Every Body Needs Milk -- until weaning, that is.

http://www.ecotopia.com/webpress/milk/

Here are some links to articles on the web about the dangers of milk consumption by adults. NoMilk.Com! Lots of useful links on the subject. Udder Madness: The rBGH Controversy
• •

Because You're Not A Calf Anymore... NLG is dedicated to making informed decisions based on sound knowledge and honest assessment of the facts involved in the use of recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) to increase milk production in cows. The purpose of this conference is to educate students and the community on important aspects of the rBGH controversy. Representatives from all sides of the issue have been invited. From Vermont Law, a link no longer available online. Pharming the Cow

Earaches and Tonsillitis

• •

"EARACHE (ear infections) like tonsillitis, sinusitis, and bronchitis are related in cause, prevention and cure. Allergies to cow's milk is the most frequent common denominator." Tonsillitis, dietary treatment "... to avoid recurrent attacks: reduce intake of dairy produce: milk can be replaced with soya milk or goat's milk." The allopathic remedy to tonsillitis: Milk! "While the throat is very sore, feed the child soft or liquid foods such as milk, milkshakes, ice cream, soups, or instant-breakfast milk drinks..." [After I had my tonsils out, I was served ice cream. Then I puked!]

Cancer
• • •

"...Consuming dairy products is linked to an increased risk for breast cancer..." "IGF-I survives digestion and has been identified as the KEY FACTOR in breast cancer's growth." On Colin Campbell by Charlotte Gerson: When T. Colin Campbell first started as a young nutritionist, he was sent to the Philippines to help the poor starving people. The main thing they were stressing was increasing protein, because at the tiime they were taught that protein is nutrition. So they raised the protein content of these children's foods from five to twenty percent. Lo and behold the

kids developed liver cancers. Two physicians in India did similar experiments with rats. They raised their content of milk proteins from five to twenty percent. All thirty-five rats, 100 percent, developed liver cancer. Later on, Campbell studied China and found that in certain provinces where no milk is used, there is no cancer. He called milk the number one carcinogen in the world. Yahoo links on Lactose Intolerance A new book by David Pimentel, Ecological Integrity. "Tax on eaters at top of food chain would aid environmental sustainability, Cornell ecologist proposes in new book...." It can be expected that the incidence of infectious diseases will increase for young people: Coke to add milk products to beverage line. The following is from http://www.mercurycenter.com/premium/opinion/columns/027986.htm

SECTIONS

Related Links
Perspective Writing Techniques Special Reports Seven-Day Archives

Breaking News Front Page World National Local & State Business & Stocks Technology Sports SV Life Entertainment Opinion Columnists Comics Weather SV Magazine Nuevo Mundo

Published Monday, March 27, 2000, in the San Jose Mercury News

Viet Mercury
CLASSIFIEDS & SERVICES

MILTON R. MILLS

Classifieds Jobs: CareerPath Homes: HomeHunter NewHomeNetwork.com Apartments.com Mortgage Link Cars: Cars.com Personals Yellow Pages BayArea.com Entertainment: Just Go S.F. Bay Traveler Archives: NewsLibrary E-mail Dispatches Contests & Events
ABOUT US

Got milk? For many people, there are reasons to get rid of it
BY MILTON R. MILLS
In mid-March, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals sparked controversy with its campaign promoting beer's advantages over cow's milk to college students. Certainly, few health professionals would advocate beer as a health tonic, yet many mistakenly regard milk as a necessarily wholesome choice. Indeed, saying ``don't drink your milk'' may initially sound as unAmerican as ``don't eat apple pie.'' But PETA's anti-milk points are well-taken. For generations, most parents and physicians have kept urging children to drink their glasses of milk. To be sure, they generally had good intentions-but they also had been flooded with endless promotions and ads from the financially well-set dairy industry. More recently, it's hard to miss those here, there and everywhere milk-mustache and ``Got Milk?'' billboards, bus ads, print ads, TV spots, and classroom promotions. The milk industry even hit the road with its ``Better Bones Tour,'' visiting 100 U.S. cities with trucks carrying displays claiming a beneficial relationship between dairy and osteoporosis. Science, however, has been raining on dairy's parade. Observations in South African black townships, with virtually no dairy consumption, showed residents there experience almost no osteoporosis, while the chronic bone disease afflicts millions in dairy-devouring places such as Scandinavia, Canada, and the United States. In a finding published in the American Journal of Public Health in June 1997, the 12-year Harvard Nurses' Study of almost 78,000 people found those regularly consuming dairy products had no protection at all against hip and forearm fractures. Indeed, women drinking three glasses of milk daily had more fractures than women who rarely or never touched milk. Other studies are investigating dairy's links with breast cancer,

Mercury Center Advertising Information Privacy Policy Site Index San Jose Mercury News Advertising Information Newspaper Subscription Mercury News Newsletter Mercury News Jobs

ovarian cancer, iron deficiency, insulin-dependent diabetes, cataracts, food allergies, heart disease, asthma and colic. Common toxic contaminants in dairy include pesticides, drugs and antibiotic traces. In attacking cow's milk, PETA actually echoes the growing number of nutritionists and doctors -- the late pediatrician Benjamin Spock among them -- wiping off their milk mustaches. From my perspective as an African-American physician, there is another troubling side to dairy promotions, and especially to government recommendations that it be part of every school lunch meal and similar nutrition programs. While only about 15 percent to 20 percent of U.S. whites are intolerant of the milk sugar lactose, some 95 percent of Asian Americans, about 70 percent of African Americans and Native Americans, and more than 50 percent of Mexican-Americans cannot digest it. Many get quite sick from it. Nature starts to remove the enzymes that digest milk sugar once we have passed the age of weaning. Indeed, one can call lactose intolerance nature's normal warning signal not to ``do dairy,'' akin to the protective pain signals prompting you to snatch your hand away from a hot stove. Of course, some advocate taking lactose-tolerance pills or adding small amounts of dairy at intervals throughout the day to ``trick'' the body into accepting milk, ice cream, and so on. But, if you wouldn't want to trick your hand into not feeling a searingly painful stove, why would you want to temporarily mask the unhealthy downside of dairy? Being lactose-intolerant really constitutes genetic good luck. It's bad enough that current federal dietary guidelines encourage meat consumption, though they do list nutritionally sound alternatives, such as legumes (beans and peas). However, the 1992-issued federal Food Guide Pyramid's ``dairy section'' doesn't even bother to list substitutes, though the 2000 Dietary Guidelines for Americans draft does finally mention soymilk. Indeed, healthy dairy-free alternatives such as fortified soymilk and calcium-set tofu have become increasingly available in supermarkets, as well as in health food stores and food co-ops. Calcium, dairy's big ``health'' selling point, does indeed strengthen teeth and bones. But it's readily absorbable from

One section of that book is quite unlike all the others. So. black-eyed peas. pinto beans. It offers. and. M. muscular tongue. practices in Virginia and volunteers as associate director of preventive medicine at the Washingtonbased Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.broccoli. They live in the midst of the food they eat. Mills. The cow lowers its head to the ground and touches the meadow plants (or the hay in its stall) with the front end of its soft. Some technical references have been removed. enwraps the plants. SLT] Cows are grazers. kale. but reaches out with its rough. calcium-set tofu. Brussels sprouts. This activity continues for a few hours. After it has torn off a few portions and chewed a bit. I think. a Stanford University-trained physician specializing in nutrition. moist snout. why not replace cow's milk with soymilk and other alternatives? Milton R. And none of those haul the health-damaging freight that dairy does. He wrote this column for the Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service. and tears them off. mustard greens. navy beans. . The following text is copyright 1996 by Craig Holdrege. It clearly needs to use its tongue in this way -. The tongue needs the stimulation of roughage. turnip greens. Genetics and the Manipulation of Life is available from Lindisfarne for $14.95 by calling 518-851-2054. The cow does not bite off the plants with its teeth or lips. a nice counterpoint to the current news stories about Dolly and genetic engineering.cattle that receive soft feed begin to lick their fellow cows much more than usual. the new fortified orange juice and apple juice products. the huge first chamber of the four-chambered stomach. of course. the rumen can hold forty-five gallons. Genetics and the Manipulation of Life. it's not so much about genetics as about the life of the cow and how it is affected by the scientific and engineering stances we take. *** Pharming the Cow From Craig Holdrege [Back in NF #31 I reviewed Craig Holdrege's remarkable book. Occupying the entire left side of the abdominal cavity.D. Lindisfarne Press has kindly granted permission to reprint the piece here. for your health's sake. The food reaches the rumen. the cow swallows a mouthful..

The intensive transformation of substances and secretion of fluids characterizing the digestive process are heightened in the formation and secretion of milk. The other digestive organs are sustained by a similarly strong circulation. While the cow is ruminating. and the muscle activity of the rumen are all stimulated by roughage. The . the main. Bacterial activity. three to five hundred quarts of blood pass through the udder. their activity focused inwardly on grinding and digestion. For every quart of milk. hay).the calf. entering first the other three chambers of the stomach and then the small intestine. and finally in its dung. hard-to-digest component of roughage. and the greater the amount of water a cow drinks. Characteristic for cows is their fluid dung. fluids are removed from the food and new digestive juices are secreted until finally the cow has broken down its food to a point where it can be taken up by the blood. it serves another growing organism -. the secretion of digestive juices. In fact. through the whole digestive tract.milk. Glands in the udder then create a wholly new substance -. Substances produced by digestion are withdrawn from the blood in the udder. When the rumen is about half-full. in contrast to the solid dung of other ruminants like sheep or deer. and secretion of body fluids. They grind their food between their large cheek teeth in rhythmical.a fluid organ that connects all organs of the body. M. The digestive process is related to the blood -. the food is swallowed. After rumination. functionally one can consider the mouth to be a fifth chamber of the stomach. This is not a substance that is used by the cow or excreted. Cows usually lie on the ground while ruminating. rather. Rumination begins. You are probably familiar with the picture of calm presented by a herd of cows. As [E. Digestion involves an intensive production. circulation. the rumen only finishes its development and becomes functional when a calf begins to feed on grass or hay. portions of the partially digested food are regurgitated back into the mouth. the cow shows more fluidity than other ruminants.up to forty gallons a day. For every quart of saliva. three hundred quarts of blood pass through the salivary glands. In fact. from its moist snout. circling motions of the lower jaw. The drier the feed (for example. The process begins in the head.] Kranich points out. The cow's large intestine does not absorb as much fluid out of this final section of the digestive tract. lying in a meadow.Digestion in the rumen is facilitated by microorganisms that break down cellulose. the more the saliva. In these organs. the saliva glands secrete copious amounts of saliva -.

