Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Biotech Science

Carrots May Cure Cancer 97

Posted by timothy from the plus-they're-tasty dept.
Haydn Fenton writes "A group of researchers from the University of Newcastle Upon Tyne in England have discovered a link between the naturally formed pesticide found in carrots, falcarinol, and a substantial reduction in cancerous tumor formation in rats. The researchers hope that the discovery will lead to new anti-cancer drugs and new methods of production to maximize falcarinol production in crops. Dr Kirsten Brandt one of the researchers told the press "We already know that carrots are good for us and can reduce the risk of cancer but until now we have not known which element of the vegetable has these special properties."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Carrots May Cure Cancer More

Carrots May Cure Cancer

Comments Filter:
  • The drugs will be approved 10 years later and sold for $100 a pill. And in 20 years, some poorer countries will have access to them as well. If you're terminally ill, you still can't take experimental drugs unless you're in the trials.
    • The drugs will be approved 10 years later and sold for $100 a pill. And in 20 years, some poorer countries will have access to them as well.

      Quit whinin' and propose a workable alternative. Or is it just "socialize all medical research"?

      If you have a slow approval process you get people like this complaining about it - if you have a fast approval process you have drugs like Vioxx slip through.

      I know, all we want is a fast and perfect system. For free.

      Of course terminally ill people should have access
      • Comment removed based on user account deletion
        • Removing a lot of the government mandated overhead to get 'approved for humans' would certainly help real people.

          In some cases, yes. In others, it would hurt real people. Are you familiar with the cardiovascular effects of Vioxx and other selective COX-2 inhibitors?

          I think if it was someone you knew or cared for, you'd be less inclined to 'put up with the current system'

          Are you talking about the terminally ill, for which I already advocated a completely open position? Or are you talking about using
          • Comment removed based on user account deletion
            • We are all 'terminal' some of us simply faster than others. This is where I'm at, not selectively choosing one sickness over another.

              So basically, if someone turns out a drug which say, causes liver cirrhosis, then it doesn't matter whether it's a drug against cancer or a drug against acne?

              That's a weird position. It's not 'government overhead'. It's a protection system which is there for a very good reason. I guess you never heard of Thalidomide [wikipedia.org]?

              To paraphrase you, I think that if you knew more drug che
              • So basically, if someone turns out a drug which say, causes liver cirrhosis, then it doesn't matter whether it's a drug against cancer or a drug against acne?

                That's a weird position. It's not 'government overhead'. It's a protection system which is there for a very good reason. I guess you never heard of Thalidomide?

                Thalidomide is currently being used as a very effect agent against 3 different types of cancer, and is in trials for some types of neuropathic pain, as well as a host of other uses. Just bec
                • Thalidomide is currently being used as a very effect agent against 3 different types of cancer, and is in trials for some types of neuropathic pain, as well as a host of other uses. Just because a drug is bad for pregnant women doesn't mean it's a bad drug.

                  I didn't say that it was a "bad" drug. It was a (very) badly tested drug, when it was released onto the market. And this resulted in thousands of victims.

                  Today it is a very well tested drug. The risks are well-known. And that makes all the difference.

          • So you're saying if someone develops a cure for cancer and you were in charge, you'd confiscate it from them? If that becomes policy nobody will put R&D money into the search.

            "Confiscate"? Knowledge isn't property, and patents are a state intervention in the market. When you start out with the premise that the state failing to use force to stop other people from implementing the cure is confiscation you're pretty far off the rails already.

            Then you bring "socialism" into it. Publicly funded resear

      • For starters, since this chemical is naturally occuring, it can't be patented in the first place.
        Maybe the refinment process, but not the chemical itself. You'd have to alter it in some slight way to 'improve' it if you wanted a patent.

        But here's what I'd suggest in terms of fixes;

        1. Don't prevent people from buying drugs which are in use in other countries. Why should Americans support the majority of the R&D costs while other (developed) countries get the same drugs for less because they have price
    • New Label on Carrots: On front of product X: "Current British research suggests that carrots may cure cancer..." On bottom of product X: "This product believed to cause cancer in the State of California..."
    • ...just eat some fucking carrots, you numbnut.
    • And then the government will ban carrots, and then there will be hippies starting movements for legalizing medical carrots when really all they want is to eat them, and then the world will have finally had enough and all humans will be hurtled into space as the earth stops rotating because it's "sick of this stupid-ass sh*t."

      Most interesting of all, we will discover that, low and behold, Leprechauns are real, and they will emerge from deep within the earth to start a new, gold-based economy. Then they'll
    • This is why holistic folks have been keen on such natural remedies for years.

      Isn't it a small mystery that the medical establishment claims that things like vitamin C and garlic don't help your body fight off colds and various other such things?

      My grandfather has completely cured himself of Lyme's disease (something which essentially puts you on treatment for months at a time via damaging chemicals) three times and hepetitis A once, mainly by consuming copious amounts of vitamin C, garlic, and various oth

  • Decisions decisions (Score:4, Funny)

    by Dancin_Santa ( 265275 ) <DancinSanta@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 09, 2005 @11:04PM (#11626355) Journal
    Food prepared in England or dying of cancer.

    Both are horrible ways to go.

  • Carrots (Score:3, Funny)

    by Doctor Sbaitso ( 605467 ) on Wednesday February 09, 2005 @11:04PM (#11626361) Journal
    My great-grandmother would always say "you should eat your carrots while they're still good for you."

    This was, of course, a joke having to do with all those "x food causes y disease" studies that seem to pop up on a weekly basis.

    Fortunately, it seems like carrots are still healthy to eat!

  • ... and in related news ... (Score:3, Funny)

    by bigsteve@dstc ( 140392 ) on Wednesday February 09, 2005 @11:16PM (#11626437)
    ... Benson and Hedges announce the availability of a new line of carrot-tipped health cigarettes.

  • I really want this to be true and valid...but I can't help but seeing all of these scientific studies as one big logical fallacy:

    Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

    Just because one event happens after another does not mean that event 1 caused event 2. I know, it is a necessary evil to have limited size studies, but after hearing the 10th or 11th flip-flop over if eggs are going to kill me or save me, I can't put too much faith in this.

    • Just because one event happens after another does not mean that event 1 caused event 2.

      And yet, the only thing we can mean by "cause" is that event 1 always seems to be followed by event 2.

      • WRONG, thats not the only thing people mean when they say X 'caused' Y. How dare you think that everyone thinks as you do, let alone in an unguided logic-lacking, stupid method. I certainly do not think in such a manner (or atleast try not to).

        It SHOULD mean that there is sufficient empirical evidence that event X caused Y to occur.

    • Re:a worry... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You might have a case if this wasn't a controlled experiment where the use of falcarinol was compared against a negative control (and falcarinol via carrots was compared against falcarinol alone). In this situation, it is pretty clearly causation.

      I agree that most medical real-world studies can have problems accounting for complicating factors, and that correlation doesn't always mean causation. However, in this case it was a nicely controlled experiment.

      Of course, we need to have confirmational experimen
      • It just seems as though there could be a thousand other factors involved that led to these results, aside from carrots, or even that the statistical signifigance of the "cured" sample isn't really sufficent. I guess I've just seen a few too many studies like this.
    • If you don't have much faith in all these yummy healthy vegetables, I have another option for you, without any fallacy present as far as I can see:

      It just so happens, that I have a (magical) stone with me, that keeps away any form of cancer. The proof? I have had that stone for years, and during those years I have not had one cancer, no sirree!

      I'm willing to sell you that stone for a meager 1000 bucks! What do you say? I'll even throw in some drops of holy water for free, taken from good christian holy so
      • Woah, where did that come from? The parent post may not have been totally correct (science has its share of validation issues, but it is not totally invalid because of that -- not that that is what he claimed anyway, although it seems to be your interpretation of it), but I don't see where the logical leap from "I think I see a logical fallacy" to "I'm a religious bigot" can be made.

        The point in his second paragraph is quite valid too. I've lost count how many times it was determined that butter was wors
      • Hmm...you don;t believe in reading much do you? I'm hardly a religious zealot, as that would mean I would have to relly even more on a logically unsound system. I'm just saying that the next time someone tells me that Hedgehogs cause cancer, I'm going to take it with a grain of salt, and the media probably should, too.
        • "Hmm...you don;t believe in reading much do you?"

          It depends: does it actually exist? And is is catholic/christian sound? ;-)

          Actually I'm afraid you read to much in it; it was only a post meant to be modded 'funny'.
          I was actually alluding to the Simpson episode where Lisa sells Homer a stone that 'keeps away tigers' and even though Lisa explains the obvious logical fallacy ('you don't see any tigers around, do you?'), homer buys the stone anyway.

    • Just because one event happens after another does not mean that event 1 caused event 2. I know, it is a necessary evil to have limited size studies, but after hearing the 10th or 11th flip-flop over if eggs are going to kill me or save me, I can't put too much faith in this.

      This is one of the major problems between communicating science from scientists to lay people. For instance, I have two rather large binders sitting on my desk. These binders are filled with journal articles from 1949 to the present

    • There is a test in Econometrics known as Grainger causality. Basically, A variable x causes y if y can be predicted more efficiently by taking into account information on the history of x. There was a paper published 10 or 15 years ago in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics that tried to apply the test to the age old conundrum "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" Using something like weekly production data, they were able to provide an answer that showed which caused which. The kicker

  • that may be right indeed (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    have you ever seen a donky with cancer?

  • Making good carrots (Score:5, Informative)

    by Profane MuthaFucka ( 574406 ) <busheatskok@gmail.com> on Wednesday February 09, 2005 @11:53PM (#11626719) Homepage Journal
    I hated carrots until about 4 months ago when I had them prepared PROPERLY.

    Don't boil them, don't cook them too little. That's the secret.

    Get a skillet, put a little oil in it. 1 teaspoon or so. Add 200 grams of carrots. Add a cup of water. Cook the carrots on high heat until the water is gone. If the carrots aren't soft, add more water. When the carrots are soft, keep cooking them. The goal is to brown the sides of the carrots. Turn them over when they are brown on one side, and cook some more. Total cooking time is maybe 20 minutes on relatively high heat. Olive oil is good but you need to watch it because it can't take as much heat. It's important to cook them enough. 20 minutes AT LEAST. Not enough cooking makes carroty carrots. If you like carroty carrots, feel free. If you don't, keep on cooking.

    When they are cooked that way, the carrots don't taste so carroty, but actually become sweet. They are absolutely delicious like that, and you'll never go back to plain old steamed carrots.

    Yummmay!

    • Re:Making good carrots (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Mushy carrots suck. In fact, cooked carrots of any kind suck (unless they are in carrot cake). Carrots, like revenge and Gespatcho, are a dish best served cold.
    • Prepared properly? I just buy a bag at the store, and while I'm at home, I grab one from the bag and eat it. No preperation. It's the only way a man should ever eat his carrots. :P
      • Agreed. Skin and all, a carrot should be had au natural.

        Also, cooking them in water until the water evaporates is the equivalent of steeping tea leaves then throwing out the water and eating the leaves once the water has absorbed all the flavour, and more importantly, the nutrients. That recipe is simply a how-to on butchering a good vegetable.
        • Also, cooking them in water until the water evaporates is the equivalent of steeping tea leaves then throwing out the water and eating the leaves once the water has absorbed all the flavour, and more importantly, the nutrients.

          If the water is evaporating (rather than being poured out as a liquid), it probably isn't taking the flavor or nutrients with it, but leaving them behind.

          Of course you're right that carrots are just fine uncooked as well.

      • Prepared properly? I just buy a bag at the store, and while I'm at home, I grab one from the bag and eat it.

        Absolutely! The only thing better is a carrot straight from my garden. Given that I live in western Canada, I have to settle for the store bought carrots this time of year.

      • So... eh... what's up, doc?

    • Re:Making good carrots (Score:5, Interesting)

      by famebait ( 450028 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @08:26AM (#11628721)
      Another good one which differs more from the steamed ones more than you'd think:

      Heat butter or olive oil or a mixture in a thick-bottomed pan, and chop carrots into wheels (or whatever size pieces you want), adding them into the fat as you go along.
      Let them fry a little in the fat whole you chop some onion coarsely, and add that too. Let fry a little more. Then add some green peas.

      The frying is just to cut cooking time, btw; you can dump it all in at once, but it will need to cook lonmger.

      Add only a little water (ebough to keep the bottom moist and from burning for a while, but you should nowhere near enough to see it initially). Season with salt, pepper, and optional herbs of choice.

      Cover and cook gently for at least 20 minutes. Sounds dead boring, but is a really nice side-dish.

      • Re:Making good carrots (Score:5, Funny)

        by Teppy ( 105859 ) * on Thursday February 10, 2005 @03:24PM (#11634326) Homepage
        This is one of my favorite recipes: Begin by chopping three medium sized carrots into slivers.Sautee them as you suggest, but with some good quality butter, rather than olive oil. Add two cups of heavy cream and reduce until the cream thickens. Fry up a pound of bacon and chop into small pieces. Toss with some bread crumbs to firm this all up. Reserve the rendered bacon fat.

        Form the above mixture into small patties. Coat in a beer batter and deep-fry. Use the reserved bacon fat, along with the yolks of 6 eggs to make a bacon fat hollendaise. Cover the patties in hollendaise sauce, and serve, accompanied by milkshakes.

        I can't begin to tell you how relieved I was to discover that carrots are considered healthy.
        • Obligatory Simpsons Reference:

          (Marge offers Homer a rice cake that has only 35 calories)
          Marge: You can put a little something on top for flavor.
          Homer: Now you're talking! (He fumbles around a bit and pulls a multi-decker sandwich sitting on the rice cake out of the microwave) Mmm. Only thirty-five calories.

          Seriously, though, have you ever noticed that these discoveries are never about eating cows, or pigs, or chickens? You don't hear things like: 'Hmmm, this new study sugguests that pork might help preven
        • To really enhance the flavor you need to eat it while smoking a filterless menthol cigarette. MMMmmm MMMmmmmm good! Love those carrots!

          -
    • ... 'cause they're way too sweet. The best way to make a palatable carrot for my particular taste buds is to peel them and eat them raw. The peel contains a bitter substance. Of course this may be an issue related to nontasters, tasters, and supertasters [newscientist.com], which makes recommending a particular vegetable cooking style a crapshoot. You might think I'm lucky to be a supertaster, but my cancer risk is apparently higher.

      I at least agree with the "don't boil them" statement.

      • You might think I'm lucky to be a supertaster, but my cancer risk is apparently higher.
        According to the article, only because the bitter taste might make you eat less nice veggies. FWIW, I like bitter things (spinach, really hoppy beers, that paint they put on kids' nails to stop them biting them) so presumably not a problem.

        Oh, and carrots? Drop em into boiling water, as soon as it comes to the boil again they're done; they only need to be warmed through.

      • Only in America can a draft-dodging, cocaine-snorting, drunk-driving cowboy-poseur get elected on "moral values."

        Compared to his predecessor, a draft-dodging rapist and accessory to murder, he is moral.


    • Kick back and enjoy a nice Havana cigar [onlinehavanacigars.com]
    • There is no way of preparing carrots that beat them fresh out of the ground, except washing/peeling them fresh out of the ground. Any adulteration is unacceptable.
      • I am pretty surprised at the response that I've gotten to my carrot preparation notes. Quite a lot of people responded to say the same thing as you. If I had known the depth of the religious feeling on the matter I would have recommended eating the carrots (properly cooked) while using emacs.

        But I understand how you feel. I think that both fish and beef should be cooked as little as possible.
        • Yeah, I read at +4 or +5 (with various changes) so I didn't see most of them ... only another who recommended cooking. Didn't mean to say anything about you. But my parents have always had this thing about cooking carrots ... which, even though they just steam them, makes them way too sweet to go on the dinner table IMHO.

          But when I say fresh out of the ground, I don't mean raw from the shop: I mean fresh out of the ground. If you've never tried that, I really do recommend it. Though I s'pose you mightn't l
          • Don't like raw carrots at all. The other people who suggested that my colon will rot off will be heartened to know that I do like broccoli, green beans, peapods, bean sprouts, lettuce, cabbage, tomatoes, corn, onions, bell peppers, and mushrooms completely raw.

