Word: cancerous
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1980-1989
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...following its recommendations, says the report, the American people could cut by at least 20% the risk of developing coronary heart disease, the top killer in the U.S. They could also "substantially" reduce the threat of a host of other ailments, including cancer, stroke, high blood pressure, obesity, osteoporosis and liver disease. Just how to do this is described in the guidelines, which were prepared by a 19-member panel after a review of more than 5,000 studies. The NRC group not only crystallizes the broad dietary goals laid down by earlier reports but also extends them to children...
...surprises; many people have long believed the more protein the better. In fact, some popular weight-loss schemes have been based on high-protein intake. But the panel notes that diets rich in animal protein have no known benefits and may increase the risk of colon or breast cancer. Whether protein is the villain is not clear, however, since meats are typically loaded with...
...thumbs down too. Eating marine fish one or more times a week is thought to help lower cholesterol, but proof that concentrated fish oil has the same result is lacking, and there is no information on its long-term effects. Nor are fiber supplements warranted as a hedge against cancer of the stomach, large intestine and lungs. Though the panel endorses eating more high-fiber foods, no one knows if the beneficial effects result from the fiber itself...
...liver, may not be as efficient in removing toxic chemicals. "We must revise all existing tolerances and set the levels for children," says Janet Hathaway, the NRDC's chief lobbyist in Washington. "We should be able to eat food without worrying that we are sowing the seeds of cancer...
...Bruce Ames, head of the biochemistry department at the University of California, Berkeley, labels the NRDC's alarms "wild." Says he: "They are piling one worst-case scenario on top of another." Moreover, Ames points out, plants produce their own poisons to ward off pests. "The proportion of positive cancer tests is about as high for natural pesticides as for synthetic pesticides, and we are eating 10,000 times more of the natural ones," he notes. The NRDC insists that its risk estimates are conservative. They do not, for instance, take into account pesticides in milk or water...