This increase has taken place essentially within the last fifty years. In our time. Breeders try to realize in the domestic animal (or plant) a mental picture they carry within themselves.cow only begins to produce milk after she has given birth to a calf. When we gain some insight into the cow viewed as an organism. they produce more milk. even if only in an elementary way." The scrubbers remain in the rumen for life. this dietary change has its limits. which "were observed to float on the surface of the ruminal contents in these steers and to form a mat similar to that observed when ruminants are fed roughage. When we build up a picture of the cow in this way. But since. about one-half gallon per day). Until this century the cow gave about as much milk per day as her calf would have drunk. so that the animal as a whole comes into view. by feeding them differently. this relation is enhanced. These characteristics reflect in part the aims of the breeders. How has the increase been made possible? First. had it not been weaned -.about two to three gallons in present-day breeds (in India. Second. A simple method has been developed to circumvent the need for roughage in steers bred for beef. When cows receive more high-protein grains in their feed. each with its own characteristics. and the calf has begun to suck on the teats. The domestication of cows by human beings goes back thousands of years. by breeding larger cows that by virtue of their size eat more. pot scrubbers were wrapped in masking tape and then. eight scrubbers were pushed down the steer's throat into the rumen. Evidently. cows need roughage. we begin to see the cow as a total organism. As consumers we tend to take for granted our relation to the cow. One result of this endeavor is that milk loses its isolated status as a product we consume. Moreover.instead of roughage. In trials. The trials indicated that steers fed 100% concentrate plus pot scrubbers grew at approximately the rate of cattle fed 85% concentrate with 15% roughage (corn silage). The tape soon detached from the scrubbers. the dairy cow's milk production can exceed seven gallons per day. and give more milk. as we have seen. one after another. In the course of time this interaction has led to many different breeds. digest more. the scrubbers stimulate the rumen walls in a manner similar to roughage. We view each part in the context of other parts. . the way we now care for these animals stems in good part from our points of view.the ones we buy in supermarkets -. The steers are "fed" plastic pot scrubbers -.

This is particularly true in genetic engineering: Producing human pharmaceutical proteins in the milk of transgenic livestock has been an attractive possibility. texture -. But some farmers or feedlots have evidently used Loerch's method.In this issue of Bio/Technology three groups report significant progress in realizing these benefits. Coupling the view of the cow as a mechanism with a one-sided economic perspective that emphasizes cost-effectiveness has become increasingly prevalent in our times. he is reported to have received many phone calls "from bewildered butchers who have found pot scrubbers in the guts of slaughtered cattle" (New York Times.. and unlimited multiplication of the bioreactor [that is. the animal].... These include fertility problems. but also on the way the animals are raised and cared for. [S." It is by no means clear that a farmer would actually save money using this method.taste. This tuning of the bioreactor in a specific direction has brought with it some unwanted side effects. In its starkness this example is illustrative. 1992).Such "molecular pharming" technologies are appealing for a number of reasons.. it would be beneficial if roughage could be eliminated from cattle diets without sacrificing performance. Nutritional considerations are reduced to ascertaining that roughage is low-calorie feed and therefore not effective for fast growth. and this can be substituted for. as a university animal scientist..Their results provide convincing demonstration of the feasibility of using animals as commercial bioreactors..] Loerch surmised that "because roughage is relatively low in energy and is expensive.In undertaking his research. It shows not only how strongly the desire to lower costs is a determining factor in agricultural research. Perhaps a more enlightened age will discover that the nutritional quality of foodstuffs such as milk or beef are dependent not only on the results of biochemical analysis.. The cow's need for roughage is reduced to a mechanical function. August 29. since. low operating costs. vol. but also in what narrow terms the cow is viewed. and leg and hoof afflictions. 9 (1991). pp. since it is not a given that 15% more concentrate would be cheaper than producing or buying a corresponding amount of corn silage. High milk-producing cows are often slaughtered after . mastitis. The steer can no longer ruminate because the scrubbers are too large to be regurgitated. [Bio/Technology. smell. 786-788] The attempt to continually increase milk production reflects the treatment of cows as commercial bioreactors. They offer the potential of extremely high volumetric productivity.are not considered.. Has this no significance for the animal's well-being and physiology? The cow as a mechanism and not the cow as an organism stands behind the roughage substitute. The sensory qualities of hay or silage -.

the whole is changed. we learn to expect that the desired effect of our manipulations will in all likelihood be only one among many changes. This hormone is produced by bacteria that have been genetically altered by a cow-derived DNA that is related to the organism's production of growth hormone. (Increased circulation always occurs in inflamed organs -. Extensive testing of rBGH was done on rats as part of the FDA's procedure for establishing the safety of the substance. From the point of view of the organism. the FDA sees no reason for the milk to be labeled as coming from rBGH-treated cows. the udder is susceptible to inflammation. If we change a part. Therefore. When we begin to think in terms of the organism. therefore. a cow will reach its peak of milk production after three or four years of lactation. Since it is an infectious disease. mastitis is likely. In some unknown way. and will continue healthy lactation for a number of years beyond that. the udder is almost on the verge of inflammation without bacteria. Much controversy surrounds the use of rBGH.) When milk production is increased to the utmost degree. very surprising that mastitis can accompany increased milk production. and in Europe its use has not been approved. they are in and of themselves interesting. 1993. the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the commercial sale of milk. The treated animals were larger than normal. milk products. strict hygienic procedures are called for to prevent bacteria from entering the udder via the openings in the teats. When the researchers investigated the individual organs. Cows injected with this hormone produce 10 to 20% more milk. and meat from cows treated with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH). But this is only one side of the problem.it calls forth the warmth and redness of inflamed tissue. FDA scientists concluded that experimental evidence (provided by manufacturers of rBGH) demonstrates that milk from treated cows is in essence chemically identical to milk from untreated cows. Due to the intensive circulation in the udder during lactation.three years of lactation (five-year-old animals). there is no such thing as a side effect. growth hormone stimulates milk production. It is not. and when bacteria do enter the udder. The FDA was concerned solely with the product's safety. The organism is a whole. Such changes depended in part on the animal's . and this change will likely manifest in ways that go beyond any desired effects. Mastitis is an inflammation of the udder. Without the demand to produce as much milk as possible in a short period of time. they found that some were proportionately smaller while others were proportionately larger than normal. Researchers found that the whole organism was affected by rBGH. In November. The cow's physiology is stressed. Although such experimental results cannot simply be assumed to be valid for cows.

They also report that Monsanto blocked their original attempt to publish their analysis of the data. a research group led by Erik Millstone analyzed Monsanto data. July/August.] government has spent between $600 million and $1. 1991." It is absurd to invent a product to increase milk production while milk itself is already being produced in surplus. the Congressional Budget Office estimated that if only one in five farmers were to use rBGH in the first year it is sold. Farmers (particularly those with large farms) who seek further mechanization and ever higher production are most likely to use rBGH.S. Some independent scientists have come to different conclusions. Moreover. and into what context do its effects radiate? Clearly there is no consumer demand for more milk. The group concluded that milk from rBGHtreated cows contained an average of 19% more white blood cells than milk from untreated cows. In modern Western economic ideology there is an emphasis on growth. it must aggressively market the product. An increase in white blood cells is "associated with increased risk of mastitis. Higher productivity is achieved to the detriment of the connection between farmers and the plants and animals upon which their work is based. "the government will have to spend $15 million [more] to buy the [additional] surplus milk. Most recently. Out of what context is rBGH produced. Large chemical companies continually grow. White blood cells enter an organ as part of the inflammatory reaction.sex. claims there are no significant side effects. . 3). "Ratios of organ weight to body weight were increased for spleen and adrenal [gland] and decreased for testes in male rats. but the question of the effects of rBGH has been a source of major controversy and concern." Such detailed analyses have not been performed on cows. and increased for heart and spleen and decreased for brain in the female rats. Such a total separation of production from actual needs is a consequence of our economic system.3 billion a year to purchase surplus milk (Hastings Center Report. p. and cost-cutting. nor is there a demand for rBGH milk." The researchers acknowledge that their analysis will remain incomplete until Monsanto releases all the pertinent data. This growth is seen as the means to counter rising costs of production (inflation. But others follow in fear of not being able to compete. When such a company invests millions of dollars to develop a new product like rBGH. "From 1987 to 1989 the [U. higher wages. higher production. And large government subsidies reflect an approach to production that does not take into consideration real consumer needs. and so on). a producer of rBGH. Monsanto. The attempt to emphasize such things in agriculture has led to the development of ever larger factory farms.

