|
December 21, 1999
Cancer and the Vegetarian
Diet
by William Harris, M.D.
Cancer
is not caused by bacteria, faulty diet, inadequate exercise, environmental
contaminants, ionizing radiation, tobacco, viruses, nor heredity.
Cancer is caused by a series of genetic mutations in DNA which may
be either germline (inherited) or somatic (acquired during life).
However, the chances of these mutations occurring in sufficient
number to result in cancer is affected by all of the preceding factors.
DNA is the critical target molecule in carcinogenesis (1). Although
DNA has various repair mechanisms, some types of damage persist
and become the basis of the defective molecular biology that is
cancer. Oncogenes (tumor genes), tumor suppressing genes, and aptotic
genes (causing programmed cell death) normally interact to build
normal cells, to prevent excessive growth, and finally to kill the
cell before genetic mutations cause it to malfunction.
Table 1. U.S. cancer rates.
Cancer
is the second most common cause of death in the United States, where
over 1.3 million new cases of cancer are diagnosed annually, with
550,000 deaths. Current United States incidence figures for the
ten leading types of cancer are shown (2). Women have an approximately
1:8 lifetime chance of developing breast cancer, and men have an
approximately 1:5 chance of developing prostate cancer. Rates above
are per 100,000 in 1992. Both Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma are included under lymphoma.
There are three categories of evidence suggesting that a veg*n
(vegetarian or vegan) diet reduces risk for various types of cancer.
Epidemiologically, the intake of animal source food correlates
with the country-by-country incidence of six types of cancer. Although
none of the reporting countries can be assumed to have large vegan
or even vegetarian populations, it appears that the less animal
source food per capita, the lower the cancer rate.
In the graphs below, the Y axis contains
the disease, the X axis contains the animal source dietary risk
factor. R is the correlation coefficient which reflects the "goodness
of fit" of the data points to the sloping regression line. The p-value
is the probability the apparent relationship is merely a mathematical
coincidence. An R of 1 would indicate a direct linear relationship,
while an R of zero would indicate no relationship. A p-value of
.05 indicates a 5% chance of mathematical coincidence but numbers
less than .05 are traditionally taken to suggest a non-coincidental
relationship.
A. Breast Cancer
The etiology of breast cancer, as with most cancer, is multi-factorial,
with a strong hereditary component. Using BMDP (3) statistical software,
I performed multiple regression analysis on breast cancer incidence(4)
country by country using Food and Agriculture Organization food
consumption data (5) for animal source calcium, animal Calories,
animal fat, animal protein, butter and ghee, cheese, eggs, milk
production (metric tons/yr), plant source calcium, plant fat, plant
protein, plant Calories, total calcium, total fat, total Calories,
and total protein.
I included additional vital statistics from The Book of World
Rankings (6,7) for birth rate, female life expectancy, GNP/caput($),
infant mortality, male life expectancy, male/female cancer ratios,
meat consumption (kg/caput/yr early 70's), sugar consumption (kg/caput/yr
-1976), and total population.
Of these (sometimes not independent) variables, the highest correlation
( R=.76, p<.001) with breast cancer incidence was from animal
source Calories, (with animal fat and the other animal constituents
close behind).

Plant protein consumption had a moderate negative (protective)
correlation (R= -.36, p=.046).

Of the other positive correlations, animal source calcium had an
R value of .62 and p=.0026. This would support the contention that
dairy hormones are a risk for human breast cancer (8). Insulin-like
growth factor (ISGF-1), present in both cow milk and human milk
is known to stimulate the growth of human breast cancer cells (9,
10).
The vegetarian diet has been shown to lower the level of estradiol
(11) (an estrogen) and raise sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG)
levels (12). Some forms of breast cancer are estrogen-receptor (ER)
sensitive and the phytoestrogens from plant foods (13, 14), particularly
soy products, are thought to block ERs in a manner similar to tamoxifen.
Lower post-treatment ER-rich breast cancer survival rates in women
who reported higher dietary fat intake have been found.(15)
Although the most recent pooled-analysis of fat intake as a risk
factor for breast cancer produced negative results (16), a case-control
study (17) conducted in Italy on 2,569 incident cases of breast
cancer and 2,588 controls found an odds ratio (OR) of 1.22 for saturated
fat, and 0.89 for unsaturated fat.
B. Intestinal cancer

Intestinal cancer also correlates with animal food consumption
(R=.83, p<.001) (18). Suggested explanations here are that meat
increases the rate of carcinogenic bile acid formation (19), lack
of fiber has an adverse effect on colonic bacteria (20), and additionally
lengthens the intestinal transit time so that both dietary carcinogens
in meat (21), and endogenous ones (the bile acids), are in contact
with the intestinal mucosa for a longer period.
C. Lung Cancer.

Lung cancer mortality correlates with animal fat consumption (R=.71,
p<.01) (22) and with the consumption of animal source protein
and calcium. Plant nutrients had negative (protective) R values
but p values were above .05, so they were not deemed statistically
significant. However, the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) (23)
judges that "diets high in a variety of vegetables and fruit, and
the microconstituents they contain, may prevent 20-33% of cases
of lung cancer in both smokers and non-smokers."
Data on tobacco use was not available, but there is little doubt
that it would prove to be the most important predictor of lung cancer
mortality, exceeding dietary factors by a wide margin.
D. Lymphatic Cancer

In 1977 Cunningham (24) examined the correlation between age-adjusted
lymphoma mortality as reported by the WHO (25), and food intake
as reported by the O.E.C.D. (26). Using multiple regression analysis
for the intake of cereal grain, eggs, fish, nuts, pork, potatoes,
poultry, pulses, seeds, starches, animal protein, crop protein,
and total protein, he found the highest positive correlation with
beef and dairy protein intake (R=.78, p<.001). Fish and all of
the plant foods had a slight negative correlation.
A 1997 case-control study conducted in Northern Italy between 1983
and 1992 involving 829 cases and 1,157 controls (27) found that
"Compared with the lowest tertile, the odds ratio (OR) for the highest
tertile of milk intake was 1.8 for Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma (NHL) and
1.9 for sarcomas. Liver intake was an indicator of the risk of Hodgkins
Disease (HD) (OR = 1.8), NHL (OR = 1.6), and myelomas (OR = 2.0),
ham another indicator of HD (OR = 1.7), and butter an indicator
of myelomas (OR = 2.8). A high consumption of green vegetables was
inversely related to myelomas (OR = 0.4), and frequent use of whole-grain
foods was inversely related to NHL (OR = 0.4) and soft tissue sarcomas
(OR = 0.2). The OR for the highest tertile of intake of beta-carotene
ranged between 0.5 and 0.7, whereas the OR for retinol ranged between
1.5 and 2.3."
E. Ovarian Cancer
Ovarian cancer also appears related to animal food consumption
(28). Animal source Calorie intake showed the highest positive correlation
(R=.81, p<.007). Plant source Calories were protective, with
an R value of -.62 and p<.005. Animal source calcium intake was
also a risk, with an R value of .72, p=.0005.

This latter finding is consistent with the hypothesis that consumption
of milk lactose may be a dietary risk factor for ovarian cancer
in women with a an inherited deficiency of the enzyme galactose-1-phosphate
uridyl transferase. (29). Additionally, insulin-like growth factor-I
(IGF-I) present in both cow and human milk, is elevated in the cystic
fluid of ovarian cancer (30). A study from Canada (31) implicated
saturated fat and egg cholesterol consumption as risk factors for
ovarian cancer, with reduced risk from vegetable fiber consumption.
F. Prostate Cancer.

Surprisingly, multiple regression analysis of prostate cancer incidence
(32) versus the same dietary and social variables showed the highest
correlation with animal source calcium intake (R=.74, p<.01)
(33), which in general means dairy products. Animal source Calories
came in second and plant protein had the highest negative correlation
coefficient (R= -.49, p=.0052). This finding is consistent with
a cohort study of 20,316 men of various ethnicities interviewed
between 1975 and 1980 in Hawaii (34) that found beef and milk consumption
to increase risk for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer, once again,
is a sex hormone dependent cancer (35). A more recent study again
identified animal source fat as a risk factor for prostate cancer,
particularly in blacks (36).
The World Cancer Research Fund (37) recommends a "predominantly
plant-based diet" and lists fruits and vegetables as [convincing,
probable, or possible] risk reducers for cancer of the bladder,
breast, cervix, colon, endometrium, esophagus, kidney, larynx, liver,
lung, mouth and pharynx, ovary, pancreas, prostate, rectum, stomach,
and thyroid. This organization recommends five or more portions
of vegetables and fruit daily, and "if eaten at all, red meat to
provide no more than 10% of total energy" (Calories).
There are biochemical studies that suggest how plant foods protect
against cancer. Since DNA damage is crucial to cancer, its cause
and prevention should be reviewed. Important in current thinking
is the effect of lipid peroxidation in the generation of free radicals,
small molecular fragments of fat with incorporated oxygen. Lipid
peroxidation is a branching chain reaction with devastating side
effects due to the ability of the oxidized fat fragments to covalently
bond with DNA, damaging its structure and function.
There is a large category of antioxidants, many of them man-made
such as the food preservatives BHA and BHT. Naturally occurring
antioxidants include vitamins C, E, the carotenoids (lycopene-[tomatoes],
luteins and beta-carotene [leafy greens]) ellagic acid (4-carbon
ring metabolic artifacts found in berries) (38), and saponins (
plant sterols attached to a short chain of sugars) (39). All of
these substances help to quench the free radical chain reaction.
Not
all of these antioxidants are listed in the USDA database, but of
the ones that are, I sorted by nutrient/Calorie ratio to find the
highest plant source and the highest animal source for -carotene,
vitamin C, and vitamin E. Included were 232 foods including beans,
dairy, eggs, fish, fruit, grains, meat, nuts, poultry, and vegetables.
Sorting by nutrient/weight ratio produces roughly similar results.
Clearly animal source food is no anti-oxidant match for plant foods.
It's likely that by the time animal source food reaches the table
the animal's tissues have already utilized most of the anti-oxidants
that were synthesized by the plants the animal ate. A diet high
in plant food, particularly fruits and vegetables, will be high
in these anti-oxidants, thus protective against cancer. A diet high
in animal food will be low in these anti-oxidants, since the food
itself is low and its presence in the diet displaces the fruits
and vegetables that might otherwise be present.
It should be noted that of 20 flours, breads, grains, and grain
products included in the 232 foods, all were well below 100% of
the RDA/Calorie for these three antioxidants with the exception
of wheat germ oil (vitamin E). This may bear slightly on a recent
study showing no reduction in colon cancer by high fiber intake
(40). Admittedly grains are high in fiber, but they are not high
in cancer-protective anti-oxidants. The respondents with high fiber
intake may have been consuming large amounts of cereals and grains
as they had been advised to, but the cancer-preventive agents are
mostly in fruits and vegetables. The same grain products added in
100 gram increments and averaged, also proved to have less than
100% of the RDA/Calorie for calcium, folate, and riboflavin. Ninety
three vegetables treated in the same manner were well over 100%
RDA/Cal for 18 common nutrients except for vitamin B12 and had 800%
of the RDA/Cal for -carotene, 1250% for vitamin C, and 300% for
Vitamin E.
Fiber, plentiful in grains, is not a nutrient since it is not absorbed.
It acts, in the words of one medical editor, as "a sort of colonic
broom" and while this may be advantageous, a repeat of the study,
this time using fruits and vegetables, rather than fiber, as dietary
intake markers might produce more favorable results.
Steinmetz and Potter (41) report that the cancer protective substances
in fruits and vegetables include, in addition to antioxidants, the
following: allium compounds (diallyl sulfide, allyl methyl trisulfide),
coumarins, dietary fiber, dithiolthiones, flavonoids (quercetin,
kaempferol), folic acid, indole-3-carbinol, inositol hexaphosphate,
genistein, biochanin A, isothiocyanates, sulphorophane, d-limonene,
phytosterols, protease inhibitors, and selenium.
The means by which these substances protect against cancer cell
initiation include effects on cell differentiation, increased activity
of enzymes that detoxify carcinogens, blocked formation of nitrosamines,
altered estrogen metabolism, altered colonic milieu (including bacterial
flora, bile acid composition, pH, fecal bulk), preserved integrity
of intracellular matrixes, effects on DNA methylation, maintenance
of normal DNA repair, increased apoptosis (programmed cell death)
of cancer cells, and decreased cell proliferation.
