I wasn’t clear. Getting to the journal wasn’t the issue. The only way to get a glimpse inside the text is to have guessed a keyword. Sure enough the FPP was purchased from Thorne. That was the backdoor.

Regards, -Patrick

I don’t understand why the abstract “drove you crazy,” except it’s not enough to answer your questions. PubMed is actually an excellent place to start, for 2 reasons. Firstly, they give (in this case) a direct link to the journal, Glycobiology, that you found by a “backdoor” route (Googling “Thorne”). Look on the upper right hand side of the PubMed abstract page for this link.

Secondly, PubMed pulls up related studies (right hand side of the abstract page). This enables readers to trace the history of new data and check for supporting and/or contrasting findings.

Now, it’s true that while medical journals are not in the business of promoting specific commercial products (or should not be), in a case like this people will want to know which of the products tested worked better than the others. Thanks for your input!

Why be so coy about a “commercially available” product? At least the abstract lets you know that PectaSol isn’t the one.

But there is a back-door way of finding out – maybe. Searching on ‘Thorne’, etc, I got to:

http://glycob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/cwm054v1

Same abstract. No mention of Thorne, but in the Google hit list, you see:

“Fractionated Pectin Powder from Thorne …”

Coincidentally, because of the study, I had added the Thorne product to my regimen (makes PectaSol taste like fine wine). Only today did I connect the study to Thorne. I still take PectaSol though.

-Patrick

These researchers suggest, eat more fruits and vegetables. Fruits differ in their pectin content.

Apples, quince, plums, gooseberries and oranges contain more pectin than soft fruits like grapes and strawberries. However, berries and grapes have other healthful properties.

Even in fruits and veggies considered “high” in pectin, it’s relatively low. Typical levels of pectin:
in apples, apricots approx. 1%
oranges 0.5 – 3.5%
carrots approx. 1.4%

Squash is under study as a source of pectin for the food processing industry.

A product called modified citrus pectin, announced as a tumor-shrinker c. 1995, is sold to and used by prostate cancer patients.

Refs: Pienta K et al, J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Mar 1;87(5):348-53 .

Search at PUBMED for “cancer, citrus pectin” to see the brief history of research with modified citrus pectin.

University of California San Diego has an entry for modified citrus pectin in its complementary and alternative medicine section.

American Cancer Society also has an entry on modified citrus pectin .

While the advice to focus on food as the best source of pectin is reasonable, there is no harm in taking pectin powder supplements. Pectin intake is beneficial for digestive health and may help transport dietary sources of cholesterol out of the body.

Unfortunately, I have found it impossible to identify sources of FPP that meet the definition in the article. All the FPP I have tracked down looks suspiciously like Pectasol or Pectasol look-alikes. Pectasol was specifically found in the research to be ineffective at killing PCa cells.