Rhonda Patrick· PhD
Smokers who consumed at least four and a half servings of raw cruciferous vegetables a month had a 55% reduction in lung cancer risk compared with those who consume less than two and a half servings per month.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Smokers who consumed at least four and a half servings of raw cruciferous vegetables a month had a 55% reduction in lung cancer risk compared with those who consume less than two and a half servings per month.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
There's been a lot of research on the profound associations between cruciferous vegetable consumption and risk of cancer. For example, one study found that men that ate between three to five servings of cruciferous vegetables a week had a 40% decrease in prostate cancer risk compared to men that ate less than one serving per week.
Tobacco smoke is loaded with carcinogens that form DNA adducts, which is why it's really nasty stuff that increases the risk of several different types of cancer, including lung and bladder cancer. It also may explain why just a few extra servings of cruciferous vegetables a month may lower the risk of lung cancer by 55% like we just discussed a while ago. But what about the study on bladder cancer? Here too, we've got pretty good cause to believe that it's the isothiocinates.