Link to Novels

Wednesday, February 25, 2026

Supplements Don’t Prevent Cancer, Studies Show - Fred Hutch Study

 


Dietary supplements are wildly popular, but large clinical trials and other research by Fred Hutch Cancer Center scientists show that many common dietary supplements offer little proven benefit for cancer prevention, and in some cases may even increase cancer risk.

Initially created to treat nutritional deficiencies, dietary supplements are now sold as a panacea for nearly all ills ― including cancer ― and unlike drugs used to treat disease, they face few regulatory hurdles. There's no rigorous vetting process to get U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval; supplements have no FDA approval process. The FDA only gets involved if they're shown to be unsafe, misbranded or adulterated once they're on the market.

Yet in 2025 alone, U.S. consumers spent an estimated $60 billion (or more) on dietary and over-the-counter supplements, their popularity fueled by an aging population and a burgeoning wellness industry replete with charismatic online influencers.

Who wouldn't want to simply take a “magic pill” to boost a flagging immune system, sharpen a foggy mind and/or protect them from ― or even eliminate ― cancer?

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. That's why in addition to researching and developing cures for cancer, Fred Hutch scientists have drilled down into a slew of supplements to see whether they offer any protection against disease. Their data point to a consistent theme: supplements have not been shown to prevent cancer and, in some cases, may actually increase cancer risk.

What's more, some supplements can interfere with cancer treatments, something not all patients realize. Many people assume they're harmless, even beneficial, and don't think to tell their doctors.

Curious about the benefits (and potential harms) of dietary and other over-the-counter supplements?

See the following Study Results 

      

Dietary supplements are wildly popular, but large clinical trials and other research by Fred Hutch Cancer Center scientists show that many common dietary supplements offer little proven benefit for cancer prevention, and in some cases may even increase cancer risk.

“It would be nice if we had a pill that we could take that could protect us from disease,” said Garnet Anderson, PhD, director of Fred Hutch’s Public Health Sciences Division (PHS) and holder of the Fred Hutch 40th Anniversary Endowed Chair. “But it’s not that easy.”

Initially created to treat nutritional deficiencies, dietary supplements are now sold as a panacea for nearly all ills ― including cancer ― and unlike drugs used to treat disease, they face few regulatory hurdles. There’s no rigorous vetting process to get U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval; supplements have no FDA approval process. The FDA only gets involved if they’re shown to be unsafe, misbranded or adulterated once they’re on the market.

Yet in 2025 alone, U.S. consumers spent an estimated $60 billion (or more) on dietary and over-the-counter supplements, their popularity fueled by an aging population and a burgeoning wellness industry replete with charismatic online influencers.

Who wouldn’t want to simply take a “magic pill” to boost a flagging immune system, sharpen a foggy mind and/or protect them from ― or even eliminate ― cancer?

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. That’s why in addition to researching and developing cures for cancer, Fred Hutch scientists have drilled down into a slew of supplements to see whether they offer any protection against disease. Their data point to a consistent theme: supplements have not been shown to prevent cancer and, in some cases, may actually increase cancer risk.

What’s more, some supplements can interfere with cancer treatments, something not all patients realize. Many people assume they’re harmless, even beneficial, and don’t think to tell their doctors.

Curious about the benefits (and potential harms) of dietary and other over-the-counter supplements? Read on for their findings:

Cancer and nutrition: What you need to know

Debunking Common Nutrition & Physical Therapy MythsFred Hutch dietitians and physical therapy experts debunk common myths.

What is fiber? Fred Hutch clinical dietitians Ray Palko and Suz Stein explain fiber, why it’s important, and how it can affect cancer risks.

Supplements are not the same as food

First and foremost, most large research organizations including the American Cancer Society advise against taking supplements as a way to prevent cancer. In fact, not taking dietary supplements for cancer prevention is one of AICR’s(American Institute for Cancer Research) top 10 cancer prevention tips.

