The Foods With the Highest Aspirin Content

The results of a recent aspirin meta-analyses suggesting a reduction of cancer mortality by about one-third in subjects taking daily low-dose aspirin “can justly be called astounding.” Yet the protection from “Western” cancers enjoyed by those eating more traditional plant-centered diets, such as the Japanese, “is even more dramatic.” I examine this in my video Plants with Aspirin Aspirations.

Before the Westernization of their diets, animal products made up only about 5 percent or less of the Japanese diet. At 0:37 in my video, you can see the difference in cancer mortality of U.S. men and women compared with Japanese men and women. “[A]ge-adjusted death rates from cancers of the colon, prostate, breast, and ovary were on the order of 5–10-fold lower in Japan than in the US at that time; mortality from pancreatic cancer, leukemias, and lymphomas was 3–4-fold lower in Japan. But this phenomenon was by no means isolated to Japan; Western cancers were likewise comparatively rare in other societies where “people ate plant-based diets.”

“The cancer protection afforded by lifelong consumption of a plant-based diet, in conjunction with leanness and insulin sensitivity (which tend to be promoted by low-fat plant-based diets)…may be very substantial indeed.” Therefore, a “lifestyle protocol for minimizing cancer risk” may include a whole-food plant-based diet.

If part of this cancer protection arises out of the aspirin phytonutrients in plants, are there any plants in particular that are packed with salicylates? Though salicylic acid, the main active ingredient in aspirin, is “ubiquitously present in fruits and vegetables,” the highest concentrations are found in herbs and spices.

Red chili powder, paprika, and turmeric contain a lot of salicylates, but cumin is about 1 percent aspirin by weight. Eating a teaspoon of cumin is like taking a baby aspirin. (See the table at 1:54 in my video for details on other herbs and spices, and their salicylate content.) “Consequently, populations that incorporate substantial amounts of spices in foods may have markedly higher daily intakes of salicylates. Indeed, it has been suggested that the low incidence of colorectal cancer among Indian populations may be ascribed in part to high exposure to dietary salicylates throughout life from spice consumption.”

“The population of rural India, with an incidence of colorectal cancer which is one of the lowest in the world, has a diet that could be extremely rich in salicylic acid. It contains substantial amounts of fruits, vegetables, and cereals flavored with large quantities of herbs and spices.” Some have proposed it’s the curcumin in the spice turmeric (which I discuss in detail in my video Turmeric Curcumin and Colon Cancer), but it may be the salicylic acid in cumin—and the spicier the better.

A spicy vegetable vindaloo may have four times the salicylates of a milder Madras-style veggie dish. As you can see from the chart at 2:55 in my video, after just one meal, we get an aspirin spike in our bloodstream like we just took an aspirin. So, eating flavor-filled vegetarian meals, with herbs and spices, may be more chemoprotective—that is, more protective against cancer—than regular, blander vegetarian meals.

We may also want to eat organic produce. “Because salicylic acid is a defense hormone of plants, the concentration…is increased when plants become stressed,” like when they are bitten by bugs (unlike pesticide-laden plants). Indeed, soups made from organic vegetables were found to have nearly six times more salicylic acid than soups prepared from conventionally grown ingredients.

We should also choose whole foods. Whole-grain breads, which are high in salicylic acid, contain about 100 times more phytochemicals than white bread: 800 phytochemicals compared to 8.

“Interest in the potential beneficial effects of dietary salicylates has arisen, in part, because of the extensive literature on the disease-preventative effects of Aspirin™. However, it should not be forgotten that plant products found to contain salicylic acid are generally rich sources of other phenolic acids…[and many] also have a marked anti-inflammatory and redox-related bioactivity [that is, antioxidant activity] in mammalian cells. Their potential protective effects should not be overlooked. In this context, the importance of dietary salicylic acid should not perhaps be over emphasised…Indeed, some believe that ‘salicylic acid deficiency’ has important public health implications and that it should be classed as an essential vitamin, namely ‘Vitamin S’.”

What they’re saying is that we should all eat a lot of plants.


If you missed the first two videos in this series, see Should We All Take Aspirin to Prevent Heart Disease? and Should We All Take Aspirin to Prevent Cancer?.

