519S.

By: Robert Kingsley

Robert Kingsley — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:33:08 +0000

Could you please tell what the back ground or credentials of Stuart Fox are? I’m interested in his article about antioxidants but I don’t know if he’s a scientist or what. Also, there were no foot notes. Where does his information come from?