Pomegranates Put to the Test for Prostate Cancer

The pomegranate “has been revered through the ages for its medicinal properties”––so much so that it’s been used as a symbol for some medical organizations. A fruit seems to me a better representation of health than the American Medical Association’s snake on a stick.

The pomegranate is thought to be beneficial for a wide range of diseases, including several types of cancer, cardiovascular disease, and rheumatoid arthritis. Evidently even the cannibals love it as it improves the color of “kid meat.” The researchers were talking about baby goats, but the title of their study did make me do a double-take!

Most of the attention over the last decade has focused on pomegranates and prostate cancer. In vitro studies have shown that pomegranate extract can suppress the growth of prostate cancer cells in a petri dish by up to 95 percent. As you can see in my video Pomegranate vs. Placebo for Prostate Cancer, there is no real difference between what normal prostate cells look like under a microscope with a little or a lot of pomegranate extract; it doesn’t seem to have much of an effect on healthy cells. However, prostate cancer cells are decimated by pomegranate extract—at least in a petri dish, but what about in a person? If these results translated to the clinic, it could be dramatic, but we first need to try it out in people.

“Primary management of prostate cancer…consists of either radical surgery or radiation therapy.” Despite this, “a significant number of patients relapse and ultimately develop metastatic disease.” Even after radical prostatectomy, the cancer comes back in about one-third of the patients, as evidenced by rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. At that point, the treatment options are limited as the prostate has already been removed. The next step is essentially chemical castration, or hormonal ablation. Just like breast cancer can thrive on estrogen, prostate cancer can thrive on testosterone. We can try to wipe out testosterone, but that can have such negative side effects that anything we can do to delay that would be good. 

So, what about plants? Men in Asia appear to have the lowest prostate cancer rates in the world, up to ten times lower than men in North America. Is this simply because of genetics? No. When Japanese individuals move to the United States and start living and eating like us, their breast and prostate cancer rates shoot right up toward ours. It could be because of what they start eating more of: animal products, which are the strongest risk factor for prostate cancer worldwide on a country-by-country basis. Or, it could be because of what they’re eating less of in the United States, namely their traditional low-fat, high-fiber, generally plant-rich diet with soy products and green tea. So, did the researchers put the cancer patients on a plant-based diet? No, they just had them drink a cup of pomegranate juice every day. Why? Because the study was funded by a pomegranate juice company.

In the three years leading up to the study, participants’ cancer was steadily growing, as measured by the increase in their average PSA levels. Once they started the juice, their tumors continued to grow, but it looked like they were growing slower. In contrast, Dean Ornish and his colleagues got an apparent reversal in early prostate cancer growth with a plant-based diet and other healthy lifestyle changes. Indeed, PSA didn’t just go up slower—it trended down. And, when dripping the blood of the men on prostate cancer cells growing in a lab, the blood serum of those eating healthfully suppressed cancer growth nearly eight times better, whereas the blood of the men on the pomegranate juice suppressed cancer growth by only about 12 percent. Still, to see any effect from drinking a cup of juice a day is pretty impressive.

The problem is that there was no control group in the pomegranate juice study. We could say the patients acted as their own controls, before and after. It’s probably not just a coincidence that their tumors started growing slower right when they started the juice. But, a drug trial tried to do the same thing—treat men with recurring prostate cancer after surgery or radiation. In the drug group, tumor growth slowed in 55 percent of the men. A pretty effective drug, right? Well, the sugar pill worked 73 percent of the time. The placebo effect can be so powerful that it may slow cancer growth. This is why we need placebo-controlled trials. Maybe tricking people into drinking pomegranate-flavored Kool-Aid would have had the same effect. We don’t know until we put it to the test.

Finally, researchers did a randomized, controlled trial of pomegranate juice for prostate cancer, and the daily pomegranate intake had no impact. What do they mean, no impact? Twenty-five percent of the cancer patients appeared to shrink their tumors as soon as they started drinking the pomegranate juice, but 35 percent shrunk their tumors not drinking pomegranate juice. So, any effect appears just to be a placebo. It’s the same story with pomegranate extract pills: They seemed to work until they went head to head with sugar pills and fell flat on their face.


I love pomegranates! Unfortunately, the juice and extracts look no more promising today than when I produced my video Is Pomegranate Juice That Wonderful?.

For some foods that may actually affect prostate cancer progression, 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, year-in-review presentations:

Meat Can Cause Stress Hormone Levels to Rise and Testosterone levels to Drop

A critique of the scientific validity of the dietary advice in Men’s Health magazine discovered nuggets claiming meat can give men “a testosterone boost,” but we’ve known for a quarter century that a meal with that much fat can drop testosterone levels by nearly one-third within hours. In fact, a significant drop of both free and bound testosterone in the bloodstream occurs within just one hour of it going in one’s mouth, whereas a low-fat meal of mostly carbs has no such effect. Based on in vitro studies on the effects of fat on testicle cells in a petri dish, researchers suspect fat in the blood may actually suppress testosterone production in real time. If you feed people lots of eggs and meat, including fish and poultry, and then switch them to a diet with bread, fruit, vegetables, and sugar—but about the same amount of fat—all their testosterone levels go up. Even more importantly, however, all their levels of cortisol, a stress hormone produced by our adrenal glands, go down.

Having low stress hormone levels is good, because high cortisol levels may “strongly predict cardiovascular death” in men and women both with and without pre-existing cardiovascular disease. In fact, this may help explain “death from a broken heart,” the heightened heart attack and stroke risk in the immediate weeks following the loss of a spouse. Higher cortisol levels days, months, or even years after losing someone you love may increase cardiac risk and reduce immune function. And, the rise in stress hormone levels from the loss of a spouse, a bump of about 50 points, is less than the bump you get by eating high-meat diet.

Cortisol may also help explain why those who are depressed tend to put on abdominal fat. The reason obesity around the middle is associated with elevated cortisol secretion may be that abdominal fat kind of sucks it up, so the accumulation of fat around our internal organs may be an adaptation by which our body deals with excess stress.

These spikes in stress hormone levels every time we eat a lot of meat may not just affect our health, but that of our children, which I discuss in my video Maternal Diet May Affect Stress Responses in Children. “Substantial evidence now suggests that maternal diets of high protein density have adverse effects on the fetus.” For example, back in the 1960s, an experiment was performed on pregnant women in Motherwell, Scotland, in which they were told to eat a high-meat diet in hopes of preventing preeclampsia, a disease of pregnancy. It didn’t work. In fact, the lowest preeclampsia rates I’ve ever seen were among women eating strictly plant-based diets—only 1 case out of 775 pregnancies. Preeclampsia normally strikes about 5 percent of pregnancies, so there should have been dozens of cases, suggesting a plant-based diet could alleviate most, if not all, of the signs and symptoms of this potentially serious condition. So what did happen when pregnant women went from eating about one daily portion of meat to about two portions a day? Mothers who ate more meat and fewer vegetables during pregnancy gave birth to children who grew up to have higher blood pressures.

“One explanation proposed for the adverse effects of high-meat/fish consumption is that this may increase maternal cortisol concentrations, which, in turn, affect the developing fetus,” resetting his or her stress hormone thermostat to a higher level. But, we don’t know until we put it to the test. And indeed, researchers found higher blood cortisol levels “in both the sons and daughters of women who had reported higher meat/fish” consumption, about a 5 percent increase for every meat serving per day. Such diets may present a metabolic stress to the mother and kind of reprogram the adrenal axis of their children, leading to lifelong hypercortisolemia, elevated levels of stress hormones in the blood. This may help explain why every daily portion of meat during late pregnancy may lead to a 1 percent greater fat mass in their children by the time they reach adolescence. So, this could increase the risk of their children becoming obese later in life and thus has “important implications for public health and in terms of prevention of obesity.”

What if they’re already born? We may be able to bring down children’s stress hormone levels with similar dietary changes, but this is just baseline stress hormone levels. Do children of mothers who eat more meat during pregnancy also have exaggerated responses to life stressors? Researchers put them through a stressful challenge—public speaking and mental arithmetic—and then measured their cortisol responses. If their mom ate less than two servings of meat/fish a day while she was carrying them, they got little shots of stress hormones from their adrenal glands. Those whose moms ate more really got stressed out, and those whose moms ate the most—17 or more servings a week, which is more than 2 servings each day—appeared to be really quaking in their boots. In a way, you are what your mother ate.


Want more craziness from Men’s Health magazine? Check out my video Changing a Man’s Diet After a Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.

Here are some other popular videos about eating healthfully during pregnancy:

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:

The Effects of the Hops Phytoestrogen in Beer on Breast Cancer Risk

Hops have been used for centuries as a flavoring agent in beer, but “[o]ver the years, a recurring suggestion has been that hops”—and therefore beer—may be estrogenic, thanks to a potent phytoestrogen in hops called 8-PN, also known as hopein. Might beer drinking affect our hormones? I discuss this in my video What Are the Effects of the Hops Phytoestrogen in Beer?.

Even just the alcohol in beer can reduce testosterone levels in men, so when beer was tested as a source of estrogens, the alcohol was first removed. Researchers tested the equivalent of one can of beer every day for a month on the hormone levels of postmenopausal women, so as to not confound the results with her own estrogens, and they found significant alterations of hormonal levels during the beer month and then a return to baseline a week afterwards. But does this have any clinical effects, whether good or bad?

A cross-sectional study of about 1,700 women found that beer drinkers appear to have better bone density, perhaps because of the pro-estrogenic effects. They don’t recommend women start drinking beer for bone health, but suggest it may have beneficial bone effects for women who already drink.

What about helping with hot flashes? About half of postmenopausal and premenopausal women in the United States suffer from hot flashes, whereas the prevalence in Japan may be ten times lower, presumed to be because of their soy consumption. What about hops? There have been a few studies showing potential benefit, leading to a 2013 review suggesting that “hop extract may be somewhat effective in treating menopausal discomforts especially against hot flushes,” but that was before a study reported extraordinary results with about a half teaspoon of dried hop flowers. In the placebo group, the women started out having 23 hot flashes a week and continued to have 23 hot flashes a week throughout the three-month study. In the hops group, the women started out even worse with about 29 hot flashes a week, but then got down to 19 at the end of the first month, then 9, and finally just 1 hot flash a week. And similar findings were reported for all the other menopausal symptoms measured.

Animal estrogens work, too. Millions of women used to be on horse hormones—Premarin, from pregnant mares’ urine. That drug also took care of hot flashes, as well as  curtailed osteoporosis, but caused a pesky little side effect called breast cancer. Thankfully, when this was realized and millions of women stopped taking it, breast cancer rates fell in countries around the world.

The question, then, is: Are the estrogens in hops more like the breast cancer-promoting horse estrogens or the breast cancer-preventing soy estrogens? The key to understanding the health-protective potential of soy phytoestrogens is understanding the difference between the two types of estrogen receptors, alpha receptors and beta receptors. Unlike animal estrogen, the soy phytoestrogens bind preferentially to the beta receptors, and in breast tissue, they’re like yin and yang with the alpha receptors signaling breast cell proliferation. This explains why horse hormones increase breast cancer risk, whereas the beta receptors, where the soy binds, oppose that proliferative impact. So, do the hops phytoestrogens prefer beta, too? No. 8-PN is a selective estrogen receptor alpha promoter. “Surprisingly and in clear contrast to genistein [the soy], 8-PN is a much weaker” binder of beta than of alpha. So, that explains why hops is such a common ingredient in so-called breast enhancing supplements—that is, because it acts more like estrogen estrogen. Given the breast cancer concerns, use of such products should be discouraged, but just drinking beer could provide the exposure to the hops estrogen, which could help explain why beer may be more carcinogenic to the breast than some other forms of alcohol.


A phytoestrogen in beer? For more on the background of this issue, see The Most Potent Phytoestrogen Is in Beer.

Other videos on phytoestrogen include:

To learn more about dietary effects on testosterone, see:

What about “natural” hormones for menopause? See my video Plant-Based Bioidentical Hormones.

For more on the risks of alcohol in terms of breast cancer risk, see Breast Cancer and Alcohol: How Much Is Safe? and Breast Cancer Risk: Red Wine vs. White Wine.

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: