Tomato intake (especially tomato paste with higher concentrations of lycopene) is linked to a lower risk of prostate cancer. Is serum testosterone level sacrificed? (Sorry all I can read is the abstract)
Manseed, the drops in serum testosterone were transient drops. In other studies it was reported that longer carotenoid feeding did not significantly alter serum testosterone concentrations. The transient decrease in serum testosterone levels with short-term carotenoid intake is considered beneficial, as excessive androgen status can ultimately give rise to prostate cancer.
I think what I got out of the study was that tomato powder supplementation modulated ELEVATED androgen status and that it is ELEVATED androgen status that is actually associated with enhanced prostate cancer risk.
Here’s the full study and discussion … http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/1,11803,00.htm?rss=y
I read that whole damn study and the one thing I’d like to know is how “sham-operated” is being used in this context. It is set in direct juxtaposition to castration which would lead one to believe that the “sham-operated group” simply hadn’t been castrated, but they way it’s used in other places makes this assumption impossible. Also why designate an unaltered group as “sham-operated”?
I know what “sham-operated” means (or at least used to mean), but can’t make heads or tails out of the seemingly inconsistent use of it in this VERY technical article.
Thanks for the info and link T!
Great to see you on!
[quote]Tampa-Terry wrote:
I think what I got out of the study was that tomato powder supplementation modulated ELEVATED androgen status and that it is ELEVATED androgen status that is actually associated with enhanced prostate cancer risk.
Here’s the full study and discussion … http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/1,11803,00.htm?rss=y
[/quote]
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Also why designate an unaltered group as “sham-operated”? [/quote]
It’s a closer match than a group without surgery. This shows that the trauma of the surgery (anaesthetization cutting stitching etc.) didn’t cause the changes (but I feel as though you already know this).
[quote]
I know what “sham-operated” means (or at least used to mean), but can’t make heads or tails out of the seemingly inconsistent use of it in this VERY technical article.[/quote]
They sham operated at first, then removed everything at the end of the study.
[quote]Tampa-Terry wrote:
Manseed, the drops in serum testosterone were transient drops. In other studies it was reported that longer carotenoid feeding did not significantly alter serum testosterone concentrations. The transient decrease in serum testosterone levels with short-term carotenoid intake is considered beneficial, as excessive androgen status can ultimately give rise to prostate cancer.
I think what I got out of the study was that tomato powder supplementation modulated ELEVATED androgen status and that it is ELEVATED androgen status that is actually associated with enhanced prostate cancer risk.
Here’s the full study and discussion … http://www.cancercompass.com/cancer-news/1,11803,00.htm?rss=y
[/quote]
Thanks for the info! It’s just what i was looking for.
[quote]David Barr wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Also why designate an unaltered group as “sham-operated”?
It’s a closer match than a group without surgery. This shows that the trauma of the surgery (anaesthetization cutting stitching etc.) didn’t cause the changes (but I feel as though you already know this).
I know what “sham-operated” means (or at least used to mean), but can’t make heads or tails out of the seemingly inconsistent use of it in this VERY technical article.
They sham operated at first, then removed everything at the end of the study.[/quote]
Thanks Dave. I used to read a lot more of these types of things. I think my brain got rusty. In any case it seems a bit tenuous to base any fear of tomatoes on this study alone from what I could gather though this did seem to be rather well thought out. Then again we’re left with the speculation of how much of this translates from rats to humans even assuming the conclusiveness of the findings.
It seems these types of folks revel in the practice of constructing written thought in such a way so that you almost have to diagram the damn things sentence by sentence unless you’re one of them.