Why not get your vitamins and minerals in pill form? Isn’t it more efficient?

“Research shows that supplements don’t offer the same benefits as eating whole foods,” the AICR advises. “When you eat whole foods, your body absorbs a range of vitamins, minerals, amino acids and other compounds that work together to protect your health. But when vitamins, minerals, fiber and other food substances are isolated into supplements, they may not be absorbed as well by our bodies.”

In other words, getting your beta-carotene from carrots and sweet potatoes is fine, but taking beta-carotene in pill form is not. Read on to discover why.

Some supplements can increase cancer risk

Cancer prevention is a big part of Fred Hutch’s research, and the scientists here have conducted many large randomized clinical trials — the gold standard in science — to determine if dietary supplements are helpful for the prevention of cancer and other diseases. Some of those trials had unexpected results.

The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) was launched in 2001 to see if Vitamin E and selenium supplementation could prevent prostate cancer in men. Contrary to expectations, the data showed no protective benefit. Instead, they found vitamin E supplements increased prostate cancer risk by 17% and selenium raised the risk of high‑grade prostate cancer in some men.

The Carotene and Retinol Efficacy Trial (CARET), another NCI-funded trial led by Fred Hutch, was launched to study the cancer prevention capabilities and safety of a daily combination of the antioxidant beta-carotene and retinyl palmitate (Vitamin A) in people at risk for lung cancer. Instead of helping, they found beta carotene and vitamin A supplements increased lung cancer incidence and death among heavy smokers or workers exposed to asbestos.

Fred Hutch's Dr. Heather Greenlee (left) speaks on a panel at the 2024 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Medical director of Fred Hutch’s Integrative Medicine Program, Dr. Heather Greenlee (left) speaks on supplement and cannabis use among breast cancer patients at the 2024 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium Photo by Diane Mapes / Fred Hutch News Service

Fiber is definitely your friend

What does work? Research consistently points to dietary fiber ― found in fruits, vegetables, legumes, whole grains, nuts and seeds ― as the remedy that improves health in a number of ways.

“Fiber has so many roles and provides so many different benefits for our bodies,” said Fred Hutch registered dietitian Suz Stein, MDM, RD, in this video. “In terms of cardiovascular health, fiber can help lower cholesterol by drawing it out of our body. Fiber is also really important in terms of keeping us regular, it helps with blood sugar control, it helps our gut microbiome and is really amazing for cancer prevention.”

Fred Hutch’s Heather Greenlee, ND, PhD, MPH, a professor in the PHS and Clinical Research divisions, said fiber is especially protective against colorectal cancer and advises we eat 30 grams or more of it a day (only around 10% of Americans meet this fiber goal).

“Emphasize plant foods,” she said. “They’re packed with fiber and nutrients, including those that are anti-inflammatory. And plant protein is more affordable than meat. It’s also lower in saturated fat and higher in fiber.”

What about fiber laxatives? A 2014 Fred Hutch study looking at laxative use found soluble-fiber laxatives offered the same protective effects as dietary fiber, which reduces colorectal cancer risk by diluting carcinogens in the stool, encouraging growth of healthy bacteria in the colon and increasing stool transit time.

Non-fiber laxatives, however, were a problem. People who took non-fiber laxatives increased their risk of developing colorectal cancer by nearly 50%. Fiber-based laxatives lowered the risk of colorectal cancer by 56%.

Photo of Kerry McMillen in a lovely yellow sweater
Fred Hutch registered dietitian Kerry McMillen said the patients she sees are often surprised to learn that food is important in cancer prevention and survivorship.Fred Hutch file photo 

Can supplements cause harmful interactions?

Absolutely, it’s one reason why Fred Hutch cancer researchers have continued to study their use.

A 2008 Fred Hutch study found that up to 81% of cancer survivors use dietary supplements and that up to 68% of those who do, don’t tell their oncologists. That’s a huge problem because, as study author Cornelia Ulrich, PhD, pointed out “some vitamins, such as folic acid, may be involved in cancer progression while others, such as St. John’s wort, can interfere with chemotherapy.”

Research has shown that St. John’s wort reduces the effectiveness of cyclosporine, an immunosuppressive drug used in stem-cell and solid organ transplantation, as well as indinavir, a protease inhibitor used to treat HIV infection. There are other documented interactions, as well, which is why Fred Hutch has continued to investigate dietary supplements and what effect (good, bad or ugly) they may have on people undergoing cancer therapy.

Even the expense of supplements can cause issues for patients.

“Supplements are not inexpensive,” McMillen said. “And the expense of these unproven supplements can impact the dollars people have to spend on real food. It’s a real scenario.”

Greenlee, medical director of Fred Hutch’s Integrative Medicine Program, said some patients don’t realize supplements can potentially reduce the effectiveness of cancer treatment or cause complications, pointing to these potential interactions at the 2024 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium:

  • Fish oils and omega-3a supplements, said to provide anti-inflammatory support, can cause bleeding.
  • Turmeric supplements, touted as “anti-cancer therapy,” can cause bleeding, as well as estrogenic activity and CYP interactions (often implicated in drug-drug interactions).
  • Melatonin supplements can also cause bleeding, CYP1A2 interactions (linked to cancer risk) and also has estrogenic properties.
  • Medicinal mushrooms supplements (including turkey tail, lion’s mane, reishi) are taken for immune support, but they can cause bleeding, CYP interactions, liver damage and more.


 

Saturday, February 14, 2026

Do whatever it is you need to do to ensure we do not sell out Ukraine.

 


14 February 2026 - Barack Obama Addresses What's Going On In The U.S .of A.

Hours ago interview with Barack Obama. 
Oh, bookmark this YouTube channel with Brian Tyler Cohen - one of the best. 


Navalny Was Poisoned With Frog Toxin, European Governments Say...

 When Alexi was killed my hope and dream of a free Russia died with him. 

Heartbreaking.

 

The toxin was found in the body of the Russian dissident Aleksei A. Navalny, who died in prison two years ago, five governments said, challenging Russia’s official account.



 "Aleksei A. Navalny was most likely poisoned by a toxin found in a South American frog, five European countries said on Saturday, making the most concrete Western accusation yet that Russia’s leading opposition figure was murdered by his government in an Arctic prison two years ago.

Samples taken from Mr. Navalny’s body showed the presence of a toxic substance, epibatidine, according to a statement released by the foreign ministries of Britain, France, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands.

“Epibatidine is a toxin found in poison dart frogs in South America. It is not found naturally in Russia,” the statement read.

“Only the Russian government had the means, motive and opportunity to deploy this lethal toxin against Alexei Navalny during his imprisonment in Russia,” it read.

The finding directly challenges Russia’s official account of Mr. Navalny’s death, which was that he died of natural causes. Instead, the statement said, the presence of a foreign toxin shows that the Russian authorities most likely killed Mr. Navalny, who was the government’s most prominent political opponent when he died in a maximum-security prison in the Russian Arctic in 2024.

It was also clear evidence that Russia has not ended its use of chemical weapons, disregarding international law, the statement added.

Maria V. Zakharova, a spokeswoman for the Russian Foreign Ministry, dismissed the statement as a “P.R. campaign to deflect attention from pressing issues in the West.” She told the state-owned Tass news agency that the Kremlin would not comment in detail about the poisoning accusation until it had seen detailed test results.

The U.S. government did not immediately comment on the European countries’ statement.

Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, said poisoning political opponents was characteristic of Russia under President Vladimir V. Putin, along with invading neighboring countries and silencing journalists. She called Mr. Navalny’s death “a cowardly act from a frightened leader.”

