Eating this kind of bread can raise colon cancer patients' risk of death
Eating white bread and other foods considered to be proinflammatory can raise colon cancer patients' risk of death from the disease, researchers said this week.
Of a study of more than 1,600 patients with stage III colon cancer, people who consumed the most of those foods — also including french fries, hot dogs, and soda — during a phase 3 clinical trial showed a shorter overall survival post-treatment compared to those on a proinflammatory diet. The patients who ate a proinflammatory diet had an 87 percent higher risk of death than those who consumed the least proinflammatory food.
Inflammation is the body's immune response to stimulus, such as falling down or burning your finger. Both too little and too much inflammation can cause problems, and most chronic diseases are believed to be rooted in inflammation that lasts over time. Some of the foods that can contribute to inflammation have been linked to cancer risk.
'One of the most common questions that patients ask is what they should do after treatment to maximally reduce their risk of cancer recurrence and improve survival,' Dr. Sara Char, a clinical fellow in hematology and oncology at Boston's Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, said in a statement. 'These findings add to the published literature about the importance of dietary patterns and physical activity in outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer.'
Char was the first author of the research which was presented on Sunday at this year's American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting.
'This study provides additional evidence that diet may be important for improving outcomes and survival in patients with stage III colon cancer,' co-author Dr. Kimmie Ng, also of Dana-Farber, said. 'Further studies are needed to tailor specific dietary recommendations for patients with colon cancer, and to understand the biological mechanisms underlying the relationship between proinflammatory diets and survival.'
The use of the anti-inflammatory drug in the participants' trial, which is known as celecoxib, did not have a significant influence on the relationship between diet and survival, but the authors also noted that those who engaged in higher levels of physical activity had the best overall survival outcomes.
Their findings come following previous research that showed systemic inflammation can increase the risk of colon cancer development and progression. Using anti-inflammatory drugs can reduce the risk of recurrence in selected patients with stage III colon cancer, the Dana-Farber researchers said. It remains unclear how much diet could affect cancer outcomes after treatment, but these findings add to a growing body of knowledge that could affect tens of thousands of Americans with colorectal cancer.
Some 150,000 people are diagnosed with colorectal cancer each year in the U.S. It is the second-most common cause of cancer deaths for men and women in the U.S., and is expected to cause about 52,900 deaths this year. The average five-year survival for patients with stage III colon cancer is around 80 percent, although between 25 and 35 percent of patients experience a recurrence of cancer during that time.
The researchers say that they plan to conduct more detailed investigations of the biological effects of diet and lifestyle on colon cancer outcomes, including those with metastatic colon cancer and those diagnosed at younger ages, under age 50.
The majority of Americans — as many as 57 percent — may be eating a diet that promotes inflammation, researchers at the Ohio State University found last year.
In 2018, a Harvard study found that people who ate foods that promoted inflammation had a higher rate of colorectal cancer compared with people who ate the least foods, with a 22 percent higher risk for men than women.
Eating white bread and drinking alcohol are linked to an increased risk for developing colorectal cancer. Whole grains have anti-cancer properties and eating fiber helps to reduce colorectal cancer risk, researchers told Fox News Digital in 2023. The next year, a study found potential risk for white bread intake.
Alternatively, consuming more dark leafy greens, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, and protein sources that are high in omega-3 fatty acids can help fight inflammation, according to UCLA Health. The Mediterranean diet may be the most beneficial, Johns Hopkins Medicine notes.
