Yes, most nutritional studies are done the same way. There are some animal studies where animal are fed large quantities of a substance and then studied to see if they get cancers.
take care
Thank you! I appreciate this information! Do you know if to Vitamin C and other antioxidant supplements were studied the same way?
Thanks!
Hi Meli-melo,
You raise an interesting question. The answer, I think is complex. All these studies that link something in the environment - food, sunlight, living next to a nuclear reactor- are what I call "soft" science. Basically the studies are done usually by telephone interview. people are selected who have a cancer and are asked to recall what they - ate, did, lived next to , etc. This group is then compared to a similarly matched group usually using telephone directories or hospital patients who do not have cancer , etc, who are then also interviewed.
Now think about it - you have been diagnosed with a cancer. You are racking your mind to think of what you ate or did to cause this. Are you going to remember something you did or ate from 10 to 20 years earlier in an objective manner?
Probably not. That is called "bias". All studies have some type of bias to them. What we try to do is figure out what wisdom we can glean from understandably biased information.
So is it really a life long habit of eating diary products that increases the chance of a cancer? Or is it something associated with that like, people who eat dairy may be heavier than people who are vegans and have no fats in their diet. Or is it that some cows were fed grain that was fortified with estrogen hormone in the '60s. It is pretty hard to sort out.
If something causes cancer - let's take a completely non controversial example of cigarette smoking causing lung cancer - it takes years of exposure and then there is a 10 to 30 year delay before the cancer shows up.
so I would say - do not ask your mother to stop eating something that gives her joy
best wishes