Re: Re: No Correlation of ALA with BPH/PC

[Guest guest]

Is it possible that the PCa begins independently of ALA, and only then that the ALA supports and encourages the cancer cells' growth? I.e., that the initial cancer cells might have been routinely killed off by the body's defenses, except that the ALA has somehow supercharged them?

This comes to mind because of the PCa associations with IGF-1 (and hGH), testosterone, and arachidonic acid - all anabolic.

(I was surprised to see ARA touted as anabolic, but here it is by Jarrow:

http://tinyurl.com/6c23l

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:0TNQVDeep7IJ:www.nutritiondome.com/mn-015.html+arachidonic+meat & hl=en

--

Ken

In a message dated 9/19/04 5:34:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, perspect1111@... writes:

There are doubtless many ways people with prostate cancer might not

have elevated levels of ALA in the prostate. It is highly unlikely

ALA itself is the carcinogen. Most likely the ALA/Prostate cancer

connection exists because the carcinogen is DERIVED FROM ALA, or

because ALA acts as a catalyst in production of the carcinogen. One

explanation that immediately comes to mind is that ALA is converted

to the carcinogen outside the prostate (perhaps in the liver?) and

arrives in the prostate after conversion. Another is that ALA

arrives in the prostate and is then converted into the carcinogen

after arrival - which would be an especially good way to explain a

depleted level of prostate tissue ALA. ly I don't care. As

long as large, serious, carefully controlled studies show that men

who eat the most ALA have the most prostate cancer - and those who

eat the least much less of it - I will reduce my intake of ALA, where

possible.

[Guest guest]

I don't think we're demonizing. We're merely saying there is no reqt for ALA, AND it might cause Prostate Cancer. That's the position of some well respected practicing PCa doctors. Another doc even says no multivitamin, just the few supplements that are associated with prevention or cure, like selenium.

One doc's position is that adult males don't make EPA from ALA, and an article I posted before said like only 3% is converted to EPA, so if you want EPA in tissues you eat EPA, not ALA.

And the cardio types are saying EPA or fish.

If one article says do it and another don't do it, I'm willing to go with the one that says don't do it until there is a concensus. This particular article doesn't clarify it for me. In fact, it says more studies are needed. And his argument is don't rule out ALA because it helps heart disease. BUT, he doesn't say how much ALA to take or what the serum levels should be. Get the whole article and tell me which parts you specifically like.

[alpha]-LINOLENIC ACID AND THE RISK OF PROSTATE CANCER. WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE?

[CLINICAL UROLOGY: Review Article]

ATTAR-BASHI

"CONCLUSIONS

Following a review of the literature on ALA and prostate cancer we conclude that more research is needed before recommendations can be made regarding the association between this essential nutrient and prostate cancer. Examples of future research include dietary intervention studies of patients with prostate cancer to investigate the effects of a diet rich in ALA on biomarkers of prostate cancer, studies on the association between PUFA intake and subsequent concentrations of PUFAs in prostate tissue, and studies carried out in an appropriate animal model (eg canines) where prostate cancer occurs spontaneously. "

My conclusion is I get enough ALA accidentally in veggies and I certainly don't need extra from oils.

Probably a reasonable conclusion could be made that the association with PCa is based on folks who eat a LOT of soy oil in fried foods. I can use EPA and wait until next month's edition on the issue.

