Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

Absurdly bad study spurs headlines linking healthy diet to lung cancer

read original get Healthy Eating Cookbook → more articles
Why This Matters

This article highlights the dangers of relying on dubious and unreviewed research that can spread misinformation about health and nutrition. Such flawed studies can mislead consumers and influence public health guidelines based on weak evidence, potentially causing harm. It underscores the importance of critical evaluation and peer review in scientific reporting, especially in the digital age where sensational headlines spread rapidly.

Key Takeaways

Dubious nutrition research and downright terrible diet and health advice are nothing new, but the situation has devolved as of late. With the rise of anti-vaccine Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, federal food guidelines have centered on slabs of meat, excessive amounts of protein, and sticks of butter. The animal-based food craze has people slathering beef tallow on their faces. And, if your cardiovascular system isn’t already hardening just reading this, health influencers are now peddling nicotine—an addictive drug considered to be a cardiovascular toxin.

With this bananas context came headlines in the past few days suggesting that eating fruits, vegetables, and whole grains can be bad for you. Specifically, it can increase the risk of lung cancer—a claim that flies in the face of decades of evidence-based nutrition guidance, like a full-fat cream pie.

The full study behind the headlines hasn’t been published yet, but experts have seen enough to call it baloney. The study is being presented at the American Association for Cancer Research conference this week and hasn’t been peer reviewed. Based on the abstract available online, the study was small, had no appropriate control group, led to a finding not previously hypothesized, used groupings that were “arbitrary,” is likely picking up on a known correlation, and jumps to speculation based on no data from the study.

“This is only a conference abstract, but the flaws of the study and its conclusions are quite striking,” Baptiste Leurent, associate professor in Medical Statistics at University College London, said in a statement.

A “stretch”

According to the abstract, researchers led by Jorge Nieva at the University of Southern California analyzed dietary survey data from 166 non-smokers who developed lung cancer under age 50. The researchers broke the participants into groups based on the mutations found in their cancers and scored the quality of their diets. Based on those scores, researchers found that the participants had higher scores for consuming fruits, vegetables, and whole grains compared with reference values for the general population. Without any more data, the researchers speculate that the produce and grains may contain high levels of pesticides, and those pesticides may increase the risk of lung cancer.