New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Study Suggests Vitamin C Is a Double-Edged Sword

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


When it comes to preventing cancer, vitamin C may do as much harm as good, researchers now say. According to the results of a study described today in the journal Science, the well-known antioxidant can also produce DNA-damaging compounds. And mutations caused by such agents are known from tumors. Though the findings do not indicate that vitamin C causes cancer or that people should eliminate it from their diets, they may help explain why supplements of the vitamin have proved ineffective at combating cancer.

Scientists have known for some time that vitamin C acts to render free radicals harmless. But some have wondered whether it might also prompt compounds known as lipid hydroperoxides to degrade into DNA-damaging genotoxins in the same way that certain metal ions do. To assess vitamin C's effects, Ian A. Blair of the University of Pennsylvania and his colleagues added it to test tubes containing lipid hydroperoxides. The vitamin, they found, induced genotoxin formation more than twice as effectively as the metal ions did. Taking that into consideration, "it's possible that vitamin C isn't working in cancer prevention studies because it's causing as much damage as it's preventing," Blair remarks.

Looking forward, the researchers plan to investigate whether vitamin C spurs genotoxin production in intact cells. In the meantime, however, the argument that it can stave off cancer is unsupported. The logic some researchers have followed in recommending vitamin C supplements to cancer patients "is that fruits, vegetables, et cetera, contain vitamin C; these foods prevent cancer; thus vitamin C prevents cancer," Blair notes. "But our message is that it's the total diet that's important, not just one antioxidant."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and was formerly senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe