A new milestone in the fight against cancer is documented in an annual American Cancer Society report released last week. It shows that the actual number of Americans who died of cancer dropped below the count for the previous year, based on records from 2003 and 2002, the most recent data available. This drop in actual cancer deaths in the recent headlines report that cancer deaths fell for the first time since 1930. A closer look at the statistics indicates that the decrease is insignificant.
I suggest we place this into the correct context. Think of it this way — for more than 75 years, cancer deaths have climbed every single year. And this recent study that proclaims we are winning the war on cancer is jumping to unjustified conclusions.
After spending $400 billion on drug research, we are losing this war big time.
The decrease in cancer for men could essentially be attributed to smoking less, and the study states that while cancer only slightly decreased in men it actually increased slightly again in women. The point being that the front page of the New York Times gives the false impression that cancer is on the decline and, secondly, that diet has nothing to do with cancer. Both of those concepts are totally false.
The health care industry is not winning the war on cancer. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) predicts a doubling of the cancer rates in the next 20 years. Of particular interest here is the science that demonstrates that the current epidemic of adult cancers and other diseases is closely linked to what we eat in the first quarter of life, not mostly from what we consume as an adult.
It is childhood diets that create adult cancers and, according to scores of research articles, our children are eating a worse diet than ever before. With the lowering of smoking rates we should have seen a large drop. The tiny decrease denotes nothing.
Bottom line, in spite of modern medical care, we are still losing the war on cancer. It may not be cigarettes leading the charge any more, but our growing waistlines show food addiction is just as serious as cigarette smoking because as we are smoking much less, cancer has hardly budged in 75 years.
Let’s face it, Americans are digging their graves with their knives and forks. They eat only 9 percent of total calories from the anti-cancer health foods —fruits, vegetables, beans, avocados, raw nuts and seeds. It is not the fat content that causes cancer, it is the low antioxidant and phytochemical levels in the American diet. Animal products and processed foods that comprise the vast majority of caloric intake simply do not contain the symphony of phyto-chemicals that the human animal requires for excellent health.
Does Diet Have Anything To Do With Cancer? Last week’s news blared crazy headlines. The New York Times, for instance, says that a “Low-Fat Diet Does Not Cut Health Risks, Study Finds.” The conclusion of their article was that dietary improvements do not lower risk of heart disease or cancer. This recent study published last week in JAMA does not reveal anything new. There have been many other similar studies that have demonstrated “low fat” is not the key factor in disease causation.
I am curious why they had to waste over $400 million on this silly project. First of all, this study compared two groups that both ate unhealthy diets, if you look closely at the data we see that the researchers compared a typical, disease-causing American diet, with one that was just marginally better, but still terribly unhealthy.”
According to the study’s authors, the women in the low fat group actually wound up eating 29 percent of calories from fat, not much different from the 35 percent eating in the control group. This is just about one more serving of fruit or vegetable per day. The two groups consumed about the same number of calories.
Eating a diet heavy in bread, pasta, white meat and processed foods can be low in fat, but is a very poor source of the anti-cancer micronutrition, especially phy-tonutrients, that contribute mightily to overall health. Furthermore, the study was of post-menopausal women.
The later in life dietary improvement are made, the smaller effects dietary interventions can have. It would not have worked much even if the participants had successfully dropped their fat intake much future. Fat is not the key factor in cancer causation.
High phytochemical intake, including critical antioxidants in (high-fat) nuts, seeds and avocados contain heart disease and cancer fighting compounds. Eating more low-fat foods such as egg whites, chicken and pasta does not expose us to the disease-fighting compounds in berries, seeds, nuts, cruciferous vegetables, tomatoes and carrots. But to expect dramatic reductions in cancer incidence these positive diet change must occur when we are younger.
When we are children, our cells are growing and the DNA is exposed to the damaging effects of high saturated fat, low nutrient and low phytochemical intake. The low consumption of fruits, vegetables, beans and nuts results in our unstoppable and growing cancer epidemic.
Research scientists have been forced to accept the idea that the causes of cancer are usually set into motion more than 50 years before diagnosis. Our big artillery in the war on cancer is truly in our kitchen; but we must start feeding our kids right to unleash the big guns.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on February 21, 2006. Read the original PDF.