http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/h ... -1.3572072
https://futurism.com/new-study-puts-us- ... cer-cells/
Sugar is the enemy for several reasons
Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
I believe this theory has already been debunked. I remember reading some time ago about a study where they completely starved the body of sugar and the cancer cells still found a way to survive and grow.
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
Ski,
I'm not entirely sure it's been debunked, as such. Eminent oncologist David Gorski (yes, he) I think said in a review of Seyfreids book, that some avenues were currently being explored regarding the sugar hypothesis but suggested that to say all cancers could be cured using this methodology wasn't realistic.
Maybe he put a little less politely than that.
I'm not entirely sure it's been debunked, as such. Eminent oncologist David Gorski (yes, he) I think said in a review of Seyfreids book, that some avenues were currently being explored regarding the sugar hypothesis but suggested that to say all cancers could be cured using this methodology wasn't realistic.
Maybe he put a little less politely than that.
Apo E4/E4, Male, Age 60
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
See Stavia's posts on the Ancestral Health New Zealand Conference 2017: one of the presentations was on cancer. Day one session 7: Darryl Edwards. He said sugar can fuel cancer, but some cancers have "metabolic heterogeneity" and can be fueled by ketones etc. He listed "Sugar causes cancer" as one of the myths pertaining to cancer. He recommends exercise. Go read Stavia's post! viewtopic.php?f=15&t=3665#p43803
WhatNext
WhatNext
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
It appears that its not as simple as "all cancers preferentially metabolize glucose". It is likely true for some eg many glioblastomas, but not for all.
Again, its not a case of absolute truth vs debunking, but YMMV.
I had a long heart to heart with Darryl Edwards last night. His sister died of a malignancy last year. 90% of the tumour died on keto but the remaining 10% later grew extremely rapidly. Faater than originally. He said what upset him the most was that he would have been ok with being presented with uncertainty. But the keto practitioners and resources he consulted didn't show the times when it didn't work due to the metabolic nature of that particular cancer. He said had he known then about metabolic heterogeneity he would have considered trials of different diets, monitoring his sister's tumour growth with a more critical eye.
It obviously can be both true and untrue. Even in the same person and same tumour as we see above.
More grey. More unknowns.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Again, its not a case of absolute truth vs debunking, but YMMV.
I had a long heart to heart with Darryl Edwards last night. His sister died of a malignancy last year. 90% of the tumour died on keto but the remaining 10% later grew extremely rapidly. Faater than originally. He said what upset him the most was that he would have been ok with being presented with uncertainty. But the keto practitioners and resources he consulted didn't show the times when it didn't work due to the metabolic nature of that particular cancer. He said had he known then about metabolic heterogeneity he would have considered trials of different diets, monitoring his sister's tumour growth with a more critical eye.
It obviously can be both true and untrue. Even in the same person and same tumour as we see above.
More grey. More unknowns.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
Sorry, wrong use of the term as I know its a lot more complex than that.
Re: RE: Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
All good Ski. Its true that the theory that all cancers stop growing in keto is debunkedSki wrote:Sorry, wrong use of the term as I know its a lot more complex than that.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
On instagram I just posted this exact Information 2 days ago in response to media reports from English (UK) news sources. They are flat out wrong. No sugar diets "DO NOT CURE ALL CANCERS, PERIOD". Again for the 100th time, the human body is too complex, cancer is very complex, CVD is very complex : no singular diet is going to work universally for all these conditions.
Darryls information confirms my beliefs and now I will reference his sources to further my stance. It is fairly well known with nutritional science experts that there is no "one - off diet" for cancer. It is extremely dangerous to try and hack cancer. Not saying traditional medicine is the be all, end all, just saying it is very dangerous to claim keto cures everything, including AD, CVD, and now cancer.
This is coming from a guy (me) that has been low carb most of my adult life, keto at various times, and has put both patients and athletes on low carb and keto diets. BUT I never claim it will cure anything, or is even is the best approach in all cases. There are some illnesses that keto has proven very effective, mostly seizures in children, a few diabetics that don't respond as well to insulin meds. However, divers that Dom works with does not count, they are not ill or have medical issues.
A new quote from a very logical doc I hope to meet some day: "guys: just do it! lets look beyond high fat low fat sat fat and make sure our other critical interventions are in place" This is so on point and fits my philosophical beliefs in medicine. THANKS DOC STAVIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frank
Darryls information confirms my beliefs and now I will reference his sources to further my stance. It is fairly well known with nutritional science experts that there is no "one - off diet" for cancer. It is extremely dangerous to try and hack cancer. Not saying traditional medicine is the be all, end all, just saying it is very dangerous to claim keto cures everything, including AD, CVD, and now cancer.
This is coming from a guy (me) that has been low carb most of my adult life, keto at various times, and has put both patients and athletes on low carb and keto diets. BUT I never claim it will cure anything, or is even is the best approach in all cases. There are some illnesses that keto has proven very effective, mostly seizures in children, a few diabetics that don't respond as well to insulin meds. However, divers that Dom works with does not count, they are not ill or have medical issues.
A new quote from a very logical doc I hope to meet some day: "guys: just do it! lets look beyond high fat low fat sat fat and make sure our other critical interventions are in place" This is so on point and fits my philosophical beliefs in medicine. THANKS DOC STAVIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frank
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
I feel a little awkward posting here because we’ve been traveling in a land of little internet, so I’ve not viewed Stavia’s post on AHS17 New Zealand (but I will when I get home), nor have I read the above mentioned article, but due to a close family member’s current fight with cancer and after attending a few sugar-cancer talks at low-carb conferences I’ve become very interested in this subject.
As stated above, different cancers do respond to sugar/glucose differently. I’ve recently read the book, “The Metabolic Approach to Cancer” by Dr Nasha Winters and Jess Higgins Kelley. They emphasize a ketogenic diet because so many cancers are glucose dependent and because there are benefits that the diet provides even for non-glycolytic cancers, notably how it aids mitochondrial metabolism. But the book also emphasizes that a ketogenic diet alone won’t provide a cancer solution, it discusses many other areas that cause/influence cancer: genetics, carcinogens/toxins, microbiome, immune system health, inflammation-oxidation, hormonal balance, stress, circadian rhythm disruption, mental and emotional well being. For those who just read Dr Bredesen’s book or have been reading these forums for any length of time, you will note there’s an overlap in these broad areas for ApoE4s/Alzheimer's. Admittedly, there are some differences in the details.
If interested in this subject, there’s another book that discusses the metabolic theory of cancer, which overturns current medical thoughts on cancer, it is “Tripping over the Truth” by Travis Christofferson. I hear it is very good and easily understood (vs Dr Thomas Seyfried’s book, “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease”). I haven’t read it yet, but it’s on my list, and it comes highly recommended.
As stated above, different cancers do respond to sugar/glucose differently. I’ve recently read the book, “The Metabolic Approach to Cancer” by Dr Nasha Winters and Jess Higgins Kelley. They emphasize a ketogenic diet because so many cancers are glucose dependent and because there are benefits that the diet provides even for non-glycolytic cancers, notably how it aids mitochondrial metabolism. But the book also emphasizes that a ketogenic diet alone won’t provide a cancer solution, it discusses many other areas that cause/influence cancer: genetics, carcinogens/toxins, microbiome, immune system health, inflammation-oxidation, hormonal balance, stress, circadian rhythm disruption, mental and emotional well being. For those who just read Dr Bredesen’s book or have been reading these forums for any length of time, you will note there’s an overlap in these broad areas for ApoE4s/Alzheimer's. Admittedly, there are some differences in the details.
If interested in this subject, there’s another book that discusses the metabolic theory of cancer, which overturns current medical thoughts on cancer, it is “Tripping over the Truth” by Travis Christofferson. I hear it is very good and easily understood (vs Dr Thomas Seyfried’s book, “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease”). I haven’t read it yet, but it’s on my list, and it comes highly recommended.
-Theresa
ApoE 4/4
ApoE 4/4
Re: Interesting new studies on Cancer to Sugar in-take connection
Good post, Frank. I agree that keto alone isn't a cure-all for everything. That said, if I had cancer, it would certainly be a strategy I would explore, not as a monotherapeutic, but as an adjunct therapy with whatever else my oncologist recommended.
Help me understand the danger in utilizing a keto diet when trying to beat cancer. Are you worried about weight loss? Perhaps there are other concerns...Darryls information confirms my beliefs and now I will reference his sources to further my stance. It is fairly well known with nutritional science experts that there is no "one - off diet" for cancer. It is extremely dangerous to try and hack cancer. Not saying traditional medicine is the be all, end all, just saying it is very dangerous to claim keto cures everything, including AD, CVD, and now cancer.
Dr. Andreas Eenfeldt, from Sweeden, has compiled excellent how-to and research on utilizing LC to reverse T2D, see here. Scroll to mid page for peer-reviewed science. Perhaps I’m naive, but this appears to becoming more and more mainstream. There are even instances of T1Ds carefully utilizing this approach and greatly minimizing their need for insulin. Why just limit this for a few diabetics?There are some illnesses that keto has proven very effective, mostly seizures in children, a few diabetics that don't respond as well to insulin meds.
