This new study was highlighted in yesterday's LA Times. Apparently a review of extant research (NOT a meta-analysis--an important distinction) has found little to no effect of the kind of high-vegetable-content, low-meat-content diet that I and many other cancer survivors try to follow. In particular, the article says that the low-fat, high-fiber, high-veggie diet may not do much good.
Although I find this disappointing and a little discouraging, it probably won't dissuade me from seeing the low-fat, high-fiber, high-veggie diet as ideal for preventing recurrence. a) It tends to keep weight lower, and weight is a demonstrated risk factor; b) It tends to emphasize foods closer to nature and thus less processed and with fewer chemical additives. Though we don't yet know the role of such chemicals in cancer risk, it seems like avoiding them may lessen the chance of some kind of harmful exposure; c) Even without supporting data, the logic behind the diet makes sense to me, and the corollary benefits to cardiovascular function and organ health make me feel like it could increase overall health and thus leave me less vulnerable to cancer risk.
Popular VideoSNL is not a fan of the Trump administration, and it shows with every new skit they produce. Do you think they need to tone it down?
Ultimately, it seems unlikely to cause HARM, so why not keep it up? (Of course, I write this after having guacamole, tamales, and refried beans for dinner--so maybe it's not "keep it up" so much as "start it up again"...!)