I've done a bunch of reading on antioxidants - mainly from the perspective of cancer prevention/delayed progression. It seems over the years there is growing consensus that taking antioxidant supplements can do more harm than good in many cases? I won't regurgitate what I've read but in general it seems to be proven Vitamin E and Beta-Carotene can actually increase the risk of cancer. This has something to do (explained in oversimplified terms) of them actually reducing the ability of free radicals to damage cancer cells. I'm sure that is grossly oversimplified and possibly explained wrong, but you get the general theory. I've read they can actually reduce the effectiveness of radiation therapy.
I am wondering if there is any research as to other antioxidant supplements as to whether they are "safer" then Vitamin E and Beta-Carotene? Or do all compounds with anti-oxidant properties work in basically the same way and therefore carry the risk of actually reducing the bodies ability to prevent/fight cancer? It seems to me, the nutraceutical industry may have overhyped antioxidants which has created billions in profits over the years for supplement manufacturers?
More specifically I am wondering if things like pomegranate extract or curcumin had antioxidant properties (or other compounds) that make them a "safer" antioxidant supplement than Vitamin E and Beta Carotene. It seems in the end, the wise advice is to not waste your money and just get antioxidants though incorporating fruits and vegetables into the diet. However I find it frustrating I am not turning up much information on meta-studies comparing effects of different anti-oxidants, long term.
