4.5 Review

Fruit, vegetables, and the prevention of cancer: Research challenges

期刊

NUTRITION
卷 19, 期 5, 页码 467-470

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0899-9007(02)01037-7

关键词

anticarcinogenic agents; case; case-control studies; cohort; cohort studies; epidemiology; confounding factors; fruits; vegetables

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: A great deal of epidemiologic evidence has indicated that fruits and vegetables are protective against numerous forms of cancer. However, there are many gaps in our knowledge METHODS: In this pilot-study we reviewed more than 200 cohort and case-control studies to determine the shape of the dose-response relationship (i.e ,how the risk reduction per extra serving,of fruits' and vegetables changes With the actual intake of these foods). We found major barriers to investigating this. As part of this pilot study we also investigated whether specific fruits and vegetables are responsible for the anticancer action of these foods of whether. a wide variety is required for optimal protection. If the former is correct, then fruits and vegetables may,contain one or a small number of magic bullets; if the latter is correct, then a teamwork concept may be valid. RESULTS: Different findings suggested that the teamwork concept is much more likely. Many studies, especially older ones, have ignored potential confounding variables such. as energy intake, alcohol consumption, physical activity, body mass index, smoking, and. socioeconomic status (although many recent studies have adjusted for education). Other potential-confounders that have-generally been ignored are consumption of whole grain cereals and the use of vitamin and mineral supplements. CONCLUSIONS. The inverse,association between intake of fruits and vegetable and the risk of cancer of the colon, breast, and stomach has generally been nine stronger in case-control than in cohort studies. We have no clear explanation for this. (C) Elsevier Inc. 2003.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据