--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Patrick Gillam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Fairfield Lifers interested in scientific > research may enjoy a short article in the > New York Times on what constitutes a good > medical study. > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/health/30stud.html?8dpc > or > http://tinyurl.com/4nmmg2 > > Searching for Clarity: A Primer on Medical Studies > > By GINA KOLATA > Published: September 29, 2008 > > Everyone, it seemed, from the general public to many scientists, was > enthralled by the idea that beta carotene would protect against > cancer. In the early 1990s, the evidence seemed compelling that this > chemical, an antioxidant found in fruit and vegetables and converted > by the body to vitamin A, was a key to good health. > > There were laboratory studies showing how beta carotene would work. > There were animal studies confirming that it was protective against > cancer. There were observational studies showing that the more fruit > and vegetables people ate, the lower their cancer risk. So convinced > were some scientists that they themselves were taking beta carotene > supplements. > > Then came three large, rigorous clinical trials that randomly assigned > people to take beta carotene pills or a placebo. And the beta carotene > hypothesis crumbled. The trials concluded that not only did beta > carotene fail to protect against cancer and heart disease, but it > might increase the risk of developing cancer. > > It was "the biggest disappointment of my career," said one of the > study researchers, Dr. Charles Hennekens, then at Brigham and Women's > Hospital. > > http://tinyurl.com/4nmmg2 >
Moral of the story: pre-vitamins are not drugs. If they had taken the supplements along with a bit of naturally occurring beta-carotene as found in fruits or carrots or whatever, I wonder what would have happened? Its entirely possible that the body can't process the substance properly as a pure chemical and needs other chemicals for it to be beneficial. Lawson
