May 28, 2013

Fat Tuesday: Sugar, obesity and the big C

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

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.

By Cesarachp, via Wikimedia Commons

If you thought heart disease and diabetes were the main problems associated with obesity and overweight, think again. The latest news is that being obese or overweight is a major factor in cancer risk and severity. Science writer Sarah C. P. Williams does a nice analysis of the available evidence in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Even worse, once you’ve been fat, losing the weight may not reduce your future chances of having cancer. Experiments in mice indicate a lasting effect of being overweight on cancer risk, even after slimming down. The relationship between how long, and how long ago, you were overweight and your cancer risks remains unclear.

Gary Taubes, author of “Good Calories, Bad Calories” and “Why We Get Fat” tracks the problem to sugar, and explains that many human cancers rely on insulin, and a related hormone known as insulin-like growth factor, to grow and multiply. He convincingly argues that sugar intake, which causes chronically elevated insulin levels and insulin resistance, is the cause of many cancers. Taubes says he’s scared of sugar. Maybe we should all be.

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