G'day G'day Susan,
Thanks for posting. Colorectal cancer is one cancer that is thought
to have a high risk associated with dietary factors. The problem has
been that each time excellent sounding hypotheses have been advanced
to warrant large scale INTERVENTION trials the hot contenders for
reducing the risk have not worked. The situation regarding fibre
intake was most embarrassing for its proponents. I wish all those
working in this field the best of luck in choosing the right specifics
to trial. We all need them to find a satisfactory working model to
make intelligent food choices.
Best wishes,
Quentin.
This post not CC'd by email
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:48:15 -0500, Susan <nevermind@nomail.com>
wrote:
>x-no-archive: yes
>
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
>Susan

Signature
Quentin Grady ^ ^ /
New Zealand, >#,#< [
/ \ /\
"... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Susan - 28 Mar 2006 00:06 GMT
> G'day G'day Susan,
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> to trial. We all need them to find a satisfactory working model to
> make intelligent food choices.
I think the confounding results in the fiber trials may've had to do
with the fact that they didn't control for the source and how
insulinogenic the whole diet was. Where fiber was alleged to be
protective, it may've simply lowered the total metabolizable carb load
to produce the effect. I would guess that if the fiber came from more
leafy stuff and less starch, all the phytonutrients might've been
protective against ca.
In checking Medline, a few cancers leap out as having tight relations
with hyperinsulinemia. Off the top of my head, breast, colon, prostate,
ovarian and pancreatic cancers.
Forest, trees, all that. :-/
Susan