(no subject)

[novapsyche]

Too Much Soda May Raise Cancer Risk

Carbonated drinks may raise the risk of esophageal cancer, a usually fatal disease, researchers reported on Monday.

[...] A team at Tata Memorial Hospital in India found a strong correlation between the rise in per capita consumption of carbonated soft drinks in the past 50 years and a documented increase in rates of esophageal cancer in the United States.

Team members studied U.S. Department of Agriculture data to find that per capita consumption of carbonated drinks rose by more than 450 percent, from 10.8 gallons (49 litres) on average in 1946 to 49.2 gallons (224 litres) in 2000.

And over the past 25 years, the incidence rates of esophageal cancer have risen by more than 570 percent in white American men. Esophageal cancer affected 13,900 U.S. men and women in 2003 -- more than 10,000 men -- and killed almost all of them, according to the American Cancer Society.

The number of esophageal cancer cases clearly followed the rise in intake of carbonated soft drinks, the researchers found.

That could be coincidence, but they also found research that showed a possible biological basis for the effect. Carbonated soft drinks cause the stomach to distend, which in turn causes the gastric reflux associated with esophageal cancer.

Comments

[silversliver.livejournal.com]

What bothers me about this article is that it does not mention examining the habits of the individuals who got the cancer. It just says "Soda consumption increased, and so did esophagal cancer. There must be a connection!" This disregards the other changes in Americans' eating habits over the past 50 years and no biochemical basis was considered. Granted, too much soda is not good for people; my husband lost 40 lbs. when he stopped drinking 2 liters of Coke a day. Still, I think the declared link here is too strong given the evidence that was examined.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

There's a difference between reading the research and reading an article about the research. I've not read the actual data, so I can't speak to how the doctors came to their conclusions. But I have conducted social research on my own, and I can say that it's possible to use the methods they did (other people's research) in order to examine a lot of different data and come up with correlations. It's also possible to control for other variables (though again I haven't seen this research firsthand, so I don't know if they did that).

Obviously, someone would have to set up a study that concentrates solely on certain controlled factors.