            Also never lived on a farm, but I have thrown hay into a barn. That will kick your ass if you're not in shape.

    • Cooking carrots is likely to reduce their cancer fighting ability. Likewise, while carrot extracts such as described in the article may be profitable for drug manufacturers (and the researchers who get grants from them), I have a hunch fresh carrot juice extracted with a centrifical juice extractor could be more effective and cheaper. Carrot juice provides a way of consuming large quantities of carrot nutrients including anti-oxidants in their natural proportions without consuming too much insoluable fi

    • Seriously. I hated carrots, myself, all my life. Then my dad tried to turn me on to fresh carrot juice. It took a couple of years before I would even try it.

      However, juiced carrots with some apple slices tossed into the juicer for sweetness is actually surprisingly delicious.

      Cooking the carrots kills a lot of the enzymes that are beneficial to you. Raw is the best way to eat vegetables.
      • Point ONE: I don't care about enzymes. I can't remember the last time someone died in my family under 100 years old. Really. I have good genes. What I do care about is enjoyment of my food. I'll skip the enzymes in my carrots, because the over two dozen veggies that I do eat raw will make up for it. And if they don't, then I'm sure the cigarettes I smoke will contain what I am missing. Just kidding.

        Point TWO: I posted another note to someone else listing all the veggies that I do like raw. In fact, most ve
    • I find roasting them has very good results.

      Cut carrots into 'sticks'. about 1/3 inch by 3 inches.

      Place on a sheet of foil and add a splash of oil (virgin sunflower, if you can get it, or light olive oil) and some honey. Finally, close the sheet of foil making a sealed envelope. It helps to turn the edges up to avoid any liquid escaping.

      Put the envelope in the oven with whatever else is roasting. Time taken to cook will depend on how hot the oven is and how firm the carrots. I usually find 30-40 minutes

  • Actual research abstract/paper (Score:5, Informative)

    by FleaPlus ( 6935 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @01:17AM (#11627221) Journal
    Here are links to the actual research abstract [acs.org] and paper [acs.org].

    Abstract text:

    Inhibitory Effects of Feeding with Carrots or (-)-Falcarinol on Development of Azoxymethane-Induced Preneoplastic Lesions in the Rat Colon

    Morten Kobæk-Larsen, Lars P. Christensen, Werner Vach, Jelmera Ritskes-Hoitinga, and Kirsten Brandt

    The effects of intake of dietary amounts of carrot or corresponding amounts of (-)-(3R)-falcarinol from carrots on development of azoxymethane (AOM)-induced colon preneoplastic lesions were examined in male BDIX rats. Three groups of eight AOM-treated rats were fed the standard rat feed Altromin supplemented with either 10% (w/w) freeze-dried carrots with a natural content of 35 g falcarinol/g, 10% maize starch to which was added 35 g falcarinol/g purified from carrots, or 10% maize starch (control). After 18 weeks, the animals were euthanized and the colon was examined for tumors and aberrant crypt foci (ACF), which were classified into four size classes. Although the number of small ACF was unaffected by the feeding treatments, the numbers of lesions as a function of increasing size class decreased significantly in the rats that received one of the two experimental treatments, as compared with the control treatment. This indicates that the dietary treatments with carrot and falcarinol delayed or retarded the development of large ACF and tumors. The present study provides a new perspective on the known epidemiological associations between high intake of carrots and reduced incidence of cancers.
    • I nominate this for the worst jobs in science: Examining rat colons for tumors and aberrant crypt foci.
    • You know, I heard a woman on the Art Bell program almost a full decade ago who had supposedly miraculously cured herself of cancer despite the expectations of the medical community. She was supposedly a doctor in her own right and had decided to follow her own regimine rather than just the one prescribed by her doctors.

      She ditched the chemo and, among other things, consumed an extraordinary amount of carrots, carrot juice and orange juice in her diet. Granted, this was on the Art Bell show, but I thought i

      • Re:Actual research abstract/paper (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Actually, eating carrots may not be the best thing.

