1. Contradicts everything previously known
    Barbara Holtzman Barbara Holtzman United States says:
    June 21, 2010 at 8:25 AM

    This study contradicts every other study ever done. Fluoride? it was my first thought that the water used could be a confounder. I think when a single study is so contrary to previous studies, that you have to look at the researchers, their methods, and their study population, rather than "what is it about tea?" What about the genetic risk in the study population? If you are at zero risk of RA, then what? More to check here, and I will look up the study and do so.

    Reply
    • I need a cup of tea to calm my nerves
      Richard Carlson Richard Carlson United States says:
      February 21, 2011 at 12:21 AM

      Barbara Holtzman:  Yes, "look up the study", and let us know if you can find a few holes in it (even a pinch of reasonable doubt would be nice).
      R. Carlson

      Reply
    • Barbara and Teaman
      Flo Flo United States says:
      July 4, 2011 at 8:49 PM

      Teaman and Barbara:

      This correlation is very well documented all over the world.  There are many studies linkibng skeletal fluorosis (you can call it arthritis if you want) and Camellia Sinensis in high tea consumption countries.  

      "Peer reviewed" studies are funded by moneyed interests to support their corporations and endsure ever increasing profit.  The tea industry has a huge lobby as does the coffee industry.  Do you really think they are interested in all your scientific methods that would come to the conclusion that the one product that is creating wealth for so few is harmful to their customers.  Do you really think the care?  "Peer reviewed" = Corporate approval

      Reply
      • david ankrapp on Too much tea raises the risk of rheumatoid arthritis: Study
        david ankrapp david ankrapp United States says:
        October 13, 2013 at 9:02 AM

        Being a research scientist, "Peer-reviewed" means that the data and the conclusions in the article were reviewed by other competent scientists in that particular field prior to publication (in this case, nutrition and disease)...it does NOT mean that the research was supported my 'moneyed interests".  Please don't make blanket statements about something you obviously don't know about...

        Also, when studies "appear" to contradict themselves, it usually means that there were several variables (also known as "confounding factors") in the studies that were not accounted for...it is VERY difficult for any study to account for ALL the variables between people that link diet to disease (i.e. ethnicity, lifestyle, disease history, inherent (i.e. genetic) metabolic differences, home & work environmental, hours of sleep, stress levels, etc.), these variable are endless...and even very well-designed studies can't account for all the variability between humans....

        Reply
    • The Study actually confirms many others..
      Daeran Gall Daeran Gall Canada says:
      January 15, 2016 at 2:57 PM

      www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3896455/

      Reply
The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
(Logout)
Post

Terms

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

Provide Feedback