"News Weekly" earlier introduction of a "cancer apple" study: A professor at Cornell University published animal experiments, saying that "Apple will be a baby to save the lives of people." That study results were published in professional journals on Nothing issue, however, it is not a worthy recommend to the public, "Conclusion."
In the food area, to prove a help to the health food ingredients, animal is
Inspection is not enough. To put it as a conclusion to recommend the public, at least in clinical trials and statistics, how many come to eat the amount can have much effect, as well as the amount for human health there is no other negative effects and so on. Lot of food ingredients research for several decades, animals at similar effective results abound, the results of clinical trials are also quite a number, but still should not be academic, as well as department director approval. In 2001, a company in Europe producing a beverage, main components are Puerarin and chrysanthemums, are the role of anti-inebriation. Them to apply for listing in the United States printed on product packaging function on anti-inebriation. The "function" of the evidence, first, since ancient times, Chinese people can think Puerarin Jiejiu, two research institutions are part of the relevant experimental results. Can the United States Food and Drug Agency (FDA) rejected the application on the grounds that: "hangover" is a therapeutic effect, if we claim that this feature, then required the adoption of drug application procedures. In this regard, institutions such as Harvard published the results of those studies, but also far from adequate.
Table of modern science has confirmed that fruits and vegetables for human health has major benefits. A variety of different fruits and vegetables, they bring the body's composition varies, but the human need all these different benefits. People eat food every day the total amount is limited. In the "anti-cancer apple," this example, if someone 6 apple to eat every day to get "a strong anti-cancer effects", they are bound to reduce other food intake. On the overall health, so too a single food are probably a negative. Therefore, the current food science research in assessing the health effects of a certain food when flagging dependent on this control experiment, and to assess the effectiveness of this food, the impact of the introduction of the recipes.
And "anti-cancer apple" is similar to a lot of people have heard of "green tea anti-cancer" argument. In scientific research journals, nor is it really able to find many studies in this regard. In 2004 to the FDA on someone applying for such certification: "every day to drink 40 ounces of green tea can reduce the occurrence of the risk of some cancers. While there is scientific evidence to support, but the evidence is not yet adequate." They presented a variety of academic journals on a large number of research papers to support the "green tea anti-cancer." At lot of people seem to, those papers have been enough "authority", but the applicant is put between quotation marks in the second sentence to show caution. FDA has concluded that only a very limited credible evidence to support the green tea for breast cancer and prostate cancer there is definitely a merit. FDA finally agreed to the manufacturers stated as: "A weak and limited study does not show drinking green tea can reduce the incidence of prostate cancer risk, but another weak and limited studies have shown can reduce this risk. Based on these studies, FDA believes that green tea are unlikely to reduce the risk of prostate cancer. " If manufacturers alter the integrity of the meaning of statements, or selective use of "scientific research" to promote their products, then the FDA will be held accountable.
Scientific research results will only be regarded as records. Even if each record is true, it can not rely on them to draw an elephant. Only so many people from different angles to record, then all the records together, can be enough to draw lifelike elephant.
No comments:
Post a Comment