Cancer is a Preventable Disease that Requires Major Lifestyle Changes

This year, more than 1 million Americans and more than 10 million people worldwide are expected to be diagnosed with cancer, a disease commonly believed to be preventable. Only 5–10% of all cancer cases can be attributed to genetic defects, whereas the remaining 90–95% have their roots in the environment and lifestyle. The lifestyle factors include cigarette smoking, diet (fried foods, red meat), alcohol, sun exposure, environmental pollutants, infections, stress, obesity, and physical inactivity. The evidence indicates that of all cancer-related deaths, almost 25–30% are due to tobacco, as many as 30–35% are linked to diet, about 15–20% are due to infections, and the remaining percentage are due to other factors like radiation, stress, physical activity, environmental pollutants etc. Therefore, cancer prevention requires smoking cessation, increased ingestion of fruits and vegetables, moderate use of alcohol, caloric restriction, exercise, avoidance of direct exposure to sunlight, minimal meat consumption, use of whole grains, use of vaccinations, and regular check-ups. In this review, we present evidence that inflammation is the link between the agents/factors that cause cancer and the agents that prevent it. In addition, we provide evidence that cancer is a preventable disease that requires major lifestyle changes

Support of drug therapy using functional foods and dietary supplements: focus on statin therapy

Functional foods and dietary supplements might have a role in supporting drug therapy. These products may (1) have an additive effect to the effect that a drug has in reducing risk factors associated with certain conditions, (2) contribute to improve risk factors associated with the condition, other than the risk factor that the drug is dealing with, or (3) reduce drug-associated side effects, for example, by restoring depleted compounds or by reducing the necessary dose of the drug. Possible advantages compared with a multidrug therapy are lower drug costs, fewer side effects and increased adherence. In the present review we have focused on the support of statin therapy using functional foods or dietary supplements containing plant sterols and/or stanols, soluble dietary fibre, n-3 PUFA or coenzyme Q10. We conclude that there is substantial evidence that adding plant sterols and/or stanols to statin therapy further reduces total and LDL-cholesterol by roughly 6 and 10 %, respectively. Adding n-3 PUFA to statin therapy leads to a significant reduction in plasma TAG of at least 15 %. Data are insufficient and not conclusive to recommend the use of soluble fibre or coenzyme Q10 in patients on statin therapy and more randomised controlled trials towards these combinations are warranted. Aside from the possible beneficial effects from functional foods or dietary supplements on drug therapy, it is important to examine possible (negative) effects from the combination in the long term, for example, in post-marketing surveillance studies. Moreover, it is important to monitor whether the functional foods and dietary supplements are taken in the recommended amounts to induce significant effects

Plasma assisted particle contamination control: Plasma charging dependence on particle morphology

With the introduction of EUV lithography, the control of contamination in advanced semiconductor processes has become increasingly critical. Our work is a joint effort (TU/e and VDL-ETG) and is aimed at the development of plasma-assisted contamination control strategies mainly focusing on airborne particles in a low pressure gas. We present experiments comparing the charge-to-mass ratio of single spherical micron-sized particles with that of non-spherical agglomerates thereof in the spatial plasma afterglow. It is shown that the charge-to-mass ratio of two-particle clusters deviates only 6% from that of singlets. This means that for the proposed mitigation strategy, of which the efficiency is based on the charge-to-mass ratio, it is acceptable to study the charging of spherical particles and to extrapolate the results towards non-spherical particles within a reasonable range

Comparison of five in vitro digestion models to study the bio-accessibilty of soil contanminants

Soil ingestion can be a major exposure route for humans to many immobile soil contaminants. Exposure to soil contaminants can be overestimated if oral bioavailability is not taken into account. Several in vitro digestion models simulating the human gastrointestinal tract have been developed to assess mobilization of contaminants from soil during digestion, i.e., bioaccessibility. Bioaccessibility is a crucial step in controlling the oral bioavailability for soil contaminants. To what extent in vitro determination of bioaccessibility is method dependent has, until now, not been studied. This paper describes a multi-laboratory comparison and evaluation of five in vitro digestion models. Their experimental design and the results of a round robin evaluation of three soils, each contaminated with arsenic, cadmium, and lead, are presented and discussed. A wide range of bioaccessibility values were found for the three soils: for As 6−95%, 1−19%, and 10−59%; for Cd 7−92%, 5−92%, and 6−99%; and for Pb 4−91%, 1−56%, and 3−90%. Bioaccessibility in many cases is less than 50%, indicating that a reduction of bioavailability can have implications for health risk assessment. Although the experimental designs of the different digestion systems are distinct, the main differences in test results of bioaccessibility can be explained on the basis of the applied gastric pH. High values are typically observed for a simple gastric method, which measures bioaccessibility in the gastric compartment at low pHs of 1.5. Other methods that also apply a low gastric pH, and include intestinal conditions, produce lower bioaccessibility values. The lowest bioaccessibility values are observed for a gastrointestinal method which employs a high gastric pH of 4.0

State of the art in benefit-risk analysis: Food and nutrition

Benefit-risk assessment in food and nutrition is relatively new. It weighs the beneficial and adverse effects that a food (component) may have, in order to facilitate more informed management decisions regarding public health issues. It is rooted in the recognition that good food and nutrition can improve health and that some risk may be acceptable if benefit is expected to outweigh it. This paper presents an overview of current concepts and practices in benefit-risk analysis for food and nutrition. It aims to facilitate scientists and policy makers in performing, interpreting and evaluating benefit-risk assessments. Historically, the assessments of risks and benefits have been separate processes. Risk assessment is mainly addressed by toxicology, as demanded by regulation. It traditionally assumes that a maximum safe dose can be determined from experimental studies (usually in animals) and that applying appropriate uncertainty factors then defines the 'safe' intake for human populations. There is a minor role for other research traditions in risk assessment, such as epidemiology, which quantifies associations between determinants and health effects in humans. These effects can be both adverse and beneficial. Benefit assessment is newly developing in regulatory terms, but has been the subject of research for a long time within nutrition and epidemiology. The exact scope is yet to be defined. Reductions in risk can be termed benefits, but also states rising above 'the average health' are explored as benefits. In nutrition, current interest is in 'optimal' intake; from a population perspective, but also from a more individualised perspective. In current approaches to combine benefit and risk assessment, benefit assessment mirrors the traditional risk assessment paradigm of hazard identification, hazard characterization, exposure assessment and risk characterization. Benefit-risk comparison can be qualitative and quantitative. In a quantitative comparison, benefits and risks are expressed in a common currency, for which the input may be deterministic or (increasingly more) probabilistic. A tiered approach is advocated, as this allows for transparency, an early stop in the analysis and interim interaction with the decision-maker. A general problem in the disciplines underlying benefit-risk assessment is that good dose-response data, i.e. at relevant intake levels and suitable for the target population, are scarce. It is concluded that, provided it is clearly explained, benefit-risk assessment is a valuable approach to systematically show current knowledge and its gaps and to transparently provide the best possible science-based answer to complicated questions with a large potential impact on public health