Cancer cell metastasis may be blocked by a plant-based diet. German
investigators have shown that vegetarian men have roughly twice
the natural killer cell activity as age-matched omnivorous controls
(42).
A recent study from Britain (43) concluded that: "Vegetables and
fruit are almost invariably protective for the major cancers. The
evidence is best for a protective effect of vegetables in the large
bowel and for fruits and vegetables in stomach cancer.... High consumption
of meat, especially red meat and processed meat, is linked with
higher risk of bowel, breast, prostate, and pancreatic cancer. There
is some evidence of an association with lung cancer, and of an association
of barbecued meat and oesophageal cancer." This study also concluded
that "up to 80% of bowel and breast cancer may be preventable by
dietary change."
Practical aspects of the
veg*n (vegetarian or vegan) diet.
A straightforward and simple dictum is:
"Eat as wide a variety of plant foods in as unprocessed a form
as possible."
-Susan Havala, R.D.
All the essential amino acids, essential fatty acids, and vitamins
required in the human diet are synthesized either by plants or micro-organisms
(44), not by animals. The essential inorganic nutrients (iron, calcium,
zinc, etc.) were synthesized in nuclear fusion reactions that occurred
in stars that blew up more than 5 billion years ago (45). The notion
that veg*n diets are more likely than omnivorous ones to be nutrient
deficient is the result of sorting foods by nutrient/weight ratio.
Since there is no RDA for weight in the diet, while there is an
RDA for Calories, a more rational approach to food analysis is by
nutrient/Calorie ratio, in which case it is seen that animal source
foods, because of their high fat content, have little advantage
over plant foods (46). Although poorly designed veg*n diets have
produced reports of nutritional deficiency, particularly in children
(47), the notion that vegans are more likely than omnivores to suffer
nutrient deficiencies is not supported by the literature (48). In
general, a diet centered on vegetables and fruit, preferably raw,
with grains, nuts, seeds, and starches used to fill in Calorie requirements
will satisfy nutrient requirements, with the exception of Vitamin
B12, which must be supplemented, at least until the scientific dust
settles. Numerous vegetarian and vegan cookbooks and handbooks are
available and should be consulted by new veg*ns.
Conclusion
Evidence from a broad scientific literature suggests:
A. Rates for at least six common types of cancer, country by country,
correlate with the consumption of animal source food.
B. There is a modest negative correlation with these cancers and
plant source food consumption.
C. A variety of phytochemicals present in plant foods have been
demonstrated to be protective against the DNA damage that leads
to cancer.
D. The veg*n diet, extolled by its advocates for at least 150 years
as a cancer preventive strategy, is the logical end point of the
dietary recommendations, now made by scientific organizations, to
reduce animal food consumption.
E. A recent clinical review (49) concluded: "Up to 80% of bowel
and breast cancer may be preventable by dietary change... Diet contributes
to varying extent to the risk of many other cancers, including cancers
of the lung, prostate, stomach, oesophagus, and pancreas... Generally,
fruit, vegetables, and fibre have a protective effect, whereas red
and processed meat increase the risk of developing cancer."
There are no logical arguments for the continued use of animal
source food in the human diet. However, logic is not the key factor
here. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has shielded
the meat and dairy industries from normal market forces since at
least the beginning of the Commodities Credit Corporation (CCC)
in 1933 (50), by giving direct price supports to dairy production,
and de facto supports to the meat industry in the form of feed grain
price supports (51, 52).. In 1998 USDA Secretary Dan Glickman bought
up at least $250 million worth of beef, chicken, dairy, eggs, fish,
lamb, and pork that could not be sold on an already flooded market.
These goods will be dumped into public feeding troughs such as the
National School Lunch Program (53).
This is contrary to advice given by the National Cancer Institute,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), and the
USDA itself, to consume daily at least five servings of fruit and
vegetables. Only a third of the U.S. public is aware of the "5-A-Day"
recommendation (54).
Vegetable and fruit growers have for the most part been excluded
from support programs..."All crops may be harvested on flex acreage
except...fruits and vegetables..." (55), and apparently don't want
government assistance or large ad campaigns(56) to market their
products. Evidence indicates that animal industries have exerted
enormous pressure on the government for continuation of their supports
(57). These industries then plow their profit margins into massive
ad campaigns, nutritional "education", and political action to insure
that their benefits will continue.
