‘Natural’ does not equal ‘Safe’

Discussion Board › Forums › Complementary & Alternative Treatments – CAM › ‘Natural’ does not equal ‘Safe’

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • December 15, 2011 at 4:53 am #55577
    Eli
    Spectator

    I don’t like the sound of this…

    Table 1 on Page 994 (page 6 of the PDF)

    Compound: Curcumin
    Group: Polyphenol
    Carcinogenic: No
    Genotoxic: Equivocal

    Remarks:

    A significant increase of benign neoplastic lesions was observed for rats and mice in a long-term NTP study. However, malignant tumors were not significantly increased compared to the control groups. Moreover, there was a lack of dose-dependent effects as well as consistency across sexes and/or species. Previously, it was concluded by JECFA that curcumin was not genotoxic. However, new in vitro and in vivo studies gave positive results (e.g. DNA adducts and chromosomal aberrations). According to EFSA ‘the available in vivo genotoxicity studies were insufficient to eliminate the concerns regarding genotoxicity’. Nevertheless, there is no carcinogenicity.


    Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

    December 14, 2011 at 2:57 pm #6054
    Eli
    Spectator

    ScienceDaily summary:

    Some Plant-Based Food Supplements Contain High Levels of Cancer Causing Agents, Study Suggests

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111212123652.htm


    Full PDF:

    Levels of Genotoxic and Carcinogenic Compounds in Plant Food Supplements and Associated Risk Assessment

    http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperDownload.aspx?FileName=FNS20110900010_68735976.pdf&paperID=8380

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The forum ‘Complementary & Alternative Treatments – CAM’ is closed to new topics and replies.