At the same time. SLT] Anyone who thinks in terms of commercial bioreactors and acts accordingly will of necessity consider it uneconomic to worry over the fact that animals are living.And what about the cow? As long as we treat it as a commercial bioreactor. then we must ask how far we can healthily push milk production. But if we remember that the cow is an organism. [See NF #30 for more on Community Supported Agriculture. This problem. The consumer community provides the farmer with an income. Within this setting it becomes possible to handle animals like the organisms they are. Goto table of contents . Here farmers and consumers enter an economic association that frees the farmer to some degree from the compelling necessity to increase production and lower costs. By gaining insight into the cow as a "small world. there is no reason not to continue trying to increase production. Practicing this point of view is made extremely difficult by current economic realities. farm production is related more directly to consciously affirmed consumer needs. sentient beings. and begin to fit our actions into its context. existing for its own sake" [Goethe]. has led (to mention one example) to the establishment of Community Supported Agriculture. we can recognize its specific characteristics and needs. where it is recognized.

" Judith C. August 24. 158(1) .. 249. 1994." J.. Both contain 70 amino acids in the identical sequence. January. or IGF-I..= Breast Cancer The following ten references provide converging lines of evidence that focus upon one central point. That powerful growth hormone is insulin-like growth factor. and only one hormone that is identical between any two species. When IGF-I from cow's milk alights upon an existing cancer. 1991. By drinking cow's milk. one delivers IGF-I in a bioactive form to the body's cells. "IGF-I is critically involved in the aberrant growth of human breast cancer cells. 3.C. Natl. J-Cell-Physiol. If you believe that breast feeding "works" to protect lactoferrins and immunoglobulins from digestion (and benefit the nursing infant).Endocrinol. There are hundreds of millions of different proteins in nature. Juskevich and C. 99(2). Chen. J. SCIENCE." A. 1990. Inst.. "Human Insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I) and bovine IGF-I are identical. "IGF-I is a potent growth factor for cellular proliferation in the human breast carcinoma cell line. Greg Guyer. Lippman. March. Lee. IGF-I is identical in human and cow. Health Res.V. you must also recognize that milk is a hormonal delivery system. IGF-I survives digestion and has been identified as the KEY FACTOR in breast cancer's growth.. vol." M. "Estrogen regulation of IGF-I in breast cancer cells would support the hypothesis that IGF-I has a regulatory function in breast cancer. Mol-Cell.

Journal of the American Dietetic Association. Nov. 259. 10." E." M.notmilk. Musgrove. 351." J." X. 1994. IGF-I appears to be a critical component in cellular proliferation. 1998 "Serum IGF-I levels increased significantly in milk drinkers. Exp-Cell-Res. 1993 Robert Cohen author of: MILK A-Z (201-871-5871) Executive Director (notmilkman@notmilk. vol."Insulin-like growth factors are key factors for breast cancer growth. . 1993. Eur-J-Cancer. 211(1) "IGF-I plays a major role in human breast cancer cell growth. Heaney.. Vol. 29A (16). Li.." Robert P.com) Dairy Education Board http://www. October 1999 "IGF-1 accelerates the growth of breast cancer cells." Hankinson.com Do you know of a friend or family member with one or more of these milk-related problems? Do them a huge favor and forward the URL or this entire file to them.S.. 157(2) "IGF-I produces a 10-fold increase in RNA levels of cancer cells. an increase of about 10% above baseline but was unchanged in the control group. The Lancet. May 9. J-Cell-Physiol. 99. Figueroa. no. January 29. vol. March. 1993 "IGF-I has been identified as a key factor in breast cancer.A. Lippman Science.A.

study after study has linked dairy consumption to a high incidence of breast and other cancers. as opposed to 44 per 100. and meat. have them send an empty Email to notmilk-subscribe@yahoogroups. and hormones. T. It strikes about 182.000 cancer deaths that occur in the United States each year is due to dietary factors … Although the committee recognizes that no diet can guarantee full protection against any disease.000 women in the U. animal protein. Limit your intake of high-fat foods. we believe that our recommendations offer the best nutrition information currently available to help Americans reduce their risk of cancer. breast cancer is almost unheard of. each year and kills 46. and "2. Just a few examples: The American Cancer Society points out that "about one-third of the 500. . Colin Campbell points to China. Women seeking to minimize their chances of breast cancer should avoid milk.com and they will receive it (automatically)! http://www.000.com/breast. a basically nonmilk-drinking country. International renowned nutrition expert Dr. where milk consumption is extremely rare. other dairy products. where cancer deaths among women aged 35 to 64 averaged less than 9 per 100. each of which increases cancer risk." The Society’s top two recommendations are: "1.S. particularly from animal sources. animal-based diets.Do you know of someone who should read these newsletters? If so.000 in the U.asp Got Breast Cancer? Breast cancer is the most common cancer-related death among women in most of the Western world and the leading cause of death for women under 50. Consuming dairy products is linked to an increased risk for breast cancer because dairy products are high in fat.000. Choose most of the foods you eat from plant sources". In Asia." The American Dietetic Association reports that breast cancer is most prevalent in countries where women consume high-fat.milksucks. Since the 1980’s.S.

published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Ready to reach for the soy milk? Click here for delicious dairy-free recipes. Researchers at Stanford University and the National Institutes of Health found that high concentrations of the IGF-1 hormone stimulate cancer cell growth.html Foods for Cancer Prevention download this factsheet Of the many diseases that affect people these days. most people remain unaware of how they can reduce their risk of developing cancer. reported that adult women who reduce their dietary intake of fat and animal protein substantially lower their risk of breast cancer. Doctors found a strong link between breast cancer and animal fat. A report published in Cancer Research correlates breast cancer mortality with dairy consumption and suggests that dairy products play a role in the development of breast cancer. There are numerous other studies to cite. Additionally. But despite a wealth of scientific data. An Italian study revealed that breast cancer risks increased as a result of the consumption of animal fat. "Foods for Cancer Prevention" http://pcrm. In the International Journal of Health Sciences.org/health/prevmed/foods_cancer_prev. Dr. According to the National Cancer Institute. A. as much as 80 percent of all cancers are due to . is increasingly abundant in milk from cows treated with synthetic bovine growth hormone (rBGH). Samuel Epstein warns that elevated levels of IGF-1 in milk from cows injected with rBGH is a potential risk factor for breast cancer in humans who consume cow’s milk. Studies published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association and the British Medical Journal found that consuming three additional servings of nonfat or 1 percent milk for 12 weeks was associated with a 10 percent increase in IGF-1 levels. most significantly with regard to dairy products. but no relationship between breast cancer and vegetable fat. J. For more information. cancer is among the most feared. visit these sites: The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Nicholson and N. For example. IGF-1. The Food and Drug Administration reports that IGF-1 is not destroyed by pasteurization. A comparison study published in Cancer shows that meat and milk consumption are positively associated with breast cancer deaths. indicate that the results are consistent with previous reports. animal protein. In fact. Another Italian study. meat. A survey of 1.and dairy-based diet are eight times more likely to develop breast cancer than their counterparts who eat a plant-based diet not containing dairy products.L.486 Danish women with breast cancer indicated that women who frequently consumed "standard" (whole) milk or consumed three or more liters of low-fat milk per week prior to their diagnosis significantly elevated their risk of developing breast cancer. The authors of this study. University of Illinois scientist Dr. pasteurization actually increases its concentration in rBGH milk. Barnard of The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine cite more than 12 epidemiological studies that show a positive correlation between dairy products and breast cancer. Outwater of Princeton University and Drs.Japanese women who follow a more Western-style. a hormone that occurs naturally in humans and cows and in all milk. doctors in Milan report data showing a strong correlation between dairy consumption and breast cancer. published in the British Journal of Cancer.

During this time.3 Fiber affects levels of estrogens in the body. They may come from foods. and as much as 35 to 50 percent are due to foods. It moves food more quickly through the intestines. Thirty percent are due to tobacco use. this has proven true. It is easy to control these and other risk factors. there were fewer cases of colon cancer. Foods that are closest to their natural state. are highest in fiber. The best sources of fiber are whole grains. Carcinogens are substances that promote the development of cancerous cells.S. Fat Raises Cancer Risks . Bile acids are secreted into the intestine to help digest fat. helping to eliminate carcinogens. bacteria in the colon ferment the fiber creating a more acidic environment which may make bile acids less toxic.4 Without adequate fiber. so carcinogens are diluted.. and fruits. The U. fiber cannot be digested by humans early in the digestive process. Dietary fat. or even from within the body. lentils. In the U. is known to be a promoter that helps the abnormal cells grow quickly. the estrogen can be reabsorbed from the intestine into the bloodstream. compounds known as inhibitors can keep the cells from growing. By definition. It takes years for a noticeable tumor to develop. and other Western nations whose diets are based upon animal products have the highest rates of colon cancer. and thus are potentially preventable. but sometimes they attack the cell’s genetic material (DNA) and alter it.2. While no one is certain exactly how fiber protects against digestive tract disorders. Dennis Burkitt. Experts recommend 30 to 40 grams per day. Some vitamins in plant foods are known to be inhibitors. there are several possibilities. Fiber may bind with these bile acids and evict them from the intestines. from the air. Studies have shown that stomach cancer and breast cancer are less common on high-fiber diets. unrefined and unpeeled. on the other hand. It also draws water into the digestive tract. where the fiber binds with the hormone and moves it out of the body. Fiber Fights Cancer In 1970. plant-based diets). The highest fiber intakes are found in non-industrialized nations where meat is scarce and plant foods fill the menu. Groups of such cells form tumors and invade healthy tissue. What Is Cancer? Cancer begins as a single abnormal cell that begins to multiply out of control. Animal products contain no fiber.S. Estrogens are normally secreted into the intestine. The water and fiber make fecal matter bulkier. there.1 Also. observed that a high-fiber diet reduces diseases of the digestive tract. High levels of estrogen are linked to a higher risk of breast cancer. beans. often spreading to other parts of the body. vegetables. Around the world. Fiber is also protective against other forms of cancer. peas. British physician. Most carcinogens are neutralized before damage can occur. the average daily fiber intake is 10 to 20 grams per day.identified factors. He observed that in countries where diets are high in fiber (that is. bacteria can change the acids into chemicals which promote colon cancer.