'I want to emphasize that people really need to focus on their pattern of eating — as opposed to eating a few particular foods — to reduce inflammation,' Dr. Edwin McDonald, a gastroenterologist at UChicago Medicine, wrote. ' There's no miracle food out there that's going to cure people with chronic inflammation. You need to have an anti-inflammatory lifestyle and diet.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
How thousands of unreviewed ingredients got into our food — and what FDA can do about it
At least 1,000 ingredients in food products on our grocery store shelves have never been checked for safety by the Food and Drug Administration. Dozens have raised serious safety concerns among experts. How did the FDA allow this? The answer can be found in the agency's lax interpretation of a little-known legal designation that lets companies decide for themselves if ingredients in their products are safe. Fortunately, there are steps the agency can take right now to stem the flow of potentially unsafe ingredients into our food supply. Environmental Defense Fund outlined these steps in a letter we recently sent to the agency, but first let's take a closer look at how we got here. 'Generally Recognized as Safe' is a designation Congress created in 1958 to allow commonly used food ingredients to bypass the FDA's pre-market safety review process. It was meant for food substances — such as oils, vinegar, baking soda and common spices — that were widely considered safe due to their long history of everyday use. Since 1958, this status has been coopted to cover a universe of foods that extends far beyond its original intent. According to FDA regulations, a chemical can receive the designation if experts widely agree that scientific evidence shows its use to be safe. But because 'Generally Recognized as Safe' wasn't meant for newer ingredients, Congress allowed ingredients so designated to skip the FDA's premarket approval process — despite requiring similar evidence for other additives. Under the agency's current interpretation, companies can designate the use of a substance as safe and take products with that substance to market without informing the FDA or the public of its decision. While companies may voluntarily submit a notice to FDA offering safety evidence, they are not required to — and often don't. Our organization estimated that manufacturers have notified FDA of fewer than half of the ingredients they market as safe under the 'Generally Recognized' standard. Companies that do bother to submit a notice to the FDA are free to withdraw it at any point and take their product to market, provided they can cite evidence of its safe use. But this 'evidence' is often far from independent. Companies can, and often do, enlist their own employees or handpicked consultants to conduct their safety assessments. The result is a process riddled with conflicts of interest that lets unsafe foods into Americans' homes. We analyzed 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices received by the FDA, obtained via a Freedom of Information request, and found that of the 1,163 submitted by companies between 1997 and April 2024, 192 were later withdrawn, with safety concerns cited in at least a dozen cases. We also identified 31 ingredients that companies have advertised to be recognized as safe, such as in press releases, trade publications and on their own websites (see the Appendix of our letter). However, we were unable to find the scientific evidence required under this standard to demonstrate these ingredients are commonly regarded as safe among experts. This raises red flags that FDA should be taking seriously. Although a comprehensive fix to the 'Generally Recognized' standard will require legislation from Congress, there are significant steps the FDA can take right away to ensure a more rigorous determination process that better protects Americans' health. Starting today, the FDA can use existing authority to remove safe designations from ingredients it deems unsafe and take them off the market. It can also notify manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers that the substance is no longer recognized as safe. In addition, the FDA can enforce the requirement that companies base safety designations on publicly available data. Although this won't curtail companies' ability to self-declare substances as safe, it will require those who do to be transparent in citing their evidence. Third, the FDA can enforce the requirement that safety assessments consider vital health information such as a substance's dietary sources, potential cancer risks and the cumulative health effects of similar substances. Finally, the FDA can make companies revise and resubmit their data for review when they submit 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices that fail to comply with the criteria. The 'Generally Recognized as Safe' designation is far from a perfect system, but it can work better if it is interpreted and enforced more comprehensively. If the FDA is serious about protecting public health, it should start by fully exercising the tools already at its disposal. Maria Doa is senior director at the Chemicals Policy at Environmental Defense Fund. Maricel Maffini is an independent consultant focused on human and environmental health and chemical safety.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Eating more of these plant-based foods could lower your risk of heart disease and diabetes
