The Cancer Conspiracy

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article . com,
pmoran wrote:

JOHN wrote:
Moran:

...............

I won't deny that it might be possible to push the concentrations in
the body a bit higher by massive continuous dosages of Vitamin C but
cannot yet see any point in anyone doing so unless you have been sold a
bill of goods by those selling the stuff. It is nearly all just going
to go down the toilet in urine and faeces.=20

There have been studies using injected Vitamin C which do
have the desired effect.

Yes, very high concentrations can be acheived by intravenous injections
but there is as yet no solid evidence that this has any useful
purpose, or is safe for any long period.

There is also the antioxidant
effect of the vitamin, which apparently works best with
both vitamin E and beta carotene.

Works best on what? And how do you know? Supplementation with both
these vitamins have been associated with higher mortality rates in some
studies.

The statistical religion
learned by medical workers and researchers does not permit
of looking at combinations of causes, and many of their
studies are highly flawed because of this.

Yes studies can be flawed, but a very large number of interventional
and observational studies have been now performed using vitamin
supplements, with in general negative results, and even the suggestion
of harm in some instances, such as higher ocerll mortality rates in
people taking high doses of vitamin E and a poorer prognosis for lung
cancer patients using B carotene.

Traced back, the only evidence for benefit from supplementation has
come from observational studies where levels of intake of vitamins was
probably merely a marker for a more healthful lifestyle in other
respects. These have been promoted mercilessly by the vitamin
pushers, when it now seems that people would have been much healthier
if they had concentrated on their diet, keeping their weight down and
exercising more. In a lot of recent studies a better diet has been
shown to be a far more influential factor on health than
supplementation.

Doing a Medline search on "diet and vitamins" will priibably bring up
many for you to look at.

Peter Moran



Peter Moran


--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

"pmoran" wrote in message
ups.com...

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article . com,
pmoran wrote:

JOHN wrote:
Moran:

...............

I won't deny that it might be possible to push the concentrations in
the body a bit higher by massive continuous dosages of Vitamin C but
cannot yet see any point in anyone doing so unless you have been sold a
bill of goods by those selling the stuff. It is nearly all just going
to go down the toilet in urine and faeces.=20

There have been studies using injected Vitamin C which do
have the desired effect.

Yes, very high concentrations can be acheived by intravenous injections
but there is as yet no solid evidence that this has any useful
purpose, or is safe for any long period.

ZZzz.


*Substantial* *real* *convincing* *hard* *clear-cut* *reasonable*
*significant* *credibile* *compelling* *copious* *direct* *reliable*
*adequate* *solid*

There is also the antioxidant
effect of the vitamin, which apparently works best with
both vitamin E and beta carotene.

Works best on what? And how do you know? Supplementation with both
these vitamins have been associated with higher mortality rates in some
studies.

The statistical religion
learned by medical workers and researchers does not permit
of looking at combinations of causes, and many of their
studies are highly flawed because of this.

Yes studies can be flawed, but a very large number of interventional
and observational studies have been now performed using vitamin
supplements, with in general negative results, and even the suggestion
of harm in some instances, such as higher ocerll mortality rates in
people taking high doses of vitamin E and a poorer prognosis for lung
cancer patients using B carotene.

Traced back, the only evidence for benefit from supplementation has
come from observational studies where levels of intake of vitamins was
probably merely a marker for a more healthful lifestyle in other
respects. These have been promoted mercilessly by the vitamin
pushers, when it now seems that people would have been much healthier
if they had concentrated on their diet, keeping their weight down and
exercising more. In a lot of recent studies a better diet has been
shown to be a far more influential factor on health than
supplementation.

Doing a Medline search on "diet and vitamins" will priibably bring up
many for you to look at.

Peter Moran

http://www.cancerproject.org/protect.../vitamin_c.php

http://www.healthy.net/scr/interview.asp?Id=170

http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/expert.htm#PAULING

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9803/17/vitamin.e.prostate/

http://www.pslgroup.com/dg/436ba.htm

http://www.vitamins-supplements.org/vitamin-E.php




Peter Moran


--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

"jandew6" wrote:

*Substantial* *real* *convincing* *hard* *clear-cut* *reasonable*
*significant* *credibile* *compelling* *copious* *direct* *reliable*
*adequate* *solid*

What is wrong with those words, Jan?