The lowest rates are in groups with the lowest consumption of fats. The Importance of Vegetables Not only are vegetables low in fat and high in fiber. Dr.6 Many studies indicate that fat in foods increases one’s risk for cancer. esophagus. It increases hormone production and thus raises breast cancer risks. Caution is advised in supplementing selenium. Carotenoids. broccoli. cauliflower.S. Vitamin C. Selenium is found in whole grains and has the same antioxidant effects as vitamin C and betacarotene. breast. larynx.5 Migration studies help to rule out the influence of genetics. kale. found in citrus fruits and many vegetables. Vegetables such as cabbage. a prominent cancer researcher form the University of Cambridge. mouth. however. It also blocks the conversion of nitrates to cancer-causing nitrosamines in the stomach. is about 37 percent fat. they also contain many cancer-fighting substances. studies have shown that fat intake should be well below 30 percent to have an anti-cancer affect. have been shown to help prevent cancer. Alcohol . present in dark green and yellow vegetables. there is evidence that animal fat is much more harmful than vegetable fat. Vitamin E also has this effect. It also stimulates the production of bile acids which have been linked to colon cancer. and it may also adversely affect breast cancer survival rates for those who have cancer.7 Although the total amount of fat one eats is of concern. Sheila Bingham.8 Meat and milk are also linked to both prostate and ovarian cancers.Cross-cultural studies have revealed that the populations with the highest levels of fat consumption are also the ones with the highest death rates from breast and colon cancer. which is toxic in large doses. One study noted a 200 percent increase in breast cancer among those who consume beef or pork five to six times per week. The National Cancer Institute suggests that people lower that percentage down to 30 percent. Vitamin C acts as an antioxidant. Ten to 15 percent is more likely to be helpful. the pigment that gives fruits and vegetables their dark colors. helps protect against lung cancer and may help prevent cancers of the bladder. turnips.9 How Fat Affects Cancer Risks Fat has many effects within the body. notes that meat is more closely associated with colon cancer than any other factor. The average diet in the U. Beta-carotene. neutralizing cancer-causing chemicals that form in the body. and Brussels sprouts contain flavones and indoles which are thought to have anti-cancer activities. may lower risks for cancers of the esophagus and stomach. and other sites.

Excessive intake of alcohol raises one’s risks for cancers of the breast. Kritchevsky D. The best diets are pure vegetarian diets. et al. Conclusion A cancer prevention diet is one that is high in fiber. 8. Risch HA. Role of lifestyle and dietary habits in risk of cancer among Seventh-day Adventists. nutrition. and colon. Am J Epidemiol 1985. 2. Am J Clin Nutr 1988. 7. Cancer 1986. Meat.58:1804-13. Jain M. nutritional concerns. Diet. and fiber than meat-eaters. Estrogen excretion patterns and plasma levels in vegetarian and omnivorous women.122:947-59. German researchers recently discovered that vegetarians have more than twice the natural killer cell activity of meat-eaters. Bingham SA. References 1. and non-starch polysaccharides and bowel cancer. A diet that is rich in soybeans may be one reason for the lower incidence of breast cancer in Asia. animal protein and dietary fiber in breast cancer etiology: a case control study. Cancer 1986. Breast cancer: incidence. 11. Cancer Res 1975. Also. vegetables. and treatment approaches. indoles. 10. starch. It also minimizes or excludes alcohol. 5. vegetarians tend to eat more soy products than meat-eaters. et al. Minowa M. Cancer 1986.58:2363-71. beta-carotene. J Natl Cancer Inst 1974. Dietary fiber intake in Japan. Cummings JH. Wynder EL. Not surprisingly. Bingham S. Goldin BR. pharynx. Lubin F. Choi NW. high-fiber diet that includes a variety of fruits.37A:113-9. as being the best for cancer prevention.58:1830-6. Enstrom JE. Adlercreutz H.53:631-9. International comparisons of mortality rates for cancer of the breast. Boyar AP. and includes generous portions of fruits and vegetables. Diet and breast cancer in causation and therapy. and esophagus. low in fat (especially animal fat). 9.307:1542-7. Lan HW. Human Nutr Appl Nutr 1983. and colon cancers. these risks skyrocket. ovary. N Engl J Med 1982. Modan B. and per capita food consumption. 4.35(Suppl):3513-22. Dietary factors and the incidence of cancer of the stomach. J Am Diet Assoc 1987. 6. Breslow NE.12 Natural killer cells are specialized white blood cells that attack and neutralize cancer cells. Rose DP.77:605-12. and beans.11 Vegetarians have higher blood levels of beta-carotene. whose diets easily meet these requirements. 3. Soybeans contain many substances that are anticarcinogens. Cohen LA. . They consume more vitamin C. Wax Y. Vegetarians also have stronger immune systems. including lignans and phytoestrogens. and cancer: the role of fiber. Gorbach SL. whole grains. prostate. Rose DP. et al. mouth. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986. Carpenter JT.87:765-9. Phillips RL. Geographic correlations between cancer mortality rates and alcohol-tobacco consumption in the United States. are at the lowest risk for cancer. liver. Role of fat. When combined with smoking.48:762-7. Vegetarians have about half the cancer risk of meat-eaters.10 Vegetarians Are Better Off All the evidence points to a low-fat. Wynder EL. It also raises risks for stomach. vegetarians.

Groups of such cells form tumors and invade healthy tissue. from the air. "What’s Wrong with Dairy Products" http://pcrm. But despite a wealth of scientific data.12. but sometimes they attack the cell’s genetic material (DNA) and alter it.html 111898 1 Foods for Cancer Prevention PHYSICIANSCOMMITTEEFORRESPONSIBLEMEDICINE 5 1 0 0 W I S C O N S I N A V E. W. often spreading to other parts of the body. It is easy to control these and other risk factors. as much as 80 percent of all cancers are due to identified factors. and thus are potentially preventable. most people remain unaware of how they can reduce their risk of developing cancer. It takes years for a noticeable tumor to develop.org/health/prevmed/foods_cancer_prev. According to the National Cancer Institute. Natural killer cells. and other blood components of vegetarian and omnivorous men.ORG•WWW. They may come from foods. Most carcinogens are neutralized before damage can occur. cancer is among the most feared. Nutr and Cancer 1989.PC RM.12:271-8. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. Carcinogens are substances that promote the development of cancerous cells. and as much as 35 to 50 percent are due to foods. S U I T E 4 0 4 • W A S H I N G T O N. What Is Cancer? Cancer begins as a single abnormal cell that begins to multiply out of control. During this time.. D C 2 0 0 1 6 PHONE(202)686-2210•FAX(202)686-2216•PCRM@PCRM. or even from within the body. N. vitamins.ORG Of the many diseases that affect people these days. Malter M. Thirty percent are due to tobacco use.. compounds .

Experts recommend 30 to 40 grams per day. fiber cannot be digested by humans early in the digestive process. and other Western nations whose diets are based upon animal products have the highest rates of colon cancer. In the U. plant-based diets). Bile acids are secreted into the intestine to help digest fat. there. By definition. Some vitamins in plant foods are known to be inhibitors. bacteria in the colon ferment the fiber creating a more acidic environment which may make bile acids less toxic.S. Estrogens are normally secreted into the intestine.S. there were fewer cases of colon cancer. Animal products contain no fiber. Fiber Fights Cancer In 1970. the estrogen can be reabsorbed from the intestine into the bloodstream. this has proven true.1 Also. The highest fiber intakes are found in non-industrialized nations where meat is scarce and plant foods fill the menu. helping to eliminate carcinogens. the average daily fiber intake is 10 to 20 grams per day. The U. The water and fiber make fecal matter bulkier. is known to be a promoter that helps the abnormal cells grow quickly. so carcinogens are diluted. British physician. Studies have shown that stomach cancer and breast cancer are less common on high-fiber diets. While no one is certain exactly how fiber protects against digestive tract disorders. It moves food more quickly through the intestines. He observed that in countries where diets are high in fiber (that is. Around the world. Dennis Burkitt.4 Without adequate fiber.. Fiber may bind with these bile acids and evict them from the intestines.2. It also draws water into the digestive tract. there are several possibilities. observed that a high-fiber diet reduces diseases of the digestive tract. Dietary fat. Fiber is also protective against other forms of cancer.known as inhibitors can keep the cells from growing. where the fiber binds with the hormone and moves it out of the body. The best . bacteria can change the acids into chemicals which promote colon cancer. High levels of estrogen are linked to a higher risk of breast cancer.3 Fiber affects levels of estrogens in the body. on the other hand.

Ten to 15 percent is more likely to be helpful. It also stimulates the production of bile acids which have been linked to colon cancer. One study noted a 200 percent increase in breast cancer among those who consume beef or pork five to six times per week. a prominent cancer researcher form the University of Cambridge. Sheila Bingham. lentils. there is evidence that animal fat is much more harmful than vegetable fat. and fruits.5 Migration studies help to rule out the influence of genetics. beans.S. and it may also adversely affect breast cancer survival rates for those who have cancer. studies have shown that fat intake should be well below 30 percent to have an anticancer affect.7 Although the total amount of fat one eats is of concern. is about 37 percent fat. notes that meat is more closely associated with colon cancer than any other factor. . vegetables. The National Cancer Institute suggests that people lower that percentage down to 30 percent.9 How Fat Affects Cancer Risks Fat has many effects within the body. Dr. however. Fat Raises Cancer Risk Cross-cultural studies have revealed that the populations with the highest levels of fat consumption are also the ones with the highest death rates from breast and colon cancer. are highest in fiber. The average diet in the U.6 Many studies indicate that fat in foods increases one’s risk for cancer. unrefined and unpeeled.sources of fiber are whole grains. peas. It increases hormone production and thus raises breast cancer risks. The lowest rates are in groups with the lowest consumption of fats.8 111898 2 Meat and milk are also linked to both prostate and ovarian cancers. Foods that are closest to their natural state.

