The basic assumption that food passing through the digestive tract somehow influences its normalcy and wellbeing has survived innumerable controversial studies. Epidemiological results remain inconsistent and extensive, prospective trials have failed to demonstrate the clear-cut, reproducible benefit from any one or more of the ingredients analyzed. Explanations are plentiful: even selected cohorts are not sufficiently homogeneous, dietary intake data are based on questionnaires (often with doubtful compliance), follow-up periods are insufficient, genetic susceptibility is unknown and end-point definitions in meta-analytic studies are vague or differ. Animal experiments, the last recourse for solid statistics, are not of much help: the restricted, defined life style and controlled food intake in an animal maintenance setting can hardly be extrapolated to human beings in real life. A group lead by E. L. Giovanucci from the Dept. of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, MA has tried for years to sort out grains of truth from a true mountain of data and to distill a perspective that is scientific and beneficial. Their findings follow.
Go to Previous Page
Go to Next Page