I realise that most (if not all) research done by alternative medicine
spruikers (when it is done at all, of course) is insubstantial, false,
unconvincing, easy, obfuscated, unreasonable, insignificant,
incredible, uncompelling, rare, indirect, unreliable, inadequate and
vaporous, but do you really need to point this out every time a piece
of real research is mentioned? Do you want to make alternauts seem
incompetent?
--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

In article . com,
pmoran wrote:

Herman Rubin wrote:
In article . com,
pmoran wrote:

JOHN wrote:
Moran:

...............

I won't deny that it might be possible to push the concentrations in
the body a bit higher by massive continuous dosages of Vitamin C but
cannot yet see any point in anyone doing so unless you have been sold a
bill of goods by those selling the stuff. It is nearly all just going
to go down the toilet in urine and faeces.=20

There have been studies using injected Vitamin C which do
have the desired effect.

Yes, very high concentrations can be acheived by intravenous injections
but there is as yet no solid evidence that this has any useful
purpose, or is safe for any long period.

I doubt that anyone would be even interested in testing
this for long period, but there is solid evidence that
it helps in colds. Unless one can find the gene and use
a knockout method in laboratory animals, it can only be
tested in higher primates. Other animals make vitamin C
in such megadoses normally.

There is also the antioxidant
effect of the vitamin, which apparently works best with
both vitamin E and beta carotene.

Works best on what? And how do you know? Supplementation with both
these vitamins have been associated with higher mortality rates in some
studies.

Have these studies been done using all three at the same
time? Almost everything on the effects of antioxidants
is theoretical, and the medical people have no idea how
to combine procedures; they assume that each works in
a separate manner almost always, and might get up to two
in a few situations.

The statistical religion
learned by medical workers and researchers does not permit
of looking at combinations of causes, and many of their
studies are highly flawed because of this.

Yes studies can be flawed, but a very large number of interventional
and observational studies have been now performed using vitamin
supplements, with in general negative results, and even the suggestion
of harm in some instances, such as higher ocerll mortality rates in
people taking high doses of vitamin E and a poorer prognosis for lung
cancer patients using B carotene.

These studies, as I recall, were not blinded. If people
taking high doses of vitamin E are those in poorer health,
that is to be expected. Also, vitamin E is a blood thinner,
although not as effective as aspirin. It may also be that
the current use of alpha tocopherol only, instead of a more
natural, or designed, mix of tocopherols and tocotrienols
may not be good; I believe that "natural" vitamin E is
largely gamma tocopherol, and that the delta form is the
most effective antioxidant, while the alpha form has the
most biological effect in laboratory animals.

Traced back, the only evidence for benefit from supplementation has
come from observational studies where levels of intake of vitamins was
probably merely a marker for a more healthful lifestyle in other
respects.

The early push for heavy doses of vitamin E came from some
Canadian cardiologists, and it was probably the blood thinning
effect which was important. They found that it reduced the
rate of repeat heart attacks in their patients.

The need for vitamin C to some extent goes back to the 18th
century; how much to take is questionable. An endocrinologist,
now retired, got me to raise my intake from 500 mg/day to
1000 mg/day on the basis of observations on the hair on my
arm. I am also taking megadoses of B vitamins on medical
recommendations. So both of these are for medicinal purposes,
not general; it is still true that the "average threshhold"
for vitamin C excretion under normal conditions is about 250 mg/day.
But there was a paper I read 50 years ago which indicated that
the needs of "normal" people for a nutrient could easily vary
by a factor of 10.

These have been promoted mercilessly by the vitamin
pushers, when it now seems that people would have been much healthier
if they had concentrated on their diet, keeping their weight down and
exercising more. In a lot of recent studies a better diet has been
shown to be a far more influential factor on health than
supplementation.

What is a better diet? There are NO studies showing that a
low fat diet is healthier; this was based on the art of
jumping to conclusions. "Keeping weight down" is a good
idea, but nobody has come up with a way to do it which does
not lead to other problems. As for exercising more, this
might also be impractical; there is the story about the man
whose doctor told him that if he did a certain amoung of
exercising, he would live two years longer. His answer was
that he would then be spending three years on exercising.
I for one am extremely limited in the types of exercise I
can do.
w



Doing a Medline search on "diet and vitamins" will priibably bring up
many for you to look at.

What is needed here is research by people who know how to
do multivariate studies and who do not subscribe to the
religion of statistical significance.

Peter Moran
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558