_ 1_4 _
Scientific Reductionism
WHEN OUR NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES (NAS) Diet, Nutrition and
Cancer Committee was deciding how to summarize the research on diet
and cancer, we included chapters on individual nutrients and nutrient
groups. This was the way research had been done, one nutrient at a
time. For example, the chapter on vitamins included information on
the relationships between cancer and vitamins A, C, E and some B vita-
mins. However, in the report summary, we recommended getting these
nutrients from fbods, not pills or supplements. We explicitly stated that
"These recommendations apply only to foods as sources of nutrients-
not to dietary supplements of individual nutrients.'"
The report quickly found its way to the corporate world, which saw
a major money-making opportunity. They ignored our cautionary mes-
sage distinguishing foods from pills and began advertising vitamin pills
as products that could prevent cancer, arrogantly citing our report as
justification. This was a great opening to a vast new market-commer-
cial vitamin supplements.
General Nutrition, Inc., the company with thousands of General
Nutrition Centers, started selling a product called "Healthy Greens,"
a multivitamin supplement of vitamins A, C and E, beta-carotene, se-
lenium and a miniscule half-gram of dehydrated vegetables. Then they
advertised their product by making the following claims^2 :
[The Diet, Nutrition and Cancer reportl recommended we increase
among other things our amounts of specific vegetables to help
safeguard our bodies against the risk of certain forms of cancer.
269