Editorial · Evidence Base

Sources, methods & disclaimer.

Every claim in this platform is footed with a citation to its primary source — an IARC monograph, a WHO position paper, a US Surgeon General report, or a peer-reviewed study in a recognised medical journal. The list below identifies the principal authorities the platform relies on, and the key studies most frequently cited.

IARC · WHO · NIH
AICR · USPSTF
LANCET · BMJ · NEJM · JAMA

Primary classification & guideline bodies

IARC — International Agency for Research on Cancer

The cancer-research arm of the World Health Organization. Its Monographs Programme has, since 1971, evaluated more than 1,000 agents and classified them as Group 1 (carcinogenic to humans), 2A (probably carcinogenic), 2B (possibly), 3 (not classifiable), or 4 (probably not). Classifications describe the strength of the evidence, not the size of the risk.

monographs.iarc.who.int

WHO — World Health Organization

Publishes binding guidance on physical activity, salt intake, sugar consumption, air quality, sleep, radon, and indoor environments. The 2023 WHO Europe position established that there is no safe level of alcohol with respect to cancer risk.

WCRF / AICR — World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research

The Continuous Update Project synthesises global evidence on diet, nutrition, physical activity and cancer. The 2018 Third Expert Report underpins much of the dietary guidance on this platform.

US National Toxicology Program (NTP)

Produces the biennial Report on Carcinogens, evaluating substances under "known to be a human carcinogen" or "reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen." Frequently cited alongside IARC for formaldehyde, BHA, asbestos, and others.

EFSA — European Food Safety Authority

Re-evaluates food additives, contaminants and packaging chemicals on a rolling basis. EFSA's 2021 opinion on titanium dioxide (E171) led to the EU food ban; the 2023 BPA re-assessment lowered the tolerable daily intake roughly 20,000-fold.

US Surgeon General & CDC

Authoritative US reports on tobacco, alcohol, mental health, loneliness, and social determinants of health. The 2014 and 2020 Surgeon General Reports on smoking define the modern evidence base for tobacco-attributable disease.

Key peer-reviewed studies cited

Bouvard V et al. Carcinogenicity of consumption of red and processed meat. Lancet Oncology 2015;16(16):1599–1600.
Rumgay H et al. Global burden of cancer in 2020 attributable to alcohol consumption. Lancet Oncology 2021;22(8):1071–1080.
Fiolet T et al. Consumption of ultra-processed foods and cancer risk: NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort. BMJ 2018;360:k322.
Lauby-Secretan B et al. Body fatness and cancer — viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. NEJM 2016;375:794–798.
Hill W et al. Lung adenocarcinoma promotion by air pollutants. Nature 2023;616:159–167.
Chassaing B et al. Dietary emulsifiers impact the mouse gut microbiota promoting colitis and metabolic syndrome. Nature 2015;519:92–96.
Sellem L et al. Food additive emulsifiers and cancer risk: results from the NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort. BMJ 2023;380:e074120.
Moore SC et al. Association of leisure-time physical activity with risk of 26 types of cancer in 1.44 million adults. JAMA Internal Medicine 2016;176(6):816–825.
Llaha F et al. Consumption of sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages and changes in cancer incidence. Nutrients 2021;13(2):516.
de Martel C et al. Global burden of cancer attributable to infections in 2018. Lancet Global Health 2020;8(2):e180–e190.
Estruch R et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a Mediterranean diet. NEJM 2018;378:e34 (PREDIMED).
Smith-Bindman R et al. Use of diagnostic imaging studies and associated radiation exposure. JAMA Internal Medicine 2019;179(8):1075–1082.
Michaud DS et al. Periodontal disease and risk of total and site-specific cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2018;110(8):843–854.
Mozaffarian D et al. Trans fatty acids and cardiovascular disease. NEJM 2006;354(15):1601–1613.
Goyal M et al. Meditation programs for psychological stress and well-being: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine 2014;174(3):357–368.
IARC Monograph Volume 135 — Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and other PFAS. 2023 upgrade of PFOA to Group 1.

Why citations matter

Health information online is uneven. The Team21 platform anchors every claim to its primary scientific source so that a curious reader can verify, a sceptical reader can challenge, and a healthcare professional can cross-reference. Where authorities disagree (as with glyphosate — Group 2A per IARC, but not classified as carcinogenic by EPA or EFSA) this is stated openly.

Medical disclaimer The Team21 Health Platform is published for educational and informational purposes only. The content, including text, graphics, tracker tools, and community discussions, does not constitute medical advice and is not a substitute for professional medical consultation, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the guidance of your physician or another qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition, before starting or stopping any treatment, and before making significant changes to your diet, exercise, or other lifestyle practices. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay seeking it because of something you have read on this platform. If you think you may have a medical emergency, contact your local emergency services immediately. The editor and contributors disclaim all liability arising from reliance on the information herein. Classifications referenced (e.g. IARC Group 1, 2A, 2B) describe the strength of evidence that an agent can cause cancer, not the magnitude of an individual's risk, which depends on dose, duration, individual susceptibility, and co-exposures.