I don’t think I believe this myself

One of the authors of the study, Professor Lorenzo Cohen, said: “We determined that it was specifically fructose, in table sugar and high-fructose corn syrup, ubiquitous within our food system, which was responsible for facilitating lung metastasis and 12-HETE production in breast tumours.”

Consumption of fructose (particularly HFCS) differs markedly in US/Europe. Not been told that the incidence of breast cancer so differs…..

9 thoughts on “I don’t think I believe this myself”

  1. You see, this is what happens when researchers like Prof Cohen specialise too deeply in one subject.

    Even a cursory reading of a few issues of the Daily Mail tells us that the effects of fructose can be countered by one or 14 glasses of wine a day, or indeed by never touching a drop.

    Of course, those not imbibing any alcohol are bound to get dementia, whilst those who take the 14 glasses of wine route will find their livers explode.

    Fortunately, exploding livers can be prevented by a steady ingestion of liver wort, fried with newt, on the third Tuesday of every month which has a full moon.

    Dementia, naturally, is prevented by the sacrifice of 15 vestal virgins (certified as such by the futue Lord of Danzuck).

    (Con’t p94)

  2. “You see, this is what happens when researchers like Prof Cohen specialise too deeply in one subject.”

    Yeah–telling lies.

  3. The Telegraph recently caried a piece where some bint doused cells in a petri dish with neat e-cig solution and some of them died, clearly proving e-cigs were as dangerous as the real thing.

    This is what passes as science these days.

  4. The demonisation of HFCS is just a witch-hunty thing. Oddly, I never see the witch-huters draw such sensible conclusions as avoid fruit, eschew honey.

  5. Carbohydrates break down to glucose in the body.

    Since this molecule is the same whether it comes from starch, fructose, sucrose, maltose, etc it is a puzzle why the type of carbohydrate – the source of the glucose – can play any part in cancer growth, since it is glucose not the starter carbohydrate which the cancer cells will use for energy.

    Some carbs break down quicker, but even so glucose is glucose.

    Primary risk factors for cancers are genetic and age.

    Feeding mice A will mean the mice do not consume other things… not hungry. This will change their metabolism if they have previously had the other things in their diet.

    Unless that change can be identified and eliminated as the cause of the cancer growth, then results are invalid.

    The ‘sin’ here is to choose and isolate a minor, single factor in a complex, dynamic system of multiple unmeasurable variables, ignore all others and assign it dominant or exclusive causal effect – the same is done by climate doomers.

    In the DM headline there is the ‘could’ word. Once the word ‘could’ or ‘might’ is seen in reference to any ‘research’, the word ‘research’ can be replaced by the word ‘guessing’.

  6. Fructose is fruit, sucrose is veggies, starch is grains, (and spuds), so you can stuff your five-a-day crap; I’m eating meat, (and eggs).

  7. Umm, primary risk factors for cancer are the NHS treating you with azothiaprine and cyclophosphamide for organ transplants 20 years ago.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *