Too much tea is may be carcinogenic, especially to the unborns of pregnant mothers.

Rather they generally act as genotoxins, so the health benefits probably act via hormesis, priming your system to properly deal with cancer forming toxins

Hormesis may explain this. This makes sense when you consider 95% of polyphenols are immediately flushed by the liver immediately, like a standard toxin. A regular moderate consumption is like your bodies fire drill, in case of emergency. Or this is my working theory anyway.

Long story short, in moderate amounts it may be healthful to ingest polyphenols, but in large doses or amounts it may be harmful.What level is harmful is hard to say exactly, because genotoxicity, like with ciggerettes usually takes decades to show given our DNA's defense systems, and is thus pretty nebulous to predict.

Wikipedia takes a more middle road line, basically saying that generally theres no strong proof these "anti-oxidant" substances are anti-oxidant in vivo, or that they mitigate cancer, and they may be harmful in high doses according to some studies, although it claims mostly in vulnerable populations(they also suggest someting like hormesis, saying that maybe increased uric acid as a defense to fructose is often responsible for anti-cancer effects of fruits).

But as I said earlier, the effect of genotoxins like polyphenols or ciggerettes is a bit nebulous due to the fact our DNA has redundancy and bodily defenses. Its not like any genotoxic substance apart from high doses of super cancer promoter safrole is going to make you sick semi-immediately.

To be honest the exact mechanics of cancer formation and protection escapes me, but I do know that polyphenols both decrease and increase cancer, in a dose dependant manner, and depending on which polyphenol as well.

Its inaccurate to say they are just "anti-oxidants", in veiw of this, and what

What data there is, suggests that there probably is an upper limit of excess consumption that is harmful, at least when your older, or infant. Certainly it seems like a downright stupid idea to take refined and extracted "anti-oxidants" like reversetrol or grape seed extract.

But then the level of excess consumption of tea that is harmful is probably well above a moderate one or two cups a day, and in a non-pregnant adult, would take many many years to potentially manifest.

I find that tea is a significant anti-nutrient quite interesting too.

Too much tea is carcinogenic, especially to the unborns of pregnant mothers.

Theres a flavanoid called kaempferol which is a proven genotoxic causing leukemia to unborns, when tea is drunk to excess. (This is no causation study, they have done genotoxicity studies, its direct cause and effect). The same flavanoid is also high in brocolli.

A moderate amount of polyphenols (such as flavanoids), is considered health promoting.

Polyphenols do not act as anti-oxidants in vivo however, despite the fact they are referred to often as "anti-oxidants", in vivo studies show no such action. I am not sure when the assumption was made that polyphenols reduce oxiditive stress (perhaps in vitro studies), but in vivo studies do not bear it out.

At minumum polyphenols are paradoxically both cancer preventing and cancer forming.

Rather they generally act as genotoxins, so the health benefits probably act via hormesis, priming your system to properly deal with cancer forming toxins.

This makes sense when you consider 95% of polyphenols are immediately flushed by the liver immediately, like a standard toxin. A regular moderate consumption is like your bodies fire drill, in case of emergency. Or this is my working theory anyway.

Long story short, in moderate amounts it may be healthful to ingest polyphenols, but in large doses or amounts it may be harmful. What level is harmful is hard to say exactly, because genotoxicity, like with ciggerettes usually takes decades to show given our DNA's defense systems, and is thus pretty nebulous to predict.

The caffiene of course is another issue.

I myself have a cup of black tea every second day or so. I tend to rely more heavily on herbal teas like chamomile (which thankfully are lower in polyphenols).

Heres a random study linking polyphenols to genotoxicity, though back when I was researcing flavanols and flavanoids I found some much better ones....theres quite alot out there from my research but when you search "flavanol"/polyphenol cancer/genotoxic, of course the pro-cancer effects go to the top of google.

http://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/17/5/5255/pdf

Polyphenols are also anti-nutrients, much like oxalates and phytic acid.

Wikipedia takes a more middle road line, basically saying that generally theres no strong proof these "anti-oxidant" substances are anti-oxidant in vivo, or that they mitigate cancer, and they may be harmful in high doses according to some studies, although it claims mostly in vulnerable populations (they also suggest someting like hormesis, saying that maybe increased uric acid as a defense to fructose is often responsible for anti-cancer effects of fruits).

It's probably true that excess of a mild genotoxic substance is most likely to effect infants or the elderly, as the leukemia thing only happens in unborns from their mothers drinking too much tea, and the stronger genotoxic effects of ciggerettes arent usually seen until later in life.

But as I said earlier, the effect of genotoxins like polyphenols or ciggerettes is a bit nebulous due to the fact our DNA has redundancy and bodily defenses. Its not like any genotoxic substance apart from high doses of super cancer promoter safrole is going to make you sick semi-immediately.

This paper discusses fairly even handedly the potential risks of polyphenols: http://www.ajcn.org/content/81/1/326S.full

Basically: Carcinogenicity/genotoxicity Thyroid toxicity Estrogenic activity of isoflavones Antinutritional effects Interactions with pharmaceuticals

To be honest the exact mechanics of cancer formation and protection escapes me, but I do know that polyphenols both decrease and increase cancer, in a dose dependant manner, and depending on which polyphenol as well.

Its inaccurate to say they are just "anti-oxidants", in veiw of this, and what data there is, suggests that there probably is an upper limit of excess consumption that is harmful, at least when your older, or infant. Certainly it seems like a downright stupid idea to take refined and extracted "anti-oxidants" like reversetrol or grape seed extract.

But then the level of excess consumption of tea that is harmful is probably well above a moderate one or two cups a day, and in a non-pregnant adult, would take many many years to potentially manifest.

I find that tea is a significant anti-nutrient quite interesting too.

This paper discusses fairly even handedly the potential risks of polyphenols:http://www.ajcn.org/content/81/1/326S.full

Basically:Estrogenic activity of isoflavonesInteractions with pharmaceuticals

To be honest the exact mechanics of cancer formation and protection escapes me, but I would tend to think do know that coffee is not much better eitherpolyphenols both decrease and increase cancer, in terms a dose dependant manner, and depending on which polyphenol as well.

Its inaccurate to say they are just "anti-oxidants", in veiw of its anti-nutrients this, and what data there is, suggests that there probably is an upper limit of excess consumption that is harmful, at least when your older, though I know little or infant. Certainly it seems like a downright stupid idea to take refined and extracted "anti-oxidants" like reversetrol or grape seed extract.

But then the level of its compositionexcess consumption of tea that is harmful is probably above one or two cups a day, and in a non-pregnant adult, would take many many years to potentially manifest.

I find that tea is a significant anti-nutrient quite interesting too.

Too much tea is carcinogenic, especially to the unborns of pregnant mothers.

Theres a flavanoid called kaempferol which is a proven genotoxic causing leukemia to unborns, when tea is drunk to excess. (This is no causation study, they have done genotoxicity studies, its direct cause and effect). The same flavanoid is also high in brocolli.

A moderate amount of polyphenols (such as flavanoids), is considered health promoting.

Polyphenols do not act as anti-oxidants in vivo however, despite the fact they are referred to often as "anti-oxidants", in vivo studies show no such action. I am not sure when the assumption was made that polyphenols reduce oxiditive stress (perhaps in vitro studies), but science does in vivo studies do not bear it out.

At minumum polyphenols are paradoxically both cancer preventing and cancer forming.

Rather they generally act as genotoxins, so the health benefits probably act via hormesis, priming your system to properly deal with cancer forming toxins.

This makes sense when you consider 95% of polyphenols are immediately flushed by the liver immediately, like a standard toxin. A regular moderate consumption is like your bodies fire drill, in case of emergency. Or this is my working theory anyway.

Long story short, in moderate amounts it may be healthful to ingest polyphenols, but in large doses or amounts it may be harmful. What level is harmful is hard to say exactly, because genotoxicity, like with ciggerettes usually takes decades to show given our DNA's defense systems, and is thus pretty nebulous to predict.

The caffiene of course is another issue.

I myself have a cup of black tea every second day or so. I tend to rely more heavily on herbal teas like chamomile (which thankfully are lower in polyphenols).

Heres a random study linking polyphenols to genotoxicity, though back when I was researcing flavanols and flavanoids I found some much better ones....theres quite alot out there from my research but when you search "flavanol"/polyphenol cancer/genotoxic, of course the pro-cancer effects go to the top of google.

http://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/17/5/5255/pdf

Polyphenols are also anti-nutrients, much like oxalates and phytic acid.

Wikipedia takes a more middle road line, basically saying that generally theres no strong proof these "anti-oxidant" substances are anti-oxidant in vivo, or that they mitigate cancer, and they may be harmful in high doses according to some studies, at least although it claims mostly in vulnerable populations (they also suggest someting like hormesis, saying that maybe increased uric acid as a defense to fructose is often responsible for anti-cancer effects of fruits).

It's probably true that excess of a mild genotoxic substance is most likely to effect infants or the elderly, as the leukemia thing only happens in unborns from their mothers drinking too much tea, and the stronger genotoxic effects of ciggerettes arent usually seen until later in life.

But as I said earlier, the effect of a genotoxin genotoxins like polyphenols or ciggerettes is a bit nebulous due to the fact our DNA has redundancy and bodily defenses. Its not like any genotoxic substance apart from high doses of super cancer promoter safrole is going to make you sick semi-immediately.

I would tend to think that coffee is not much better either, in terms of its anti-nutrients at least, though I know little of its composition.

Polyphenols are also anti-nutrients, much like oxalates and phytic acid.

Wikipedia takes a more middle road line, basically saying that generally theres no proof "anti-oxidant" substances are anti-oxidant in vivo, or that they mitigate cancer, and they may be harmful in high doses, at least in vulnerable populations (they also suggest someting like hormesis, saying that maybe increased uric acid as a defense to fructose is often responsible for anti-cancer effects of fruits).

It's probably true that excess of a mild genotoxic substance is most likely to effect infants or the elderly, as the leukemia thing only happens in unborns from their mothers drinking too much tea, and the stronger genotoxic of ciggerettes arent usually seen until later in life.

But as I said earlier, the effect of a genotoxin like polyphenols or ciggerettes is a bit nebulous due to the fact our DNA has redundancy and bodily defenses. Its not like any genotoxic substance apart from high doses of super cancer promoter safrole is going to make you sick semi-immediately.

I would tend to think that coffee is not much better either, though I know little of its composition.

Too much tea is carcinogenic, especially to the unborns of pregnant mothers.

Theres a flavanoid called kaempferol which is a proven genotoxic causing leukemia to unborns, when tea is drunk to excess. (This is no causation study, they have done genotoxicity studies, its direct cause and effect). The same flavanoid is also high in brocolli.

A moderate amount of polyphenols (such as flavanoids), is considered health promoting.

Polyphenols do not act as anti-oxidants in vivo however, despite the fact they are referred to often as "anti-oxidants", in vivo studies show no such action. I am not sure when the assumption was made that polyphenols reduce oxiditive stress, but science does not bear it out.

At minumum polyphenols are paradoxically both cancer preventing and cancer forming.

Rather they generally act as genotoxins, so the health benefits probably act via hormesis, priming your system to properly deal with cancer forming toxins.

This makes sense when you consider 95% of polyphenols are immediately flushed by the liver immediately, like a standard toxin. A regular moderate consumption is like your bodies fire drill, in case of emergency.

Long story short, in moderate amounts it may be healthful to ingest polyphenols, but in large doses or amounts it may be harmful. What level is harmful is hard to say exactly, because genotoxicity, like with ciggerettes usually takes decades to show given our DNA's defense systems, and is thus pretty nebulous to predict.

The caffiene of course is another issue.

I myself have a cup of black tea every second day or so. I tend to rely more heavily on herbal teas like chamomile (which thankfully are lower in polyphenols).

Heres a random study linking polyphenols to genotoxicity, though back when I was researcing flavanols and flavanoids I found some much better ones....theres quite alot out there from my research but when you search "flavanol"/polyphenol cancer/genotoxic, of course the pro-cancer effects go to the top of google.

http://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/17/5/5255/pdf

Polyphenols are also anti-nutrients.

Too much tea is carcinogenic, especially to the unborns of pregnant mothers.

Theres a flavanoid called kaempferol which is a proven genotoxic causing leukemia to unborns, when tea is drunk to excess. (This is no causation study, they have done genotoxicity studies, its direct cause and effect). The same flavanoid is also high in brocolli.

A moderate amount of polyphenols (such as flavanoids), is considered health promoting.

Polyphenols do not act as anti-oxidants in vivo however, despite the fact they are referred to often as "anti-oxidants", in vivo studies show no such action. I am not sure when the assumption was made that polyphenols reduce oxiditive stress, but science does not bear it out.

Rather they generally act as genotoxins, so the health benefits probably act via hormesis, priming your system to properly deal with cancer forming toxins.

This makes sense when you consider 95% of polyphenols are immediately flushed by the liver immediately, like a standard toxin. A regular moderate consumption is like your bodies fire drill, in case of emergency.

Long story short, in moderate amounts it may be healthful to ingest polyphenols, but in large doses or amounts it may be harmful. What level is harmful is hard to say exactly, because genotoxicity, like with ciggerettes usually takes decades to show given our DNA's defense systems, and is thus pretty nebulous to predict.

The caffiene of course is another issue.

I myself have a cup of black tea every second day or so. I tend to rely more heavily on herbal teas like chamomile (which thankfully are lower in polyphenols).