Eating more nuts, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains may help to reduce your risk of contracting deadly heart disease and type 2 diabetes. Researchers said this week that people who consumed more phytosterols — a natural compound found in plant foods — significantly delayed both of the conditions. Furthermore, eating more of them was linked to reduced inflammation, markers of better insulin regulation, and differences in the gut microbiome that may contribute to healthy metabolism. The study was not designed to confirm why this is the case, but the researchers said their findings strengthen the evidence. More than 7000,000 Americans die from heart disease and some 101,000 die from diabetes. 'Our findings support the dietary recommendation of adhering to healthy plant-based dietary patterns that are rich in vegetables, fruits, nuts and whole grains,' Dr. Fenglei Wang, a research associate at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said in a statement. 'These findings can help people make informed dietary choices.' Wang presented the observational findings on Tuesday at the flagship annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition. Some phytosterol-rich foods include corn, almonds, broccoli, bananas, and wheat bread. Previous research had found that eating foods with phytosterols can help to improve peoples' health by lowering bad cholesterol, and may reduce the risk of cancer. However, most clinical trials have used high doses of the phytosterols that were beyond what someone might get through just their own diet. The new research is the first to show the benefits as part of a normal diet. To reach these conclusions, Wang and his colleagues looked at data from more than 200,000 American adults that were a part of three studies. All of the participants were nurses or other health professionals and nearly 80 percent were women. Over the course of 36 years, more than 20,000 of them developed type 2 diabetes and nearly 16,000 developed heart disease. The participants' answers to food-frequency questionnaires allowed the researchers to estimate their individual intake of phytosterols, as well as three individual phytosterols known as β-sitosterol, campesterol and stigmasterol. Those who ate the most consumed the most phytosterol had about four to five servings of vegetables, two to three servings of fruits, two servings of whole grains, and half a serving of nuts each day. This made them 9 percent less likely to develop heart disease and 8 percent less likely to develop type 2 diabetes compares to those in the bottom fifth percentage for phytosterol intake, the research showed. Looking at the individual phytosterols, similar associations were observed for β-sitosterol. But, the same was not true for campesterol or stigmasterol. In addition, the researchers analyzed blood samples, looking at the products of metabolism — also known as metabolites — from more than 11,000 people and other metabolic biomarkers in blood samples from over 40,000 participants. They found that phytosterol and β-sitosterol levels were tied to favorable metabolites and metabolic markers relevant to heart disease and diabetes. That signaled a possible reason for the association. 'Our clinical biomarker and metabolomic results suggest the involvement of insulin activity, inflammation and the metabolism of metabolites associated with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease,' said Wang. 'This suggests that phytosterol might reduce risk by alleviating insulin resistance and inflammation.' In a group of just 465 participants, they examined the gut microbiome, or the trillions of microscopic organisms inside the intestines. They found several microbial species and related enzymes linked to higher intake of phytosterols that may affect the production of metabolites associated with a lower risk of diseases. 'We found that the gut microbiome might play a role in the beneficial associations. Some species, such as Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, carry enzymes that could help degrade phytosterol, potentially influencing host metabolism,' Wang said.
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
The Bulletin June 4, 2025
The rundown: Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s vow to "Make America Healthy Again" could fall short when it comes to chronic disease, experts have warned. Here's how. Why it matters: Nearly 130 million Americans are estimated to have at least one form of chronic disease, which could be heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity or hypertension, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The proposed cuts to Medicaid funding and work requirements for eligibility to the benefits, which are set to come as part of the broader GOP budget bill, could leave many with chronic disease without access to vital care. As many as three in four adults enrolled in Medicaid report having one or more chronic conditions, and many are unable to work the hours needed to meet the new eligibility requirements, according to nonprofit health policy research and news organization, KFF. So, while some may be medically exempt, others will lose their health coverage, meaning their conditions could worsen without access to care. Read more in-depth coverage: Health Experts Call Out RFK Jr. Policy Changes: 'New Inconsistency Every Day' TL/DR: Experts told Newsweek that, while the Trump administration's ambition to "defeat" the "epidemic" is clear, whether its policies will help or hinder chronic-disease patients remains to be seen. What happens now? Ross Brownson, director of the Prevention Research Center at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, told Newsweek that Medicaid cuts would "likely have a detrimental effect on chronic disease risk among the most vulnerable populations," adding Medicaid-enrolled adults have significantly higher rates of chronic disease than individuals privately insured. Deeper reading Can Trump Tackle US 'Chronic Disease Crisis'? Experts Weigh In
