No announcement yet.

Did you all know this ?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Did you all know this ?

    10/09/06 -- pT1-pNx-Mx-S0

  • #2
    The carcinogenic properties of benzene have been known for some time. Yet, I am extremely skeptical of the alarmist tone of the Wikipedia article. I was particularly troubled by the unreferenced claim that "Within recent years, some soft drinks have been found to contain high levels of benzene."

    An entire paragraph of the article is devoted to the assumption that benzene in soft drinks is formed by the reaction of benzoate with ascorbate in the presence of metal ions. While such a reaction is, in principle, feasible, it has a thermodynamic barrier that precludes it from taking place under the conditions of storage and consumption of the soft drinks. I looked up the original citation noted in the paragraph from J. Agr. Food Chem., and there are several items of note in the paper. To keep things simple, the conditions for the formation of benzene require large amounts of metal catalyst at a pH<2. Carbonation of a soft drink will make the beverage acidic, but only to a pH of about 5, which is too high for the "optimal" production of benzene according to the article. Similarly, soft drinks likely do not contain the large concentrations of Fe or Cu catalyst necessary for the reaction to take place.

    I really think that there are far worse issues with drinking soda than getting cancer from trace amounts of benzene that might be there. Their exceedingly high sugar content as well as their acidity come to mind.

    There is one other item worthy of note. While Wikipedia may provide useful information on some topics, one should take some those articles with a grain of salt, particularly because of the lack of oversight in their production. It's always best to go to the primary literature when it comes to claims of this sort.
    "Life moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it." -Ferris Bueller
    11.22.06 -Dx the day before Thanksgiving
    12.09.06 -Rt I/O; 100% seminoma, multifocal; Stage I-A; Surveillance; Six years out! I consider myself cured.


    • #3
      I have been taking classes at Baker College Online for two years, and I was told at least that long ago that wikipedia could not be used for research information.

      Son Anthony DX 12/11/06
      L/O 12/20/06 Stage IIIA, 95% EC, 5% Yolk Sac
      4XEP 1/29-4/6/ 07
      AFP started increasing3 wks later
      Residual abdominal mass found on CT
      RPLND 6/8/07
      Cancer in pathology-
      80% mature teratoma, 20% Yolk Sac. --
      No adjuvent chemo and
      AFP normalised

      July 22, 2010 ---- 3 years all clear!


      • #4
        Originally posted by mstlyn
        I have been taking classes at Baker College Online for two years, and I was told at least that long ago that wikipedia could not be used for research information.
        That doesn't surprise me one bit. My kids used to enjoy "editing" the various articles there, so you can't trust that what you read is the truth. An article may have once started out as the truth, but who knows if it is anymore?



        • #5
          Don't get me wrong all!

          I did cross reference this and trust me do some shopping and you will see this artical is not hocus pocus (spelling) I agree with Fed-- the surger and acid are for sure..
          10/09/06 -- pT1-pNx-Mx-S0