The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Friday confirmed that it has not found any strong link between eating lycopene and a reduced risk of certain cancers, shattering retailers’ hope to include labels advertising the beneficial effects on products containing tomatoes.
FDA’s conclusion comes nearly eighteen months after the agency refused a request from some U.S. tomato growers and food companies to allow them to make unfettered claims that both fresh and cooked tomatoes have anti-malignancy properties, and that lycopene, the antioxidant that gives tomatoes their red color, is responsible.
The U.S. health watchdog concluded yesterday (July 10) in the journal of the National Cancer Institute that a diet rich in tomatoes and the tomato antioxidant lycopene is not associated with the reduced risk of any type of cancer.
To reach their conclusion, Claudine Kavanaugh and his colleagues of the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, College Park, Maryland evaluated 145 studies of lycopene, tomato, or tomato product intake and cancer risk.
"The analysis found no credible evidence that lycopene, either in food or in a dietary supplement, was associated with reduced risk of any of the cancers evaluated," said chief researcher, Kavanaugh.
According to Dr. Edward Giovannucci of the Harvard School of Public Health who wrote an editorial accompanying the report, the health agency's conclusions should not be interpreted as confirmation that tomatoes are not beneficial in preventing prostate cancer as the report showed a little evidence for associations between tomato consumption and reduced risk of prostate, ovarian, gastric and pancreatic cancers.
"Although it may be premature to espouse increased consumption of tomato sauce or lycopene for prostate cancer prevention, this area of research remains promising," Giovannucci said.
Some earlier studies claim that the lycopene found in tomatoes has cancer-preventing properties. But the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition says there is no credible evidence that intake of lycopene cuts the risk of cancer.
Submitted by Tony (not verified) on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 04:09. *
these guys could not research anything ---first of they have not had any labs since the 80's when Reagen disbanded any fascility research centerandtook away the ability to research----secondly the facts have been going on with lycopene and olive oil to be the best effect you could have to make this work through the synergistic effect they have ( pizza any one---with out the excesses) there has been an anti vitamin campaign going on in NZ and Canada and the EFSA has ben re writng the book on dietary claims all equaling to a discreditting of supplements---these administrations are being pressured or cajoled by the drug companies to remove supplements that work off the shelf so people will go after the drugmakers for help----the problem is that the vitamin companies in the states are a 60 million dollar a year industry for the pharma group so they have to dismantle it with regulations and limited dose or access or discrediting the supplement as being toxic or contaminated or useless ---this has been going on for over 50 years---the difference today is less people are opposing this move by the drug companies
Disclaimer: The views and investment tips expressed by investment experts on themoneytimes.com are their own, and not that of the website or its management. TheMoneyTimes advises users to check with certified experts before taking any investment decision.
FDA????
these guys could not research anything ---first of they have not had any labs since the 80's when Reagen disbanded any fascility research centerandtook away the ability to research----secondly the facts have been going on with lycopene and olive oil to be the best effect you could have to make this work through the synergistic effect they have ( pizza any one---with out the excesses) there has been an anti vitamin campaign going on in NZ and Canada and the EFSA has ben re writng the book on dietary claims all equaling to a discreditting of supplements---these administrations are being pressured or cajoled by the drug companies to remove supplements that work off the shelf so people will go after the drugmakers for help----the problem is that the vitamin companies in the states are a 60 million dollar a year industry for the pharma group so they have to dismantle it with regulations and limited dose or access or discrediting the supplement as being toxic or contaminated or useless ---this has been going on for over 50 years---the difference today is less people are opposing this move by the drug companies
Tony
Post new comment