A glance at IRS Corporate Income Tax Form 1120 and most state corporate
tax forms shows also that advertising is a tax deductible business
expense. There is little doubt that the animal food interests are
taking full advantage of this as they suborn the media, the nutritional
establishment, and the government to push their wares on a naive
public.
Until the government stops using public tax moneys to bail out
the animal food interests and stops giving tax breaks for their
massive advertising programs that virtually freeze vegetarian information
out of the public consciousness, there is not much chance that we
will see a reduction in cancer rates.
William Harris, M.D.
Medical Director
Kaiser-Permanente Vegan Lifestyle Clinic (VLC)
1765 Ala Moana Blvd. #1880
Honolulu, HI 96815
INTERNET:vegidoc@compuserve.com
ENDNOTES
1 Murray RK, Granner DK, Mayes PA,
and Rodwell VW.Harper's Biochemistry. Appleton and Lange
Norwalk, CT 1990. ISBN 0-8385-3640-9 p 653.
2 McPhee SJ, Papadakis, Gonzales,
Tierney. Current Medical Diagnosis & Treatment (CMDT)
on CD-ROM 1998. Appleton Lange 1998. Norwalk, 1990. ISBN 0-8385-1480-4.
3 BMDP Statistical Software. BMDP
New System for Windows v1.0 Los Angeles,1994. ISBN 0-935386-30-0.
4 Tominaga S., Aoki K, Fujimoto I, Kurihara M. Cancer Mortality
and Morbidity Statistics Japan and the World -1994. Age adjusted
breast cancer incidence/100,000/year 1983-87. Japan Scientific
Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd., N.W. Boca Raton
Fl 33431ISBN 0-8493-7748-X . Table I-13. p194.
5 Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations. FAO Production Yearbook.Rome,1987
6 Kurian, George Thomas. The Book
of World Rankings. Facts on File Inc. 119 West 57th St. New
York,N.Y.10019. 1979.ISBN 0-87196-394-9.
7 Kurian, George Thomas. The New
Book of World Rankings. Facts on File Inc. 460 Park Ave. So.
New York, N.Y. 10016. 1991 ISBN 0-8160-1931-2.
8 Outwater JL; Nicholson A; Barnard
N. Dairy products and breast cancer: the IGF-I, estrogen, and
bGH hypothesis. Med Hypotheses (ENGLAND) Jun 1997, 48 (6) p453-61,
ISSN 0306-9877.
9 Musgrove EA, Sutherland RL. Acute
effects of growth factors on T-47D breast cancer cell cycle progression.
Eur J Cancer 1993;29A(16):2273-9.
10 Figueroa JA, Sharma J, Jackson
JG, McDermott MJ, Hilsenbeck SG, Yee D. Recombinant
insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 inhibits IGF-I, serum,
and estrogen-dependent growth of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells.
J Cell Physiol 1993 Nov;157(2):229-36.
11 Prentice R, Thompson D, Clifford
C, Gorbach S, Goldin B, Byar D. Dietary fat reduction and plasma
estradiol concentration in healthy postmenopausal women. The Women's
Health Trial Study Group. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990 Jan 17;82(2):129-34.
12 Bennett FC; Ingram DM. Diet
and female sex hormone concentrations: an intervention study for
the type of fat consumed. Am J Clin Nutr Nov 1990, 52 (5) p
808-12, ISSN 0002-9165.
13 Reinli K, Block G. Phytoestrogen content of foods--a compendium
of literature values. Nutr Cancer 1996;26(2):123-48.
14 Adlercreutz H; Mousavi Y; Clark
J; Hockerstedt K; Hamalainen E; Wahala K; Makela T; Hase T. Dietary
phytoestrogens and cancer: in vitro and in vivo studies. J
Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Mar 1992, 41 (3-8) p331-7, ISSN 0960-0760.
15 Holm LE, Nordevang E, Hjalmar ML, Lidbrink E, Callmer E, Nilsson
B. Treatment failure and dietary habits in women with breast
cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Jan 6;85(1):32-6.
