B vits 6 and 12 and increased risk of lung cancer

[Flatfred]

My Son sent me this link. It's the first I've heard of it and am not personally troubled but wondered if anyone else has heard of this....

ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.120...

[Gambit62 Administrator]

I see that the papers reported this as a causal link though the study seems quite clear that they it was a significant correlation rather than a causal link

Reading summary around the article it does postulate that the correlation could be related to the role of the vitamins in regulating homocysteine and methionine processes

Looks like the study included several vitamins and only found significant correlations with B6 and B12 - and seemed to be much stronger with B6. The study only found this relationship in men and it was much stronger in men who were also smokers ... so basically a long way to go before the real causal mechanism is established and a bit early to be claiming that supplementing B6 and B12 causes cancer.

The incidence of cancers in the sample of nearly 80,000 seems to have been around 800 so which implies that the risk is still quite small.

ascopost.com/News/58008?utm...

[Hidden]

'Inconsistent findings' as the first 2 words in the report are not exactly encouraging Flatfred. The number of lung cancers recorded during the study was 808 out of a total sample of 77118 people is just 1.05% getting the condition and it was just a 2 year study. The difference between men and women has not been explored. All in all it looks to me like sound and fury signifying nothing.

Some years ago I had a long discussion with a haematologist who reckoned I had a 20% chance of a heart attack or stroke by the time I was 65. He was stopped dead in his tracks when I thanked him as I was pleased he thought my chances of NOT having them was as high as 80%, he had never looked at it like that.

When studying statistics as part of a management course there were several cautionary tales show to us and one was of a study of the women having breast cancer in a very large hospital in USA. The study suggested there was a close relationship between the women who had the problem and the use of a particular range of cosmetics. When the findings were published the sales of that range went into a nose-dive. The cosmetics firm had the study redone and then a different story emerged as the percentage of women in the country who used that range of cosmetics was the same as the percentage of women with breast cancer in the sample.

You could say your chances of not getting lung cancer between the ages of 50 and 76, over the next 2 years, according to this report, is almost 99% and that seems as good a proposition as anyone could want.

There are liars, damned liars and statisticians.

Pinch of salt time I think.

[Flatfred in reply to Hidden]

Lol. I'm personally not bothered one bit as the benefit form the fortnightly injections I give myself far out way any risk as far as I'm concerned. B12 injections and Armour thyroid tabs have improved my life considerabley in the last 4 yrs and I won't be stopping soon! American Pharma? Big pinch of salt me thinks lol

Thanks for the reply.

[porter5]

"There are liars, damned liars and statisticians"and there are Pharmaceutical Cos who want to

downplay the value of supplements.