“Russia has long acted as a terrorist state, relying on terrorist methods,” Ms. von der Leyen said on social media. “This is the true face of Russia today.”

Yulia Navalnaya, Mr. Navalny’s widow, speaking to reporters on Saturday at the Munich Security Conference, described the European countries’ statement as validation of the Navalny team’s longstanding assertion that Mr. Putin was personally responsible for Mr. Navalny’s death.

“I want to repeat: Vladimir Putin killed my husband, Aleksei Navalny, using a chemical weapon,” she said. “Of course, it’s not news that Vladimir Putin is a killer, but now we have yet another direct piece of proof.”

 

Russian scientists have experimented with synthesizing epibatidine, according to a research paper published in a Russian scientific journal in 2013. Some of those experiments were carried out by scientists employed by a Russian state research institute that developed the Novichok nerve agent before the breakup of the Soviet Union.

That institute, the Russian Scientific Institute for Organic Chemistry and Technology, was tasked with supervising the destruction of Russian chemical weapons such as Novichok at the end of the Cold War.

The 2013 paper did not refer to using epibatidine as a poison, instead calling it a “non-opioid analgesic,” which, unlike an opioid, would not cause an addiction.

In 2020, Mr. Navalny survived an attempted assassination by poisoning when he collapsed on a flight to Moscow from the Siberian city of Tomsk. As he recovered in Berlin, the German authorities said he had been poisoned with Novichok, which also was used against Sergei V. Skripal, a former Soviet spy, and his daughter in a 2018 attack in England. They survived.

The Russian scientific institute was sanctioned by the European Union in connection with the 2020 poisoning of Mr. Navalny, and what the bloc described as its role in continuing to develop Novichok, even after it was supposed to be destroying chemical weapons. Russian officials denied that accusation.

Aides to Mr. Navalny have said that when Mr. Navalny died, he was close to being released in a prisoner exchange with the West. They argued that by killing him, the Kremlin would have removed Mr. Navalny as a factor in the negotiations over the exchange. Russia and Belarus ended up releasing 16 people, including several political prisoners and the American journalist Evan Gershkovich, in an exchange in August 2024.

News reports said in 2024 that U.S. intelligence officials did not believe Mr. Putin had personally ordered Mr. Navalny’s death, though they saw him as ultimately responsible because of the conditions Mr. Navalny had endured since his imprisonment in early 2021.

 

Russia released Mr. Navalny’s body to his mother after a weeklong battle over custody of his remains. Last September, his widow, Ms. Navalnaya, said her team had managed to transfer some biological samples from his body abroad, and that two laboratories had found that he was poisoned, but she did not provide more details about those conclusions.

She said that a photograph of her husband’s prison cell showed vomit on the floor on the day he died, and that excerpts from official incident reports submitted by five prison officials suggested that he suffered heavy vomiting and convulsions shortly before he died.

 

Six months after his death, Russia’s Investigative Committee refused to open a criminal investigation into Mr. Navalny’s death. It said in a report that a combination of medical factors had killed him. In a report to his family, the committee listed hypertension, chronic hepatitis and a damaged vertebrae as contributing to his death.

An increase in blood had disturbed his regular heart rhythm and overloaded his heart, the committee found. One of Mr. Navalny’s former doctors described the diagnosis as “implausible.”

 

After Mr. Navalny’s 2020 poisoning, he released a video of himself — posing as an aide to a senior Russian security official — extracting a confession from one of his would-be assassins, essentially confirming the involvement of the Russian intelligence services. He was told the poison had been planted in his underwear at his hotel sometime before he boarded the plane.

He flew back to Russia knowing he was likely to be arrested on his return. He was arrested as soon as he landed.

Mr. Navalny was given multiple prison sentences that would most likely have kept him locked up at least until 2031. Despite harsh conditions, including repeated stints in solitary confinement, he maintained a presence on social media while members of his team who were in exile continued to publish investigations into corruption among Russia’s elite."