BTW, I'm waiting for a concensus on lotsa issues. As long as I can KEEP waiting, I'll be happy.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: loganruns73

Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 1:04 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: No Correlation of ALA with BPH/PC

> LOL. In the subject line of your post you say: "No Correlation of > ALA with BPH/PC". Of course the content of what you posted > underneath that subject line said nothing of the kind. What is > more, the study you posted covered the grand number of 28 > individuals! The reason for the study was: "Several epidemiological studies have reported a positive association between plasma alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) levels and the incidence of prostate cancer; however other studies have not supported this association, as recently reviewed." The included tissue biopsies of BPH was a side benefit. I thought my summarized headline more eye-catching than their headline.> There are many studies now, some of them having MANY tens of > thousands of subjects, which show that men who consume large > amounts of ALA, or have high blood levels of it, have considerably > increased incidence of prostate cancer.The strength of the study I posted, besides being the latest I could find, was that it was NOT an epidemiological study.> depleted level of prostate tissue ALA. ly I don't care. As That sounds like a preference to be biased? But it is your perogative if you want to demonize an entire EFA because of what may be spurious correlations on the surface.> that there are health risks for those on CR who minimize their ALA > consumption. Can you?By the same token, can you provide any evidence that non-damaged ALA has any correlation with prostate cancer or BPH? In fact, both EFA's are highly suspectible to damage by heat, oxygen and light. Any study using damaged LA or ALA because of the ignorance of the researchers or just because damaged EFA ingestion is commonly widespread to show correlation for some disease state is virtually a self-fulfilling prophecy!> BTW, can you refresh my memory about the mistake you say Castelli > recently made? The only mistake I am aware of relating to Castelli > was by someone who quoted one-fifth of what he had said out of > context, and omitted the much more relevant remaining four-fifths.It's not relevant nor germane for me to discuss it with anyone but Castelli himself.Logan

[Guest guest]

Yes.

The only thing for sure - it begins with inflammation. So either ALA or a metabolite could be the cause, but so could many other things. It's still an unknown.

One recognized CR guy is still touting flax instead of fish, but the cardios are high on fish. If it's an inflammation thing for both heart disease (atherosclerosis) and cancer, IMO, the use of fish or ALA is going to be consistent.

Also for sure, not a lot of these authors are saying much about intake levels of ALA or fish/EPA.

But I can't see eating ALA if I only convert 0.2% to EPA.

American Heart Association, Inc.

Volume 108(2) 15 July 2003 pp 155-160

Habitual Dietary Intake of n-3 and n-6 Fatty Acids in Relation to Inflammatory Markers Among US Men and Women

"EPA and DHA are much more effective than ALA in altering membrane composition and eicosanoid production, and it was recently estimated that in humans, only 0.2% of plasma ALA is converted to EPA. 35,36 The conversion rate of LA to arachidonic acid is also very low 37; however, because of the much higher intake, we speculate that LA still affects arachidonic acid concentrations, whereas ALA, because of its low intake and low conversion rate, has no substantial effect on EPA levels, and thus on inflammation, in the present study population."

35. Whelan J, Broughton KS, Kinsella JE. The comparative effects of dietary alpha-linolenic acid and fish oil on 4- and 5-series leukotriene formation in vivo. Lipids. 1991; 26: 119–126

36. Pawlosky RJ, Hibbeln JR, Novotny JA, et al. Physiological compartmental analysis of alpha-linolenic acid metabolism in adult humans. J Lipid Res. 2001; 42: 1257–1265.

37. Emken EA, Adlof RO, Gulley RM. Dietary linoleic acid influences desaturation and acylation of deuterium-labeled linoleic and linolenic acids in young adult males. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1994; 1213: 277–288.

Regards

----- Original Message -----

From: bpinfo@...

Sent: Monday, September 20, 2004 6:44 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: No Correlation of ALA with BPH/PC

Is it possible that the PCa begins independently of ALA, and only then that the ALA supports and encourages the cancer cells' growth? I.e., that the initial cancer cells might have been routinely killed off by the body's defenses, except that the ALA has somehow supercharged them?This comes to mind because of the PCa associations with IGF-1 (and hGH), testosterone, and arachidonic acid - all anabolic.(I was surprised to see ARA touted as anabolic, but here it is by Jarrow:http://tinyurl.com/6c23lhttp://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:0TNQVDeep7IJ:www.nutritiondome.com/mn-015.html+arachidonic+meat & hl=en-- Ken