The drug-like anti-inflammatory power of certain plant foods may make them a risky proposition during pregnancy. See Caution: Anti-Inflammatory Foods in the Third Trimester.

Herbs and spices not only have some of the most anti-inflammatory properties, but they also are well-rounded protectants. See:

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live presentations:

Vitamin D Supplements for Reducing Cancer Mortality

It all started with a famous study entitled “Do sunlight and vitamin D reduce the likelihood of colon cancer?” that was published in 1980. Johns Hopkins University researchers were trying to figure out why states like New Mexico and Arizona have only about half the colon cancer rates of states like New York, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Could it be because New Mexicans and Arizonans get so much more sun? The researchers proposed that perhaps vitamin D, known as the sunshine vitamin, is a protective factor against colon cancer. Since then, sun exposure has also been associated with lower rates of 14 other types of cancer.

As I discuss in my video Do Vitamin D Supplements Reduce the Risk of Dying from Cancer?, vitamin D may also affect cancer survival. Higher blood levels of vitamin D were associated with lower mortality of patients with colorectal cancer. How much lower? Nearly half the mortality. And, the higher the vitamin D levels, the lower the death rate appeared to fall. This may explain why the survival rate from colon cancer may depend in part “on the season of diagnosis.” The risk of rapid death is lowest if you’re diagnosed in the fall after you’ve spent the summer building up your vitamin D stores. Other risk factors could be seasonal, too. For example, perhaps people are taking advantage of the fall harvest and eating healthier, which might explain lower risk in the autumn. Additionally, “[a]lcohol intake is a risk factor and may be highest in the winter season…” What about physical activity? In the summer, we may be more likely to be outside running around, not only getting more sun, but also getting more exercise, which may itself be protective.

These kinds of studies just provide circumstantial evidence. Establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between colon cancer and vitamin D deficiency using observational studies is challenging because of confounding factors, such as exercise habits—so-called lurking variables. For example, there may be a tight correlation between ice cream sales and drowning deaths, but that doesn’t mean ice cream causes drowning. A more likely explanation is that there is a lurking third variable, like hot weather in summertime, that explains why drowning deaths are highest when ice cream consumption is also at its highest.

This actually happened with hormone replacement therapy. Women taking drugs like Premarin appeared to have 50 percent less risk of heart disease, so doctors prescribed it to women by the millions. But, if we dig a little deeper into the data, we find that, indeed, women taking estrogen had 50 percent lower risk of dying from heart disease, but they also had a 50 percent lower risk of dying from accidents and homicide, so it probably wasn’t the drug. The only way to know for sure is to put it to the test in a randomized, clinical trial, where half the women are given the drug and we see what happens. A decade later, such a study was done. Instead of having a 50 percent drop in risk, within a year of being given the hormone pills, heart attack and death rates shot up 50 percent. In retrospect, the lurking variable was likely socioeconomic class. Poor women are less likely to be prescribed hormone replacement therapy and more likely to be murdered and die of heart disease. Because of the lurking variable, a drug we now know to be dangerous had initially appeared to be protective.

Besides lurking variables, there’s also the possibility of reverse causation. Perhaps low vitamin D levels didn’t worsen the cancer. Instead, maybe the cancer worsened the vitamin D levels. This may be unlikely, since tumors don’t appear to directly affect vitamin D levels, but cancer treatment might. Even simple knee surgery can cause vitamin D levels to drop dramatically within hours, thought to be due simply to the inflammatory insult of cutting into someone. So, maybe that could help explain the link between lower vitamin D and lower survival. And, cancer patients may be spending less time running around the beach. So, yes: Higher vitamin D levels are associated with improved survival in colorectal cancer, and the same has been found for breast cancer. In fact, there is about double the risk of breast cancer recurrence and death in women with the lowest vitamin D levels. What’s more, higher vitamin D levels are associated with longer survival with ovarian cancer, as well as having better outcomes for other cancers like lymphoma. But, the bottom-line, as we learned with hormone replacement, is that we have to put it to the test. There weren’t a lot of randomized controlled trials on vitamin D supplements and cancer, however…until now.

We now have a few randomized controlled trials, and vitamin D supplements do indeed appear to reduce the risk of dying from cancer! What dose? Researchers suggest getting blood levels up to at least about 75 nanomoles per liter. These levels are not reached by as many as three-quarters of women with breast cancer nor achieved by a striking 97 percent of colon cancer patients .

Getting up to these kinds of levels—75 or, perhaps even better, 100 nanomoles—might require about 2000 to 4000 IU of vitamin D a day, levels of intake for which there appear to be no credible evidence of harm. Regardless of what the exact level is, the findings of these kinds of studies may have a profound influence on future cancer treatment.


What about just getting sun instead? Be sure to check out my six-part video series:

It’s better, of course, to prevent colon cancer in the first place. See, for example:

For more on that extraordinary story about Premarin and hormone replacement therapy, see How Did Doctors Not Know About the Risks of Hormone Therapy?

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations:

Cow Cancer Virus Implicated in Breast Cancer

Up to 20 percent of all cancers in general are linked to infections, particularly viruses, and the list of potentially carcinogenic infectious agents is growing. It would be great if we could find a virus that contributed to breast cancer risk, because then we might have new ways to prevent and treat it. Currently, the dietary link between breast cancer and consumption of meat and dairy is considered a saturated fat effect, but there is a cancer-causing bovine virus that infects the mammary gland cells of cows. The infectious virus is then released into the milk supply. Since most U.S. dairy herds are infected, scientists posit that Americans are often exposed to this bovine leukemia virus (BLV), which I discuss in my video The Role of Bovine Leukemia Virus in Breast Cancer.

We didn’t have proof of this until 2003, 34 years after the virus was first identified. Early on, our best available tests failed to find antibodies to BLV in human blood. When our immune system is exposed to a virus, it creates antibodies to attack it. No antibodies, no exposure. “This led to the prevailing opinion that…the virus is not a public health hazard.” Though those tests “were state of the art at that time, they are extremely insensitive compared to more modern techniques.” As a result, researchers decided to re-examine the issue now that we have better tests. They took blood from about 250 people simply to address the question: “Do any humans have antibodies to BLV?” The answer? Yes, 191 of them did––74 percent. That shouldn’t have come as a surprise, however: By then, nearly 90 percent of American dairy herds were infected, and, according to the latest national survey, 100 percent of the big factory dairy farms were infected, as determined by testing the milk coming from those operations. Given this, why isn’t there an epidemic of cancer of the udder? Dairy cattle are slaughtered so young that there isn’t a lot of time for them to develop gross tumors, but that’s how most women may be getting infected. Although pasteurization should knock out the virus, who hasn’t eaten a rare, pink-in-the-middle burger at some point?

The bottom line is that the “long-held assumption that BLV is not a public health hazard…is no longer tenable…” This whole field of investigation needs to be reopened, with the next step determining whether humans are actually infected. “The presence of antibodies to particular viruses in human sera is generally interpreted as an indicator of a present or past infection with the virus.” But, theoretically, we might have developed antibodies to the dead viruses we ate, viruses that had been killed by cooking or pasteurization. Just because three-quarters of us have been exposed doesn’t mean we were actively infected by the virus.

How do we prove this? We would need to find the retrovirus actively stitched into our own DNA. Well, millions of women have had breast surgery, so why not just look at the tissue? Researchers finally did just that and published their findings in the Centers for Disease Control and Protection’s emerging infectious diseases journal: Forty-four percent of samples tested positive for BLV, proving for the first time that humans can be infected with bovine leukemia virus. The final step? Determine whether the virus is actually contributing to disease. In other words, are the bovine leukemia viruses we’re finding in human breast tissue cancer-causing or just “harmless passengers”?

One way to make that determination is to see whether the virus is more often present in those with breast cancer. No one had ever looked for the virus in breast tissue from people with cancer…until now. The “[p]resence of BLV-DNA in breast tissues was strongly associated with diagnosed and histologically confirmed breast cancer…” As many as 37 percent of human breast cancer cases may be attributable to exposure to bovine leukemia virus.


For some historical background leading up to these shocking findings, see my video Is Bovine Leukemia Virus in Milk Infectious?.

I couldn’t wait to read the meat and dairy industry journals to see how they’d try to spin this. Find out what I discovered in my final video in this series Industry Response to Bovine Leukemia Virus in Breast Cancer.

In health,
Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations: