Chemoprevention Effects on Bronchial Squamous Metaplasia by Folate and Vitamin B12 in Heavy Smokers | Makoto Saito, M.D.; Harubumi Kato, M.D., F.G.G.P.; Takaaki Tsuchida, M.D.; Ghimori Konaka, M.D., F.G.G.P.
Article Published: 1994/08/02
Funding Source: Smoking Research Foundation
Published By: Chest, 106, 2 August 1994
Further Information Complementary to the Heimburger study published elsewhere in this section, this study reiterates the roles of Vitamin B12 and folate in assuaging for bronchial squamous metaplasia. Saito attempted improvement on Heimburger's research by utilizing closer examination of the lungs. Nevertheless such examination involves subjectivity, the number of cases studied is again small, and as Heimburger had done, Saito states the possibility of a beneficial effect of B12 and folate as just that, a possibility, which is how it should be taken. For further and more general comments on this issue, click here.
Specific to this study, several points should be noted.
The first one is commonplace – that is, the belief that smoking “causes” lung cancer MUST be stated. As it is the product of a belief and not of a scientifically demonstrated fact, it becomes necessary to craft words carefully as indeed to project that belief, but without committing to a scientific statement that would imply scientific demonstration. For example, in the first page (496) we read (emphasis added):
“Bronchial squamous metaplasia
easily occurs due to smoking. … Smoking is one risk factor related to a high incidence of lung cancer.”
The word “statistically” should have been added in front of the word “related,” but – as statistics by definition cannot prove causality – apparently it seemed more appropriate to leave it out.
Furthermore, on page 4 (499) we read (emphasis added):
“The fact that
Here one should note the statement of an “inability” to stop smoking, which implies at the same time the
most patients with squamous metaplasia have a history of smoking is a good argument to dissuade patients from smoking. However, many patients were not able to stop smoking despite encouragement to do so and frequent bronchoscopic examinations. The present study suggested that even with continued exposure to the cause, or , of the squamous metaplasia, attributable cause , ie smoking, the supplementation of diet with folate and vitamin B12 could have a beneficial effect.”
will to do so (choice to continue is implicitly excluded), and the addiction theory. In a nutshell, here is the hidden ideological statement: “Who would not like to stop smoking — if only he could?” Enjoyment, and also free choice, simply "do not compute" within technocratic brains. Smoking, free choice, and enjoyment are all "diseases" in the twisted view of Healthists.
After purging the embedded political lingo, the reader can conclude that:
Also, the small size of the study should be noted: Squamous Metaplasia is
not a disease unique to smokers (of course, as we know, “smoking-attributable” disease is unique to smokers); no The “cause” (smoking) is
not a cause, but an attributed cause – that is, a scientifically bogus and demonstrably fallacious opinion; Points 1 and 2 are confirmed and reinforced by the “ie, smoking” statement.
“The medication group originally consisted of 27 subjects, but 6 dropped out, leaving 21 patients with 31 lesions. Controls consisted of 24 subjects, but 7 dropped out, leaving 17 patients with 22 lesions.”
Keeping justified scepticism in mind, it may be said the study attempts objectivity in noting measurable improvements in the subjects treated, which evidentially support Heimburger's suggestion of a potentially important role of folate and vitamin B12 in the treatment of this medical condition. This would seem to be good news for smokers or for anybody with the condition.
Points noted regarding the related earlier research by Heimburger also apply here. Saito's paper would likely never have been published if he had not added caveats suggesting smokers must be hounded to quit and must never be given any counsel other than total abstention from tobacco.
This research has been little noted and has received no apparent follow-up in recent years while politically motivated (i.e. prohibitionist) studies are funded and touted to the hilt. Perhaps the nutrients studied here are particularly beneficial to smokers. If so the "public health" establishment does not care.
Indeed the establishment is antagonistic to anything which could ameliorate political momentum toward smoking cessation and prohibition. The bug-eyed "public health" message has been, and remains,: quit smoking, or die, and good riddance to heretics.
We remind that readers with interest in Saito's study will also be interested in the Heimburger 1988 article.
For a complete epidemiological list of the suspected causes of lung cancer other then smoking, complete with bibliography, please click here.