They consume more vitamin C. indoles. pharynx. high-fiber diet that includes a variety of fruits. larynx.12 Natural killer cells are specialized white blood cells that attack and neutralize cancer cells. broccoli. found in citrus fruits and many vegetables. neutralizing cancer-causing chemicals that form in the body.11 Vegetarians have higher blood levels of beta-carotene. German researchers recently discovered that vegetarians have more than twice the natural killer cell activity of meat-eaters. It also raises risks for stomach. vegetarians. the pigment that gives fruits and vegetables their dark colors. turnips. and colon cancers.10 Vegetarians Are Better Off All the evidence points to a low-fat. kale. Vegetables such as cabbage. liver. mouth. and other sites. they also contain many cancer-fighting substances. cauliflower. Vitamin E also has this effect. mouth. Vegetarians have about half the cancer risk of meat-eaters. may lower risks for cancers of the esophagus and stomach. esophagus. and esophagus. Carotenoids. whose diets easily meet these requirements. and Brussels sprouts contain flavones and indoles which are thought to have anti-cancer activities. Alcohol Excessive intake of alcohol raises one’s risks for cancers of the breast. beta-carotene. and beans.The Importance of Vegetables Not only are vegetables low in fat and high in fiber. Vegetarians also have stronger immune systems. vegetables. Not surprisingly. whole grains. have been shown to help prevent cancer. these risks skyrocket. vegetarians tend to eat more soy products than meat-eaters. Caution is advised in supplementing selenium. breast. When combined with smoking. as being the best for cancer prevention. Vitamin C. and fiber than meat-eaters. Vitamin C acts as an antioxidant. Soybeans . which is toxic in large doses. Selenium is found in whole grains and has the same antioxidant effects as vitamin C and beta-carotene. helps protect against lung cancer and may help prevent cancers of the bladder. It also blocks the conversion of nitrates to cancer-causing nitrosamines in the stomach. present in dark green and yellow vegetables. Beta-carotene. are at the lowest risk for cancer. Also.

vegsource.87:765-9. Cancer Res 1975. Bingham S. A diet that is rich in soybeans may be one reason for the lower incidence of breast cancer in Asia. Cummings JH.37A:113-9. and other blood components of vegetarian and omnivorous men.D.58:1804-13.12:271-8. Adlercreutz H. nutritional concerns. ionizing radiation. Cohen LA. Breslow NE. et al. Malter M. The best diets are pure vegetarian diets. Kritchevsky D. animal protein and dietary fiber in breast cancer etiology: a case control study. 9. Modan B. Wynder EL. Estrogen excretion patterns and plasma levels in vegetarian and omnivorous women. prostate. Dietary factors and the incidence of cancer of the stomach. 11. Jain M.58:2363-71. Lan HW. vitamins. viruses. Natural killer cells.35(Suppl):3513-22. et al.48:762-7. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986. Phillips RL. J Natl Cancer Inst 1974. J Am Diet Assoc 1987. Am J Clin Nutr 1988. Role of lifestyle and dietary habits in risk of cancer among Seventh-day Adventists. tobacco. and non-starch polysaccharides and bowel cancer. starch.contain many substances that are anticarcinogens. and cancer: the role of fiber. Boyar AP. and includes generous portions of fruits and vegetables. including lignans and phytoestrogens. 2. Goldin BR. ovary. Conclusion Acancer prevention diet is one that is high in fiber. Bingham SA.htm December 21. N Engl J Med 1982. 6. Breast cancer: incidence. 1999 Cancer and the Vegetarian Diet by William Harris. 7. Rose DP. Dietary fiber intake in Japan.53:631-9. Carpenter JT. Risch HA.58:1830-6.D. and per capita food consumption. Lubin F. 12. faulty diet. 4. Geographic correlations between cancer mortality rates and alcohol-tobacco consumption in the United States. . References 1.com/harris/cancer_vegdiet. 10. "Cancer and the Vegetarian Diet. M. Cancer 1986. Wax Y. http://www. environmental contaminants. and treatment approaches. nutrition." by William Harris. 5. It also minimizes or excludes alcohol. Minowa M. Diet. M. Human Nutr Appl Nutr 1983. International comparisons of mortality rates for cancer of the breast. Wynder EL. Choi NW. Gorbach SL. Cancer 1986. Diet and breast cancer in causation and therapy. low in fat (especially animal fat). Cancer 1986. 3.122:947-59. Meat. Am J Epidemiol 1985. and colon.77:605-12. Cancer is not caused by bacteria. Rose DP. Role of fat. 8. Nutr and Cancer 1989.307:1542-7. inadequate exercise. Enstrom JE. et al.

An R of 1 would indicate a direct linear relationship. In the graphs below. Current United States incidence figures for the ten leading types of cancer are shown (2). the lower the cancer rate. some types of damage persist and become the basis of the defective molecular biology that is cancer. Both Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma are included under lymphoma. tumor suppressing genes. Cancer is the second most common cause of death in the United States. where over 1. and finally to kill the cell before genetic mutations cause it to malfunction. the Y axis contains the disease. There are three categories of evidence suggesting that a veg*n (vegetarian or vegan) diet reduces risk for various types of cancer. Women have an approximately 1:8 lifetime chance of developing breast cancer. the X axis contains the animal source dietary risk factor. Although DNA has various repair mechanisms. R is the correlation coefficient which reflects the "goodness of fit" of the data points to the sloping regression line.3 million new cases of cancer are diagnosed annually.000 in 1992.000 deaths. with 550. to prevent excessive growth. A p-value of . The p-value is the probability the apparent relationship is merely a mathematical coincidence.05 are traditionally taken to suggest a non-coincidental relationship. and men have an approximately 1:5 chance of developing prostate cancer. while an R of zero would indicate no relationship. Rates above are per 100. cancer rates. and aptotic genes (causing programmed cell death) normally interact to build normal cells. the intake of animal source food correlates with the country-bycountry incidence of six types of cancer.05 indicates a 5% chance of mathematical coincidence but numbers less than . U.S. Oncogenes (tumor genes). the chances of these mutations occurring in sufficient number to result in cancer is affected by all of the preceding factors. Table 1. . it appears that the less animal source food per capita. Epidemiologically. Cancer is caused by a series of genetic mutations in DNA which may be either germline (inherited) or somatic (acquired during life). DNA is the critical target molecule in carcinogenesis (1). Although none of the reporting countries can be assumed to have large vegan or even vegetarian populations.nor heredity. However.

I performed multiple regression analysis on breast cancer incidence(4) country by country using Food and Agriculture Organization food consumption data (5) for animal source calcium. total calcium. eggs. (with animal fat and the other animal constituents close behind). milk production (metric tons/yr). animal Calories.046). . meat consumption (kg/caput/yr early 70's). male life expectancy. plant Calories. total Calories. female life expectancy. p<. plant protein. plant source calcium.A. Plant protein consumption had a moderate negative (protective) correlation (R= -. p=. with a strong hereditary component.36. butter and ghee. Breast Cancer The etiology of breast cancer. animal fat.76. and total protein. is multi-factorial.001) with breast cancer incidence was from animal source Calories. as with most cancer. Using BMDP (3) statistical software. infant mortality. animal protein. Of these (sometimes not independent) variables. male/female cancer ratios. plant fat. GNP/caput($). I included additional vital statistics from The Book of World Rankings (6. the highest correlation ( R=. cheese. and total population. total fat.7) for birth rate. sugar consumption (kg/caput/yr -1976).

(15) Although the most recent pooled-analysis of fat intake as a risk factor for breast cancer produced negative results (16). present in both cow milk and human milk is known to stimulate the growth of human breast cancer cells (9.62 and p=. particularly soy products. are thought to block ERs in a manner similar to tamoxifen.588 controls found an odds ratio (OR) of 1. The vegetarian diet has been shown to lower the level of estradiol (11) (an estrogen) and raise sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) levels (12). This would support the contention that dairy hormones are a risk for human breast cancer (8). B.Of the other positive correlations. animal source calcium had an R value of . Insulin-like growth factor (ISGF-1). Intestinal cancer . 10). and 0. 14). a case-control study (17) conducted in Italy on 2.22 for saturated fat. Some forms of breast cancer are estrogen-receptor (ER) sensitive and the phytoestrogens from plant foods (13.89 for unsaturated fat. Lower post-treatment ER-rich breast cancer survival rates in women who reported higher dietary fat intake have been found.0026.569 incident cases of breast cancer and 2.

p<.Intestinal cancer also correlates with animal food consumption (R=.83.001) (18). . Lung Cancer. and additionally lengthens the intestinal transit time so that both dietary carcinogens in meat (21). C. lack of fiber has an adverse effect on colonic bacteria (20). and endogenous ones (the bile acids). Suggested explanations here are that meat increases the rate of carcinogenic bile acid formation (19). are in contact with the intestinal mucosa for a longer period.