16 Hunter DJ, Spiegelman D, Adami
HO, Beeson L, van den Brandt PA, Folsom AR, Fraser GE, Goldbohm
RA, Graham S, Howe GR, et al. Cohort studies of fat intake and
the risk of breast cancer--a pooled analysis. N Engl J Med
1996 Feb 8;334(6):356-61.
17 Decarli A, Favero A, La Vecchia
C, Russo A, Ferraroni M, Negri E, Franceschi S Macronutrients,
energy intake, and breast cancer risk: implications from different
models. Epidemiology 1997 Jul;8(4):425-8
18 Wynder EL. The Dietary Environment
and Cancer. J Amer Dietetic Assoc. 1977;71:385-92.
19 Shils ME, Olson JA., Shike M. Modern
nutrition in health and disease-8th ed. Lea & Febiger Malvern,
PA. 1994. ISBN 0-8121-1485-X. p 580.
20 van Faassen A; Bol J; van Dokkum
W; Pikaar NA; Ockhuizen T; Hermus RJ. Bile acids, neutral steroids,
and bacteria in feces as affected by a mixed, a lacto-ovovegetarian,
and a vegan diet. Am J Clin Nutr Dec 1987, 46 (6) p 962-7,
ISSN 0002-9165.
21 Bingham SA, Pignatelli B, Pollock JRA, Ellul A, Mallaveille
C, Gross G, et al. Does increased endogenous formation
of N-nitroso compounds in the human colon explain the association
between red meat and colon cancer? Carcinogenesis 1996;17:515-23.
22 National Institutes of Health. National Cancer Institute. Cancer
Rates and Risks: Cancer Death Rates Among 50 Countries (Age adjusted
to the world standard) 4th Edition.
Source: World Health Organization data as adapted by the American
Cancer Society 1996. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Lung cancer p 39.
23 World Cancer Research Fund / American
Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition and the Prevention
of Cancer: a global perspective. 1997 1759 R St. NW Washington,
DC 20009. 178-FNS/F27 p 12.
24 Cunningham AS. Lymphomas and
Animal-Protein Consumption. Lancet.1976;Nov.27:1184-86.ISSN
0023-7507.
25 World Health Organization.
Mortality from Malignant Neoplasms 1955-1965. Geneva, 1970.
26 Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (O.E.C.D.) Food Consumption Statistics 1955-1971.
Paris, 1973.
27 Tavani A; Pregnolato A; Negri E;
Franceschi S; Serraino D; Carbone A; La Vecchia C. Diet and
risk of lymphoid neoplasms and soft tissue sarcomas. Nutr Cancer
(UNITED STATES) 1997, 27 (3) p256-60, ISSN 0163-5581.
28 Tominaga S, Aoki K, Fujimoto I, Kurihara M. Cancer Mortality
and Morbidity Statistics. Japan and the World-1994. Japan Scientific
Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd., N.W. Boca Raton
Fl 33431. ISBN 0-8493-7748-X. Table I-15 p 196. 1983-87.
29 Cramer DW; Harlow BL; Willett WC;
Welch WR; Bell DA; Scully RE; Ng WG; Knapp RC. Galactose consumption
and metabolism in relation to the risk of ovarian cancer .
Lancet Jul 8 1989, 2 (8654) p 66-71, ISSN 0023-7507.
30 Karasik A, Menczer J, Pariente
C, Kanety H. Insulin-like
growth factor-I (IGF-I) and IGF-binding protein-2 are increased
in cyst fluids of epithelial ovarian cancer. J Clin Endocrinol
Metab 1994 Feb;78(2):271-6.
31 Risch HA; Jain M; Marrett LD;
Howe GR Dietary fat intake and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer.
J Natl Cancer Inst Sep 21 1994, 86 (18) p 1409-15, ISSN 0027-8874.
32 Tominaga S., Aoki K, Fujimoto I, Kurihara M. Cancer Mortality
and Morbidity Statistics. Japan and the World-1994. Japan Scientific
Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd., N.W. Boca Raton
Fl 33431ISBN 0-8493-7748-X . Table I-16. p 197. 1983-87. "Cancer
mortality statistics in 33 countries of the world were compiled
and calculated from data edited from a magnetic tape copy of the
WHO data base of cancer mortality." All figures are age-adjusted
and represent death rate per 100,000 population.
33 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
FAO Production Yearbook. Rome, 1987. Calcium/caput/day-milligrams
1983-85. Table 109. p 252.
34 Le Marchand L; Kolonel LN; Wilkens
LR; Myers BC; Hirohata T. Animal fat consumption and prostate
cancer: a prospective study in Hawaii. Epidemiology May 1994,
5 (3) p 276-82, ISSN 1044-3983.
35 Mousavi Y, Adlercreutz H. Genistein
is an effective stimulator of sex hormone-binding globulin production
in hepatocarcinoma human liver cancer cells and suppresses proliferation
of these cells in culture. Steroids. Jul 1993, 58 (7) p 301-4,
ISSN 0039-128X.
36 Mousavi Y, Adlercreutz H. Genistein
is an effective stimulator of sex hormone-binding globulin production
in hepatocarcinoma human liver cancer cells and suppresses proliferation
of these cells in culture. Steroids. Jul 1993, 58 (7) p 301-4,
ISSN 0039-128X.
37 World Cancer Research
Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition
and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. 1997 1759
R St. NW Washington, DC 20009. 178-FNS/F27 pgs 10, 14.
38 Goodwin and Mercer. Introduction
to Plant Biochemistry. Pergamon Press.Oxford, 1983. p 562.
39 Salisbury FB, and Ross CW. Plant
Physiology. Wadsworth Publishing Co. Belmont 1985. ISBN
0-534-04482-4 p 276.
40 Fuchs CS, Giovannucci E., Colditz
GA, Hunter DJ, Stampfer MJ, Rosner BR, Speizer FE, Willett WC. Dietary
Fiber and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma in Women.
N Engl J Med 1999;340:169-76.
41 Steinmetz (1)KA, Potter JD. Vegetables,
fruit, and cancer prevention: a review. Journal of the American
Dietetic Association, Oct 1996;(10): 1027(13).
42 Malter M; Schriever G; Eilber U.
Natural killer cells, vitamins, and other blood components of vegetarian
and omnivorous men. Nutr Cancer (UNITED STATES) 1989, 12 (3)
pp 271-8, ISSN 0163-5581.
43 Cummings,
JH, Bingham,SA. Diet and the prevention of cancer. BMJ
1998;317:1636-1640.
44 Lindner M. Nutritional Biochemistry
and Metabolism. Elsevier Science Publishing Co. New York, 1985.
ISBN 0-444-01241-9 pp 70-71.
45 Random
House. Random House Encyclopedia. New York, 1977. ISBN
0-394-40730-X. p 48.
46
Harris W. The Scientific Basis of Vegetarianism. Hawaii
Health Publishers. 1415 Victoria St. Suite 1106. Honolulu, HI 96822-3663.
ISBN 0-9646538-0-X. p 91.
47 Jacobs C, and Dwyer T. Vegetarian
children: appropriate and inappropriate diets. Am J Clin Nutr.
1988;48(3):811.
48 Langley G. Vegan Nutrition,
a Survey of Research. The Vegan Society. Oxford, 1988. ISBN
0-907337-15-5.
49 Cummings
JH, Bingham SA. Diet and the prevention of cancer. BMJ
1998;317:1636-1640.
50 Luttrell, Clifton B. The High
Cost of Farm Welfare. Cato Institute. Washington, 1989. ISBN
0-932790-70-4. p 15.
51 United States Department of Agriculture.
Agricultural Statistics, 1989. United States Government
Printing Office. Washington, 1989. Table 623.
52 United States Department of Agriculture.
History of Budgetary Expenditures of the Commodity Credit Corporation:
Fiscal Year 1990-1991 Actual. ASCS/BUD/CPB Book 3.p 2.
53 http://www.ams.usda.gov/cp/index.htm
54 http://dcp.nci.nih.gov/5aday/week98/CommunityKit98.html
55 ASCS Commodity Fact Sheet. Feed
Grains: Summary of Support Program and Related Information.
United States Department of Agriculture. June 1991.
56 GAO/RCED-92-15. Generic Promotion
of Produce. Resources,Community, and Economic Division. United
States General Accounting Office. Washington, 1991. P 2.
57 McMenamin M, and McNamara W. Milking
the Public: Political Scandals of the Dairy Lobby from L.B.J. to
Jimmy Carter. Nelson-Hall. Chicago, 1980. ISBN 0-88229-552-7.
1.
|