Guest guest Posted December 15, 2003 Report Share Posted December 15, 2003 Agree, although there are probably additional factors at work for the Japanese: low saturated and total fat, relatively low total calories, higher vitamin D (fish again), green tea polyphenolics, soy. >From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@...> >Reply- > >Subject: [ ] Re: Mercury and Tuna >Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 01:37:57 -0000 > >Hi : > >The fish may be the reason the japanese have a very low incidence of >prostate cancer despite consuming a fair amount of alpha-linolenic >acid, which seems to be associated with increased prostate cancer >risk. > >(There are very nearly as many new cases of, and deaths from, >prostate cancer in men as there are of breast cancer in women. So >this is not a minor detail). > >Rodney. > > > > Dunno for sure if there's more to fish than oil, but I'd suspect >so. Some > > studies have suggested as much: > > > > Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Jan;12(1):64-7. Links > > > > > > A prospective study of intake of fish and marine fatty acids and >prostate > > cancer. > > > > Augustsson K, Michaud DS, Rimm EB, Leitzmann MF, Stampfer MJ, >Willett WC, > > Giovannucci E. > > > > Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard >Medical > > School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. katarina.augustsson@m... > > > > Experimental studies suggest that marine fatty acids have an >antitumor > > effect on prostate tumor cells. The aim of this study was to >investigate > > whether high consumption of fish and marine fatty acids reduces the >risk of > > prostate cancer in humans. We followed 47882 men participating in >the Health > > Professionals Follow-up Study. Dietary intake was assessed in 1986, >1990, > > and 1994, using a validated food frequency questionnaire. During 12 >years of > > follow-up, 2482 cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed, of which >617 were > > diagnosed as advanced prostate cancer including 278 metastatic >prostate > > cancers. Eating fish more than three times per week was associated >with a > > reduced risk of prostate cancer, and the strongest association was >for > > metastatic cancer (multivariate relative risk, 0.56; 95% confidence > > interval, 0.37-0.86, compared with infrequent consumption, i.e., >less than > > twice per month). Intake of marine fatty acids from food showed a >similar > > but weaker association. Each additional daily intake of 0.5 g of >marine > > fatty acid from food was associated with a 24% decreased risk of >metastatic > > cancer. We found that men with high consumption of fish had a lower >risk of > > prostate cancer, especially for metastatic cancer. Marine fatty >acids may > > account for part of the effect, but other factors in fish may also >play a > > role. > > > > PMID: 12540506 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> > > >Reply- > > >< > > > >Subject: Re: [ ] Mercury and Tuna > > >Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:04:54 -0600 > > > > > >The question is: Is there something magic about eating fish flesh >(other > > >than the touted omega 3's which I can get from fish oil)? > > >BTW, I've read where some of those small pens are actually >contiguous with > > >ocean waters, not just contained lakes, whatever. Probably helps >to pollute > > >the ocean, maybe more than raising cattle. > > > > > >Regards. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Gifford > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 9:41 AM > > > Subject: [ ] Mercury and Tuna > > > > > > > > > > If there is some magic to eating fish > > > > flesh maybe smaller, farmed fish would > > > > be safer. > > > > > > If you're worried about the sanitary side of eating fish, then >you > > >should > > > avoid farmed fish. Farmed salmon are raised in small pens >where they > > > essentially eat/ breathe/ live in their own faeces. Lice >infestations > > >are > > > also extreme in farmed fish > > > > > > I personally stick to wild salmon (Pacific) from smaller fish. >When I > > >have > > > the time, which is not very often now, I try to acquire fresh >wild > > >trout, > > > though the time spent on that has little to do with the food... > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > ________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2003 Report Share Posted December 15, 2003 Maybe we need some mercury? Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 7:37 PM Subject: [ ] Re: Mercury and Tuna Hi :The fish may be the reason the japanese have a very low incidence of prostate cancer despite consuming a fair amount of alpha-linolenic acid, which seems to be associated with increased prostate cancer risk. (There are very nearly as many new cases of, and deaths from, prostate cancer in men as there are of breast cancer in women. So this is not a minor detail).Rodney.> Dunno for sure if there's more to fish than oil, but I'd suspect so. Some > studies have suggested as much:> > Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Jan;12(1):64-7. Links> > > A prospective study of intake of fish and marine fatty acids and prostate > cancer.> Eating fish more than three times per week was associated with a reduced risk of prostate cancer, and the strongest association was for metastatic cancer We found that men with high consumption of fish had a lower risk of prostate cancer, especially for metastatic cancer. Marine fatty acids may account for part of the effect, but other factors in fish may also play a role.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2003 Report Share Posted December 19, 2003 The amount of mercury absorbed by the body depends on its chemical form. A methylated form bound to an organic carrier may be more highly absorbed and cytotoxic. This is the case with fish for example. While free mercury may have a different character. And inhaled fumes of mercury, cadmium, etc exhibit still different characteristics. The issues regarding poisons are complex. " The poison is in the dose " . Studies of hormesis effects (look it up) actually show the stress due to poisons can have beneficial results. I would not bet on this benefit however! -- Warren On 15 Dec 2003, Rodney wrote: > > Hi Jw: > > Maybe. > > And if so then my bet is that the 'rda' for mercury will have been > more than taken care of by leaching from the fillings in our teeth. > > Rodney. > > > > > Dunno for sure if there's more to fish than oil, but I'd > suspect > > so. Some > > > studies have suggested as much: > > > > > > Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2003 Jan;12(1):64-7. Links > > > > > > > > > A prospective study of intake of fish and marine fatty acids > and > > prostate > > > cancer. > > > > > Eating fish more than three times per week was associated > > with a reduced risk of prostate cancer, and the strongest > association was > > for metastatic cancer > > > > We found that men with high consumption of fish had a lower > > risk of prostate cancer, especially for metastatic cancer. Marine > fatty > > acids may account for part of the effect, but other factors in > fish may also play a role. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.