However. Lymphatic Cancer . D.01) (22) and with the consumption of animal source protein and calcium. and the microconstituents they contain. p<.Lung cancer mortality correlates with animal fat consumption (R=.71. so they were not deemed statistically significant. but there is little doubt that it would prove to be the most important predictor of lung cancer mortality. exceeding dietary factors by a wide margin. Plant nutrients had negative (protective) R values but p values were above ." Data on tobacco use was not available. may prevent 20-33% of cases of lung cancer in both smokers and nonsmokers.05. the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) (23) judges that "diets high in a variety of vegetables and fruit.

poultry.C. and myelomas (OR = 2.D.5 and 0.8).7). he found the highest positive correlation with beef and dairy protein intake (R=.In 1977 Cunningham (24) examined the correlation between age-adjusted lymphoma mortality as reported by the WHO (25). The OR for the highest tertile of intake of beta-carotene ranged between 0. and food intake as reported by the O. and frequent use of whole-grain foods was inversely related to NHL (OR = 0. the odds ratio (OR) for the highest tertile of milk intake was 1.8). crop protein. and butter an indicator of myelomas (OR = 2. animal protein. Ovarian Cancer .6).4) and soft tissue sarcomas (OR = 0. A 1997 case-control study conducted in Northern Italy between 1983 and 1992 involving 829 cases and 1.78.7.4). eggs. nuts. seeds. potatoes. Using multiple regression analysis for the intake of cereal grain. Liver intake was an indicator of the risk of Hodgkins Disease (HD) (OR = 1. pulses. NHL (OR = 1. starches.0).001). ham another indicator of HD (OR = 1.2).9 for sarcomas.3. Fish and all of the plant foods had a slight negative correlation. whereas the OR for retinol ranged between 1. pork. p<." E. (26). A high consumption of green vegetables was inversely related to myelomas (OR = 0. fish.E.5 and 2.157 controls (27) found that "Compared with the lowest tertile.8 for NonHodgkins Lymphoma (NHL) and 1. and total protein.

72.0005. (29). with reduced risk from vegetable fiber consumption. with an R value of .81. Plant source Calories were protective. A study from Canada (31) implicated saturated fat and egg cholesterol consumption as risk factors for ovarian cancer. Animal source calcium intake was also a risk.007). This latter finding is consistent with the hypothesis that consumption of milk lactose may be a dietary risk factor for ovarian cancer in women with a an inherited deficiency of the enzyme galactose-1-phosphate uridyl transferase. insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) present in both cow and human milk. Animal source Calorie intake showed the highest positive correlation (R=. Additionally. F. Prostate Cancer. with an R value of -.005. p=.Ovarian cancer also appears related to animal food consumption (28). is elevated in the cystic fluid of ovarian cancer (30). .62 and p<. p<.

74.49. lung. stomach. once again. A more recent study again identified animal source fat as a risk factor for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer. Animal source Calories came in second and plant protein had the highest negative correlation coefficient (R= -. Important in current thinking is the effect of lipid peroxidation in the generation of . its cause and prevention should be reviewed. breast. kidney.01) (33). is a sex hormone dependent cancer (35). which in general means dairy products. colon. red meat to provide no more than 10% of total energy" (Calories). and "if eaten at all. larynx. rectum. pancreas. esophagus. This finding is consistent with a cohort study of 20. p<. particularly in blacks (36). There are biochemical studies that suggest how plant foods protect against cancer. This organization recommends five or more portions of vegetables and fruit daily. ovary. or possible] risk reducers for cancer of the bladder. and thyroid.Surprisingly. mouth and pharynx. The World Cancer Research Fund (37) recommends a "predominantly plant-based diet" and lists fruits and vegetables as [convincing. cervix. endometrium. liver.316 men of various ethnicities interviewed between 1975 and 1980 in Hawaii (34) that found beef and milk consumption to increase risk for prostate cancer.0052). prostate. p=. Since DNA damage is crucial to cancer. multiple regression analysis of prostate cancer incidence (32) versus the same dietary and social variables showed the highest correlation with animal source calcium intake (R=. probable.

Included were 232 foods including beans. thus protective against cancer. Ninety three vegetables treated in the same manner were well over 100% RDA/Cal for 18 common nutrients except for vitamin B12 and had 800% of the RDA/Cal for -carotene. and vitamin E. vitamin C. since the food itself is low and its presence in the diet displaces the fruits and vegetables that might otherwise be present. grains. also proved to have less than 100% of the RDA/Calorie for calcium. and 300% for Vitamin E. Not all of these antioxidants are listed in the USDA database. all were well below 100% of the RDA/Calorie for these three antioxidants with the exception of wheat germ oil (vitamin E). luteins and beta-carotene [leafy greens]) ellagic acid (4-carbon ring metabolic artifacts found in berries) (38). particularly fruits and vegetables. fruit. but of the ones that are. There is a large category of antioxidants. meat. dairy. grains. 1250% for vitamin C. Sorting by nutrient/weight ratio produces roughly similar results. but the cancer-preventive agents are mostly in fruits and vegetables. poultry. many of them man-made such as the food preservatives BHA and BHT. The same grain products added in 100 gram increments and averaged. It's likely that by the time animal source food reaches the table the animal's tissues have already utilized most of the anti-oxidants that were synthesized by the plants the animal ate. the carotenoids (lycopene-[tomatoes]. I sorted by nutrient/Calorie ratio to find the highest plant source and the highest animal source for -carotene.free radicals. eggs. All of these substances help to quench the free radical chain reaction. Naturally occurring antioxidants include vitamins C. E. will be high in these anti-oxidants. Admittedly grains are high in fiber. nuts. but they are not high in cancer-protective anti-oxidants. Lipid peroxidation is a branching chain reaction with devastating side effects due to the ability of the oxidized fat fragments to covalently bond with DNA. and riboflavin. This may bear slightly on a recent study showing no reduction in colon cancer by high fiber intake (40). breads. and grain products included in the 232 foods. small molecular fragments of fat with incorporated oxygen. A diet high in plant food. A diet high in animal food will be low in these anti-oxidants. damaging its structure and function. Clearly animal source food is no anti-oxidant match for plant foods. and saponins ( plant sterols attached to a short chain of sugars) (39). folate. . fish. The respondents with high fiber intake may have been consuming large amounts of cereals and grains as they had been advised to. It should be noted that of 20 flours. and vegetables.

folic acid. dithiolthiones. in addition to antioxidants. sulphorophane. It acts. High consumption of meat. flavonoids (quercetin. phytosterols. and pancreatic cancer. There is some evidence of an association with lung cancer. A straightforward and simple dictum is: "Eat as wide a variety of plant foods in as unprocessed a form as possible. R." Practical aspects of the veg*n (vegetarian or vegan) diet. indole-3-carbinol. German investigators have shown that vegetarian men have roughly twice the natural killer cell activity as age-matched omnivorous controls (42). protease inhibitors. fecal bulk). genistein. preserved integrity of intracellular matrixes. increased apoptosis (programmed cell death) of cancer cells. maintenance of normal DNA repair. Steinmetz and Potter (41) report that the cancer protective substances in fruits and vegetables include. coumarins. increased activity of enzymes that detoxify carcinogens. the following: allium compounds (diallyl sulfide. Cancer cell metastasis may be blocked by a plant-based diet. allyl methyl trisulfide).. plentiful in grains. and decreased cell proliferation. altered estrogen metabolism. dietary fiber." This study also concluded that "up to 80% of bowel and breast cancer may be preventable by dietary change. kaempferol). as "a sort of colonic broom" and while this may be advantageous. A recent study from Britain (43) concluded that: "Vegetables and fruit are almost invariably protective for the major cancers. especially red meat and processed meat. The means by which these substances protect against cancer cell initiation include effects on cell differentiation. is linked with higher risk of bowel.Fiber. The evidence is best for a protective effect of vegetables in the large bowel and for fruits and vegetables in stomach cancer. in the words of one medical editor. is not a nutrient since it is not absorbed.D. . prostate. biochanin A. d-limonene. altered colonic milieu (including bacterial flora. rather than fiber. and selenium. blocked formation of nitrosamines. pH. isothiocyanates. breast. and of an association of barbecued meat and oesophageal cancer. as dietary intake markers might produce more favorable results. bile acid composition. a repeat of the study." -Susan Havala. effects on DNA methylation... this time using fruits and vegetables. inositol hexaphosphate.

. stomach. with grains. essential fatty acids. which must be supplemented. is the logical end point of the dietary recommendations. in which case it is seen that animal source foods. calcium. In general. and pancreas. E. while there is an RDA for Calories." . C.. to reduce animal food consumption. D. at least until the scientific dust settles. zinc. and fibre have a protective effect. The notion that veg*n diets are more likely than omnivorous ones to be nutrient deficient is the result of sorting foods by nutrient/weight ratio. Since there is no RDA for weight in the diet. now made by scientific organizations. Generally. The veg*n diet. The essential inorganic nutrients (iron. and vitamins required in the human diet are synthesized either by plants or micro-organisms (44). whereas red and processed meat increase the risk of developing cancer. etc. correlate with the consumption of animal source food. oesophagus.. Diet contributes to varying extent to the risk of many other cancers. B. Rates for at least six common types of cancer. fruit. seeds. A variety of phytochemicals present in plant foods have been demonstrated to be protective against the DNA damage that leads to cancer. and starches used to fill in Calorie requirements will satisfy nutrient requirements. preferably raw. a more rational approach to food analysis is by nutrient/Calorie ratio. A recent clinical review (49) concluded: "Up to 80% of bowel and breast cancer may be preventable by dietary change. prostate. country by country. vegetables.. the notion that vegans are more likely than omnivores to suffer nutrient deficiencies is not supported by the literature (48).All the essential amino acids. a diet centered on vegetables and fruit.) were synthesized in nuclear fusion reactions that occurred in stars that blew up more than 5 billion years ago (45). including cancers of the lung. Although poorly designed veg*n diets have produced reports of nutritional deficiency. particularly in children (47). with the exception of Vitamin B12. nuts. There is a modest negative correlation with these cancers and plant source food consumption. not by animals. Conclusion Evidence from a broad scientific literature suggests: A. extolled by its advocates for at least 150 years as a cancer preventive strategy. Numerous vegetarian and vegan cookbooks and handbooks are available and should be consulted by new veg*ns. have little advantage over plant foods (46). because of their high fat content.

52). In 1998 USDA Secretary Dan Glickman bought up at least $250 million worth of beef. Until the government stops using public tax moneys to bail out the animal food interests and stops giving tax breaks for their massive advertising programs that virtually freeze vegetarian information out of the public consciousness. by giving direct price supports to dairy production. and de facto supports to the meat industry in the form of feed grain price supports (51. the nutritional establishment. and apparently don't want government assistance or large ad campaigns(56) to market their products..fruits and vegetables. M. Medical Director Kaiser-Permanente Vegan Lifestyle Clinic (VLC) 1765 Ala Moana Blvd. Vegetable and fruit growers have for the most part been excluded from support programs.. and the USDA itself. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has shielded the meat and dairy industries from normal market forces since at least the beginning of the Commodities Credit Corporation (CCC) in 1933 (50). and pork that could not be sold on an already flooded market. to consume daily at least five servings of fruit and vegetables. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). #1880 . nutritional "education". chicken.. fish. However.There are no logical arguments for the continued use of animal source food in the human diet. Evidence indicates that animal industries have exerted enormous pressure on the government for continuation of their supports (57). These goods will be dumped into public feeding troughs such as the National School Lunch Program (53).S... eggs. dairy. the U.S.D. William Harris. These industries then plow their profit margins into massive ad campaigns. This is contrary to advice given by the National Cancer Institute. and the government to push their wares on a naive public. A glance at IRS Corporate Income Tax Form 1120 and most state corporate tax forms shows also that advertising is a tax deductible business expense. and political action to insure that their benefits will continue. Only a third of the U. there is not much chance that we will see a reduction in cancer rates.. There is little doubt that the animal food interests are taking full advantage of this as they suborn the media. lamb. logic is not the key factor here. public is aware of the "5-A-Day" recommendation (54)." (55)."All crops may be harvested on flex acreage except..

1994. Med Hypotheses (ENGLAND) Jun 1997. BMDP New System for Windows v1. 7 Kurian.10019. 1991 ISBN 0-8160-1931-2.com ENDNOTES 1 Murray RK.29A(16):2273-9. N..Rome.Appleton and Lange Norwalk. Fujimoto I.1987 6 Kurian. 1990. ISBN 0-8385-3640-9 p 653. 10016. ISBN 0-935386-30-0. Current Medical Diagnosis & Treatment(CMDT) on CD-ROM 1998. Granner DK.W. George Thomas. New York. Cancer Mortality and Morbidity Statistics Japan and the World -1994. Sutherland RL. Table I-13.Recombinant insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 inhibits IGF-I. The Book of World Rankings. Eur J Cancer 1993. Age adjusted breast cancer incidence/100.157(2):229-36. Barnard N. Boca Raton Fl 33431ISBN 0-8493-7748-X . 460 Park Ave.Y. 48 (6) p453-61. Facts on File Inc. CT 1990. HI 96815 INTERNET:vegidoc@compuserve. and Rodwell VW. Jackson JG. 3 BMDP Statistical Software. Kurihara M. p194. 9 Musgrove EA. J Cell Physiol 1993 Nov. ISSN 0306-9877. Dairy products and breast cancer: the IGFI. .0 Los Angeles.ISBN 0-87196-394-9. The New Book of World Rankings. 10 Figueroa JA. 4 Tominaga S. and bGH hypothesis.N. and estrogen-dependent growth of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. Papadakis..Harper's Biochemistry. Mayes PA. Acute effects of growth factors on T-47D breast cancer cell cycle progression. ISBN 0-8385-1480-4. Tierney. 5 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. McDermott MJ. Appleton Lange 1998. estrogen. 1979. George Thomas. Gonzales. Facts on File Inc. Sharma J. serum. Yee D. Japan Scientific Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd. 2 McPhee SJ. Norwalk. Hilsenbeck SG. FAO Production Yearbook. Aoki K. N. 119 West 57th St. Nicholson A. New York.Y.Honolulu. 8 Outwater JL.000/year 1983-87. So.

J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol Mar 1992. 1994. J Amer Dietetic Assoc. 17 Decarli A. Franceschi SMacronutrients. Am J Clin Nutr Nov 1990. Mallaveille C. Dietary fat reduction and plasma estradiol concentration in healthy postmenopausal women. Folsom AR. Epidemiology 1997 Jul.71:385-92. Bol J. Hamalainen E. Ingram DM. Nutr Cancer 1996. 13 Reinli K. neutral steroids. a lactoovovegetarian. Nilsson B. et al. Callmer E. Gross G. ISSN 0002-9165. PA. Hockerstedt K. 21 Bingham SA. Diet and female sex hormone concentrations: an intervention study for the type of fat consumed. Goldin B. Ferraroni M. ISSN 0960-0760. ISBN 0-8121-1485-X. Phytoestrogen content of foods--a compendium of literature values. et al. Block G. 12 Bennett FC. and a vegan diet. Hermus RJ.334(6):356-61. energy intake. 16 Hunter DJ. 1977. Ellul A.85(1):32-6. Russo A. Negri E. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Jan 6. Olson JA..26(2):123-48. Spiegelman D. Cohort studies of fat intake and the risk of breast cancer--a pooled analysis.11 Prentice R. Clark J. and breast cancer risk: implications from different models. Bile acids. La Vecchia C. Thompson D. Hase T. Gorbach S. Lidbrink E. 41 (3-8) p331-7. 19 Shils ME. Fraser GE. The Dietary Environment and Cancer. Wahala K. Am J Clin Nutr Dec 1987.82(2):129-34. 46 (6) p 962-7. van den Brandt PA. Lea & Febiger Malvern. Hjalmar ML. N Engl J Med 1996 Feb 8. Byar D. Pikaar NA. 20 van Faassen A. Clifford C. The Women's Health Trial Study Group. Beeson L. Makela T. p 580. Does increased endogenous formation of N-nitroso compounds in the human colon . Treatment failure and dietary habits in women with breast cancer. ISSN 0002-9165. Pignatelli B. Modern nutrition in health and disease-8th ed. Goldbohm RA. Nordevang E. 15 Holm LE. 14 Adlercreutz H. J Natl Cancer Inst 1990 Jan 17. Adami HO. Graham S. Shike M.8(4):425-8 18 Wynder EL. van Dokkum W. Favero A. Howe GR. Ockhuizen T. and bacteria in feces as affected by a mixed. Pollock JRA. 52 (5) p 808-12. Dietary phytoestrogens and cancer: in vitro and in vivo studies. Mousavi Y.

D. . 1973. Mortality from Malignant Neoplasms 19551965.Diet and risk of lymphoid neoplasms and soft tissue sarcomas. Galactose consumption and metabolism in relation to the risk of ovarian cancer . Kurihara M. Cancer Rates and Risks: Cancer Death Rates Among 50 Countries (Age adjusted to the world standard) 4thEdition. Table I-15 p 196. 30 Karasik A. 26 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (O. 27 (3) p256-60. Cancer Mortality and Morbidity Statistics. Willett WC. Knapp RC. 2 (8654) p 66-71.Nov. ISBN 0-8493-7748-X.Geneva. La Vecchia C. Paris. NW Washington. 25 World Health Organization. 1997 1759 R St. Harlow BL. 27 Tavani A. 24 Cunningham AS. Fujimoto I. 28 Tominaga S. 1983-87. Negri E. Nutr Cancer (UNITED STATES) 1997.. Japan and the World-1994. Carbone A. Aoki K. Lancet Jul 8 1989.C. DC 20009.78(2):271-6. Japan Scientific Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd. 23 World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. U. Welch WR. Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and IGF-binding protein-2 are increased in cyst fluids of epithelial ovarian cancer.17:515-23.E.W. 178-FNS/F27 p 12.) Food Consumption Statistics 1955-1971. Pregnolato A. ISSN 0023-7507. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1994 Feb. Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. Lymphomas and Animal-Protein Consumption. National Cancer Institute.1976.27:1184-86. Menczer J. Lung cancer p 39.ISSN 0023-7507. ISSN 0163-5581. Boca Raton Fl 33431.Lancet.explain the association between red meat and colon cancer? Carcinogenesis 1996. 1970. Ng WG. Kanety H. 29 Cramer DW. Serraino D. 22 National Institutes of Health. N.S. Food. Franceschi S. Source: World Health Organization data as adapted by the American Cancer Society 1996. Department of Health and Human Services. Pariente C. Bell DA. Scully RE.

340:169-76. 178-FNS/F27 pgs 10. Stampfer MJ. 35 Mousavi Y. Colditz GA. Epidemiology May 1994. N Engl J Med 1999. and Ross CW. 1983.W. Fujimoto I. Marrett LD. Willett WC.000 population. Steroids. Hunter DJ. Pergamon Press. Belmont 1985. Table 109. Genistein is an effective stimulator of sex hormonebinding globulin production in hepatocarcinoma human liver cancer cells and suppresses proliferation of these cells in culture.. N. p 252. Japan Scientific Societies Press CRC Press 2000 Corporate Blvd.31 Risch HA." All figures are age-adjusted and represent death rate per 100. Food. Myers BC. Animal fat consumption and prostate cancer: a prospective study in Hawaii. 58 (7) p 301-4. 5 (3) p 276-82. 1987. Calcium/caput/day-milligrams 1983-85. 34 Le Marchand L. Aoki K. Dietary Fiber and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Adenoma in Women. Jul 1993. "Cancer mortality statistics in 33 countries of the world were compiled and calculated from data edited from a magnetic tape copy of the WHO data base of cancer mortality. 37 World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. 38 Goodwin and Mercer. Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: a global perspective. 32 Tominaga S. Plant Physiology. J Natl Cancer Inst Sep 21 1994. p 562. Giovannucci E. p 197. ISSN 0027-8874. . Table I-16. Rosner BR. ISSN 0039-128X. 1983-87. Jul 1993. 86 (18) p 1409-15. Kolonel LN. Genistein is an effective stimulator of sex hormonebinding globulin production in hepatocarcinoma human liver cancer cells and suppresses proliferation of these cells in culture. Adlercreutz H. DC 20009. Hirohata T. Kurihara M.. 1997 1759 R St. Cancer Mortality and Morbidity Statistics. Boca Raton Fl 33431ISBN 0-8493-7748-X . Wilkens LR. ISBN 0-534-04482-4 p 276. Steroids. Jain M. Japan and the World-1994. 33 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 14.Oxford. Adlercreutz H. Introduction to Plant Biochemistry. 36 Mousavi Y. ISSN 1044-3983.Rome. ISSN 0039-128X. Howe GR Dietary fat intake and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. NW Washington.. 39 Salisbury FB. 58 (7) p 301-4. 40 Fuchs CS. FAO Production Yearbook. Wadsworth Publishing Co. Speizer FE.

1977. Table 623. ISSN 0163-5581. ISBN 0-907337-15-5. ISBN 0-444-01241-9 pp 70-71. 49 Cummings JH. Cato Institute. 1989. 1985. BMJ 1998.41 Steinmetz (1)KA. Hawaii Health Publishers. 43 Cummings.nih.usda. and other blood components of vegetarian and omnivorous men.(10): 1027(13). The Vegan Society. 45 Random House. Suite 1106. Washington. 1989. and Dwyer T. Bingham SA. The High Cost of Farm Welfare. Vegetables. Bingham.gov/5aday/week98/CommunityKit98. 1988. ISBN 0-39440730-X.nci. Potter JD. Agricultural Statistics. Natural killer cells. Clifton B. BMJ 1998. Honolulu. The Scientific Basis of Vegetarianism.Am J Clin Nutr. Nutr Cancer (UNITED STATES) 1989. Schriever G. Elsevier Science Publishing Co. ISBN 0-9646538-0-X.html .p 2. 44 Lindner M. 1415 Victoria St. 1988. a Survey of Research. Oxford. Washington. United States Government Printing Office. ASCS/BUD/CPB Book 3.317:1636-1640. 52 United States Department of Agriculture.317:1636-1640. and cancer prevention: a review. History of Budgetary Expenditures of the Commodity Credit Corporation: Fiscal Year 1990-1991 Actual. 1989. 46 Harris W. 12 (3) pp 271-8. Vegan Nutrition. 48 Langley G. vitamins. New York. 53 http://www. Journal of the American Dietetic Association. JH.ams. 42 Malter M. 51 United States Department of Agriculture.gov/cp/index.htm 54 http://dcp. New York. p 48. HI 96822-3663. Random House Encyclopedia. Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism. p 91. 47 Jacobs C.SA. fruit.48(3):811. 50 Luttrell. p 15. Vegetarian children: appropriate and inappropriate diets. Diet and the prevention of cancer. ISBN 0-932790-70-4. Eilber U. Oct 1996. Diet and the prevention of cancer.

01) was between breast cancer and animal source Calorie consumption (see graph below). June 1991. Resources. United States General Accounting Office. P 2.) Using this. Washington.B. 57 McMenamin M. 4).htm Breast Cancer Statistics "Cancer mortality statistics in 33 countries of the world were compiled and calculated from data edited from a magnetic tape copy of the World Health Organization (WHO) data base of cancer mortality. Feed Grains: Summary of Support Program and Related Information. 1980. and Economic Division." (1. Generic Promotion of Produce. Milking the Public: Political Scandals of the Dairy Lobby from L. United States Department of Agriculture.79. I checked for correlations between female breast cancer mortality rates in the 30 countries for which data was available. Nelson-Hall. and McNamara W. 1991.vegsource. to Jimmy Carter. and food and environmental factors collected from various other sources (2. 56 GAO/RCED-92-15. The highest correlation (R=. ISBN 088229-552-7. . Chicago. 3. p much less than .com/harris/b_cancer.55 ASCS Commodity Fact Sheet.Community. Statistics comparing breast cancer diagnoses to animal-food intake http://www.J.

This would support the hypothesis (5.001).55.There was a lower but still significant correlation between breast cancer mortality and milk production (R=. (see graph below) . p=.) that estrogens and insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I) in cow's milk stimulate breast cancer.

the more vegetable source protein consumption. the lower the incidence of breast cancer).7897 1.3E-07 Animal fat/day (gm) 0.5E-05 Animal source calcium (mg/day) 0.6071 0.7807 2. Multiple regression by BMDP (5.0013 Total protein (gm/day) 0.1E-07 Animal protein (gm/day) 0. Negative R values indicate an inverse relationship (e.533 0.6401 0.5268 0.4661 0.0003 Milk production (lbs/caput/day) 0.7767 2.g.1E-07 Total fat/day (gm) 0.): Variable Partial_R p value animal source calories/day 0.Multiple regression analysis showed some additional correlations.6937 1.0082 . although it does not prove that the one causes the other.05 suggests that there is a significant statistical relationship between the dietary factor and the disease.0E-05 Meat Kg/caput/year 0. A large correlation coefficient (R) and a p value less than .7029 1.5521 0.0001 Total Calories/day 0.002 GNP/cap($) 0.0023 Female life expectancy (years) 0.

10019. .4123 0.3657 0.0212 William Harris. (6.Y. and bGH hypothesis.)Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. CRC Press. Kurihara M. ISBN 0-8493-7748-X (2. Nicholson A. N. So.1182 0.com REFERENCES (1. Japan and the World-1994. HI 96814 (808) 597-2100 (W) vegidoc@compuserve. Medical Director Kaiser-Permanente Vegan Lifestyle Clinic (VLC) 1010 Pensacola Street Honolulu.) Kurian.0514 0. 1991.) Tominaga S.353 -0. estrogen.) Dairy products and breast cancer: the IGF-I. Barnard N. Outwater JL. Rome. 1979. FAO Production Yearbook. Facts on File Inc. Los Angeles.) Kurian. The New Book of World Rankings.. N.D.0462 0. (5. BMDP New System for Windows..Hen eggs (lbs/caput/day) Vegetable source calcium (mg/day) Vegetable source Calories/day Vegetable source protein (gm/day) Infant mortality 0.460 Park Ave. ISSN 0306-9877. 1994. New York. Cancer Mortality and Morbidity Statistics. 48 (6) p453-61. George Thomas. Aoki K. New York. M.3607 -0. (3. Med Hypotheses (ENGLAND) Jun 1997. 10016. Japan Scientific Societies Press. 2000 Corporate Blvd. George Thomas. Boca Raton Fl 33431.W.) BMDP Statistical Software. 1987. Fujimoto I. N. ISBN 0-935386-30-0.119 West 57th St. ISBN 0-87196-394-9 (4.2864 -0.Y. Facts on File Inc.1682 -0. ISBN 0-8160-1931-2. The Book of World Rankings.

.

yellow-brown. • A rash develops. feed the child soft or liquid foods such as milk. tender lumps in the neck. • Encourage your child to drink plenty of fluids. • The child coughs up green. and bloodstream. you may apply a moist. stiff neck.. • You may give over-the-counter medicines such as acetaminophen to relieve the pain. • Children older than 8 years may suck on hard candy or frozen juice bars or gargle with a warm or cold liquid to help soothe the throat. Causes The infection can be caused by a variety of viruses and bacteria. Signs/Symptoms There may be fever. • If the child is on antibiotics. earache. headache. • The child has a high temperature or a fever that lasts more than 48 hours. or bloody sputum.. Tonsillitis is a common problem in young children. A younger child can be given a teaspoon of corn syrup or honey several times a day (do not give honey to children younger than 1 year of age). have a stomach ache. but be careful not to burn the child. While the throat is very sore. The tonsils may look red and swollen and feel tender. • Use a cool-mist humidifier to help decrease throat irritation and cough. Seek Care Immediately If.. milkshakes. the doctor will prescribe the child an antibiotic. lungs. tender lumps in the neck. wait 24 hours before returning him or her to school or daycare. • The child develops new symptoms such as vomiting.com/mc/fgmc1303. Keep the compresses warm. • Family members who develop a sore throat or fever should have a medical exam or throat culture. and sore muscles. chest pain. . warm towel or wash cloth several times a day for 30 to 60 minutes. or trouble breathing or swallowing. Care The first step is a throat culture. The youngster may vomit. It is spread from person to person by coughing.healthsquare. severe headache.Tonsillitis http://www.htm WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW Tonsillitis (TON-sill-EYE-tis) is an infection of the tonsils--lumps of tissue at the back of the throat that fight nose and throat infections and keep them from spreading to the neck. • The child develops more severe throat pain along with drooling or voice changes. use 1 teaspoon salt mixed in 8 ounces of water or strong tea. and touching. If the culture is positive for strep germs. Call Your Doctor If. or be sleepy. or instant-breakfast milk drinks. sneezing. painful swallowing. WHAT YOU SHOULD DO • Have the child rest as much as possible and get plenty of sleep. For gargling. soups. • If the child has swollen.. sore throat. ice cream. • The child has large.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful