Is organic food really linked to a lower risk of cancer?

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jim mcnamara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cancer Food Organic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This thread discusses the potential link between organic food consumption and cancer risk, referencing various articles and critiques on the topic. The scope includes commentary on media reporting, scientific critiques, and the implications of nutritional research.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the validity of claims made in media articles, labeling them as "drive-by journalism."
  • Concerns are raised regarding the interpretation of research findings, with references to critiques from JAMA and other sources questioning the original study's conclusions.
  • One participant notes the high cost of organic food in the US compared to non-organic options, suggesting this influences consumer perceptions.
  • There are mentions of "p-hacking" in relation to the study, indicating concerns about the research methodology and data manipulation.
  • References to the need for critical reading of scientific articles and the importance of understanding the context of claims made in popular media.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about the claims linking organic food to lower cancer risk, but no consensus is reached on the validity of the studies or the media's portrayal of the research.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight issues with the clarity and accuracy of media reporting on scientific studies, as well as the potential for misinterpretation of research findings. There is also mention of the need for careful evaluation of sources and claims in nutritional science.

jim mcnamara
Mentor
Messages
4,789
Reaction score
3,852
This thread is about cancer risk and organic food consumption - reporting on it mostly.

USA today: (drive by journalism?)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...vent-cancer-french-study-suggests/1737791002/

Commentary from JAMA (a critique)
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2707943

Original article (linked by JAMA)
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/ja...t=personalizedcontent&previousarticle=2707943

And we have this from a science watchdog group (This is not well written, IMO)
https://www.acsh.org/news/2018/10/2...ncer-risk-thats-biologically-impossible-13538

This is why Nutrition Research has problems:
1. USA Today says basically 'Organic foods reduce cancer risk'.
2. The original article has a more limited view.
3. The JAMA commentary critiques the original research.
4. ACSH take on the article is extremely critical of the original French paper

My initial response: this is why "fake news" works, at least according to Yuval Noah Harari
What internet companies sell is reader attention to advertisers. Not correct content to the viewership. See-
"21 lessons for the 21st century" 2018 Yuval Noah Harari

This is also a clear example of why PF has a list of online journals that we accept. And why we delete or lock some threads.

If you are going to comment on this: Please do!

Please Do A Good Job. Do not do what you see above - . In this case, that means at least please try to read the abstracts. If you cannot understand something, please ask.

My current take is that organic food is generally more expensive in the US than non-organic foodstuffs. I cannot sensibly say a lot more at this point.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, russ_watters and berkeman
Biology news on Phys.org