The Mrs. Sent this to me for obvious reasons. I’m a heavy tea drinker.
Men who are heavy tea drinkers may be more likely to develop prostate cancer, according to new research.
A team from Glasgow University tracked the health of more than 6,000 male volunteers over a period of 37 years.
They found men who drank over seven cups of tea per day had a 50% higher risk of developing prostate cancer than moderate and non tea drinkers.
Now what does it mean?
The team said it did not know if tea was a risk factor or if drinkers lived to ages where cancer was more common….Volunteers were asked to complete a questionnaire about their usual consumption of tea, coffee, alcohol, smoking habits and general health, and attended a screening examination.
Just under a quarter of the men included in the study were heavy tea drinkers.
Of these, 6.4% developed prostate cancer during a follow-up of up to 37 years.
Researchers found that men who drank more than seven cups of tea per day had a significantly increased risk of prostate cancer compared to those who drank no tea or less than four cups per day.
This is one thing that really bugs me:
He said: “Most previous research has shown either no relationship with prostate cancer for black tea or some preventive effect of green tea.
“We don’t know whether tea itself is a risk factor or if tea drinkers are generally healthier and live to an older age when prostate cancer is more common anyway.”
“We found that heavy tea drinkers were more likely not to be overweight, be non alcohol-drinkers and have healthy cholesterol levels.
“However, we did adjust for these differences in our analysis and still found that men who drank the most tea were at greater risk of prostate cancer.”
Green tea, black tea, oolong tea, et al are all the leaves of the same plant, just processed differently. The claimed health benefits of green tea seem to root themselves in the fact that most of the tea studies have been conducted in the Far East where green teas are the preferred beverage. Also it should be noted that a Far Eastern diet is drastically different, as well a drastically different genetic stock. The same could be said about Scotland. Some of my ancestors are from that island, but just some of them, and I’m sure I couldn’t pinpoint all the various matings of people in my direct genetic line for the migratory people who eventually wound up in Maine and created me. How many of the people in the study could trace their ancestry to Scotland for say the last few hundred years?
Its an interesting study, but it smells of me like a study pointing out that eating Haggis and cheese burgers decrease the risk of sickle-cell anaemia. Correlation does not always mean causation.
Now how about a cup of tea?