        Carrots, though high in nutrients, are also high in Vitamin A. Excess Vitamin A has been shown to increase the size of cancerous tumors, so consuming more carrots may lead to uninhibited growth of cancerous cells.

        Obviously it is difficult to say what happened with the lady from the Art Bell show, but scientifically, she ought to be dead. Good for her that it worked out.

        However, if we could isolate the good carrot chemicals without also introducing the
        • Actually, eating carrots IS the BEST thing. Taking supplements is NOT. A study using just betacarotene was terminated early when it was found to increase cancer in heavy smokers. You say Excess Vit A increased tumor growth. Guess what, just carrots reduced cancer in women smokers. You go here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd = Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10530619&dopt=Abstrac t

          to see about carrots and cancer from smoking.

          The problem with isolating the supposedly "good" addi
        • as far as i know, carrots are not so much high in vitamin A as they are in retinol, vitamin A's direct precursor (vit A is formed from 2 molcules of retinol). too much vitamin A is bad, i don't believe retinol suffers the same problem.


    • Have they determined if falcarinol inhibits all preneoplastic lesions, or just those induced with azoxymethane?

      Also, there's a greek mu missing in the text of the parent post. It sould read "35 ug" instead of "35 g". They're pretty good if they can find carrots with "... a natural content of 35 g falcarinol/g"!

  • They're supposed to be particularly good for lung cancer.

    My favorite vegetable has always been carrots.

    I have a gene increasing my chances of lung cancer.

    So my body seems to know what it needs.

    • Freebase (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You have to freebase the carrots to cure lung cancer.

  • I thought... (Score:4, Funny)

    by KontinMonet ( 737319 ) on Thursday February 10, 2005 @07:52AM (#11628531) Homepage Journal
    ...an apple a day keeps the doctor away.

    Trouble is, of course, if you buy a lot of apples and fall seriously ill, you're fucked...
    • Just bump your intake up to two apples a day and the doctor will be right over. I believe the principle at work here is "too much of a good thing."
  • I have learned many years ago that Carrots and Tomatos share the same anti-carcinogen, anti-oxidant and removal of free radical properties.

    Falcarinol, this is new to me, but sounds like a specialisation of known properties. But, bugs bunny eats carrots and he is well over 65 and still a lovable cross-dressing character. So must be good for you!

    • From the FS (Summary), never mind the FA:

      We already know that carrots ... can reduce the risk of cancer but until now we have not known which element of the vegetable has these special properties.

      This is new (and good) news, they've discovered what element (or, at least one of the elements) that has the anti-carcinogen properties.

      I must say I find rather tiresome the seemingly endless lineup of people eagerly waiting to reveal their "cleverness" by shooting down every single article as "old news", even

      • no, I meant just to say that carrots and rat tests have been shown.

        If the news article was clearer, then it would have shown to me that the new part of it was the chemical, in retrospect it was clear, but the title should have been:

        'anti-carinogen isolated in carrots'

        My whole office is on a 2 carrots a day scheme after we calculated that 1/3 of us has a direct relative (or by direct relative marriage) dying of cancer.

        Wake up call... I am healthy for now... but carrots it is (and tomatos)

        • 'anti-carinogen isolated in carrots'

          Yup, you're right, it should have been! But I noticed long ago that the /. editors avoid sensibly and unambiguously written submissions and sensible titles, because that doesn't provide nearly as many 'hooks' to generate a lot of "lively discussion", and "lively discussion" = pageviews = ad revenue. If two people submit the same story, but one is clear, well-written and objective, the other subjective with some confused ambiguous sentences and a few typos, they'll alway

  • Vegetables might be nasty, but they're good for you. Researchers have found similar tumor-squashing results by injecting a brocolli compound directly into cancer cells. The brocolli composition disrupts the cancer cells ability to divide, thus neutralizing the cancer.

    Only catch is, they're not sure yet about the effects of simply eating brocolli. For now, you'll have to inject. And mommy said needles were bad.

  • . . . and a substantial reduction in cancerous tumor formation in rats . . .

    . . . what is keeping the little buggers alive.

Slashdot Top Deals

Utility is when you have one telephone, luxury is when you have two, opulence is when you have three -- and paradise is when you have none. -- Doug Larson

Close