Carotenoids

Good day Mr. Jelínek, in this lesson you mentioned the following example of a study: Studies that do not generate the expected positive outcome are not published, cited, or sometimes even completed (for example, the CARET study conducted in Scandinavia, which monitored the effects of beta-carotene on health, was terminated in 1994 due to an increased incidence of lung cancer following the administered doses of the synthetic form of beta-carotene in smokers who were part of the observed population).

Do I understand correctly that when a study on a dietary supplement (as in this example) is conducted and the results are not positive, the results are not published, but the product continues to be sold? Thank you.

It's a bit more "complicated" - in this case, the study was halted (which is the organizer's obligation when it becomes apparent that the health of respondents is demonstrably deteriorating due to the substance being used during the study). The results of unfinished studies are often published, but it's always at the discretion of the investor, so a lot of "interesting" data doesn't get publicized.

Since these are dietary supplements and not drugs, a large amount of proven negative effects would need to accumulate for legislation to respond with changes. However, in this situation, there wasn't direct evidence, so today we are still working with the theory that the use of isolated antioxidants increases pro-oxidant processes in the body. In this regard, it is more beneficial to receive antioxidant substances in natural complexes due to their synergistic effect.

Hello,

In the lesson about Lycopene, there is a mention of a study from which the number of 10 servings of food containing this carotenoid for men is derived, with respect to reducing the risk of developing prostate cancer. Could you please clarify for me the time frame in which these 10 servings of food are meant—whether it's per week, per month?

Thank you for your response.

Here is meant 10 different foods per day. However, this is an unfortunate analogy in terms of expressing the exact value of lycopene content; moreover, lycopene obtained from raw foods has very low biological value. In this form, a significantly higher intake of this substance is required compared to processed foods or dietary supplements, which is why the number of foods mentioned is so high.