Monday September 4, 2006 | 2 comments
After taking more than a year to respond to a tea health claim petition as a cancer preventative, the FDA in June 2005 came back with a real stinker of a decision to deny the request and state further that it was “highly unlikely” that tea had any cancer preventive effect. No one expected the FDA to categorically state that tea definitely prevents cancer, but they should have acknowledged by allowing a limited claim that there is substantial evidence of tea’s anti-cancer effect.
The FDA took an excessively hard line by eliminating as evidence research that was done outside the US, and by ignoring high quality studies that had not yet been replicated. In addition, the FDA decided to discount studies done in subjects already having cancer. They also decided not to allow meta-analyses, since they said they could not evaluate the methods of the individual studies upon which those meta-analyses were based (I guess they did not feel like looking up the original studies). They also decided to totally ignore animal and in vitro studies that are crucial to support the believability of human studies. As well they ignored all observational studies, saying that they could not identify the activity of a tea substance (EGCG) mentioned in the petition.
Overall the FDA chose to ignore large bodies of evidence in favor of a health benefit for tea. I cannot speculate as to why they felt they wanted to deprive the American public of its endorsement, but the reason was certainly not based on the preponderance of evidence. To read the FDA’s decision go here.
Read additional commentary about the FDA
The FDA has long been afraid of advocating beneficial foods for the public. Just do a little research on the herb stevia and you’ll find a long history of coersion by outside forces with an interest in quashing one or another natural substance. This is just one example of the FDA’s reluctance to take a stand on healthy diet and lifestyle issues. This cowardice is rife in Washington — take the USDA’s Food Pyramid for instance, with it’s preponderance of meat and dairy instead of fruits and vegetables. Don’t expect the American government to stand up for our health. Maybe with a change in leadership (meaning perhaps less meddling by the White House), the FDA will see the light. I know how I intend to vote in 2008…
Although the research base on the health benefits of dietary supplements and herbals has grown in quality and breadth over the past decade, well-designed clinical trials, considered the gold standard for scientific research in this area, are generally not yet available. What is the current state of research on the health benefits of tea? In particular, how convincing is the exisiting evidence, and what additional studies might be required?