Now that I have some more time, I looked to see if this Barbara Quinn had anything else to say. Here's something from montereyherald.com that has "fruits and vegetables" with the same list of produce:
Barbara Quinn: At risk of prostate cancer? Think red
Part of that benefit might be from lycopene, a reddish pigment that gives color to fruit and vegetables like tomatoes, apricots, guavas and watermelons.
I don't intend to ask anyone on the other site why the original article in this thread mentions only "red vegetables." (It may simply be an editing error, but if it is, someone should've seen it before publishing.)
My little distraction was different: I find it unremarkable that a tomato may be a "red vegetable," but I find it odd that an apricot, guava, or watermelon may be. (They are "vegetable" in the "animal, vegetable, mineral" sense, but most people don't usually talk about lumber or daffodils as "vegetable.") The wording in the montereyherald.com version also sounds more accurate to me in another way: most apricots aren't what I'd call red, but many have some red to them.
In other words, I definitely agree that some things can be distracting, heh. We're discussing something from the original article of this thread, but it's not (I hope) what the writer had in mind--I hope that writers and editors don't resort to odd word choices to provoke "discussion."
I don’t intend to ask anyone on the other site why the original article in this thread mentions only “red vegetables.”
My guess is that a lot of vegetables are a great ally against prostate cancer. And a lot of vegetables would likely be a great ally against several types of cancer.
Additionally, so many men have prostate surgery that shouldn’t be having it. Often times, the cancer is so slow growth (or no growth) that it would never impact the life of the patient. I’ve read that 30% or more of the surgeries are unnecessary or ill advised.