Higher Antioxidant Intakes Reduce Risk of Lung Cancer in Male Smokers

Don't avoid antioxidant supplements if you are a smoker or former smoker. Research in the 1990's seemed to indicate that high dosages of beta-carotene supplements may increase lung cancer risk in smokers. However, a new analysis of dietary records from one of these studies came to a different conclusion. Male smokers with the highest overall antioxidant intake, including beta-carotene, actually had a reduced risk of lung cancer.

In observational studies, a high intake of individual antioxidants was related to increased lung cancer risk in male smokers. However, data from many experiments suggest that there are interactions among antioxidant nutrients; therefore, consideration of multiple antioxidants simultaneously may be important in terms of assessing risk.

Yale University researchers evaluated dietary records of participants in the Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta-Carotene Cancer Prevention Study (ATBC). A group of over 27,000 Finnish male smokers aged 50-69 had food records analyzed along with intakes of carotenoids, flavonoids, vitamin E, selenium, and vitamin C. After evaluating the overall intake of antioxidants in this group, the conclusion differs somewhat from the original study.

According to this new analysis, the men with higher overall intakes of antioxidants had lower relative risks of lung cancer, regardless of their assigned study group (beta-carotene or placebo). While researchers of the ATBC study concluded that high-dose beta-carotene supplementation may increase lung cancer risk in male smokers, these findings support the hypothesis that a combination of dietary antioxidants reduces lung cancer risk in men who smoke.

Am J Epidemiol 2004 Jul 1;160(1):68-76

Comprehensive Study Shows Supplementation Correlates to Lower Health Care Costs

A recent comprehensive review of existing scientific research literature found positive health effects associated with both omega-3 fatty acids and the carotenoids, lutein and zeaxanthin. Researchers critically reviewed the scientific evidence of the two supplements' ability to reduce the risk of disease and developed estimates of potential health care savings. With health care costs skyrocketing and the age of the population increasing, helping seniors live independently for longer is becoming increasingly important.

The group reviewed several hundred studies dating back over thirty years to arrive at an estimated cost savings of 3.1 billion dollars over the next five years with the daily use of omega-3 fatty acids. They estimated that the reduction in coronary heart disease in the elderly population would result in 384,303 fewer hospitalizations and physician fees.

Loss of central vision caused by age-related macular degeneration results in numerous elderly becoming dependent on the community or a nursing facility. The researchers used over 15 years of research on lutein and zeaxanthin to estimate a potential net savings of 2.5 billion dollars over the next five years. Approximately 98,219 individuals could avoid the transition to dependence during this time through daily intake of 6-10 mg of lutein and zeaxanthin.

Based on health insurance costs for the age group over 65, the five-year estimated savings resulting from daily intake of omega-3 fatty acids and lutein with zeaxanthin is approximately 5.6 billion dollars.

http://www.supplementinfo.org/anm/articlefiles/265-FINAL_DSEA_%20FACT_SHEET.pdf

Calcium Supplements Reduce Bone Fractures, but Only if You Take Them

You've heard it before. Brittle bones lead to more fractures, especially in post-menopausal women who are susceptible to osteoporosis. Studies show that calcium can help maintain bone health. But, supplementation has to be daily - not once in a while or once a week or whenever you happen to remember!

The majority of post-menopausal women are susceptible to osteoporosis as their estrogen levels decline. This leads to greater excretion of calcium and results in more brittle bones prone to fracture. In this study, the women who took calcium supplements twice a day reduced their risk of breaking a bone, but getting them to consistently take the supplements was a problem.

The study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, lead researchers to state that they believed calcium supplementation may not be a good public health approach to fracture prevention, not because they don't work, but because of the lack of long-term compliance. Nearly half the 1,460 healthy women who participated in the study did not consistently take the twice-daily 600 mg supplements.

However, among the women in the study who took at least 80 percent of their assigned calcium, only 10 percent suffered a fracture within one year compared to 15 percent of the women who regularly took a placebo. Therefore, taking extra calcium in supplement form did significantly help those women who took them regularly.

The results of this study illustrate two important points: negative conclusions reported in some supplement studies may be a result of poor compliance, not the failure of the supplement itself, and supplements won't likely be effective if they are not taken consistently.

Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:869-875