48 hr fasting before having chemo!????
Comments
-
I'm doing quite well thank you Gabrielle!loveandhope said:thx
im glad ur ok pepe. Buzzard (clift) your msg made me cry(in a good way
. thank you all for ur support and kind words/ pepe my dad is having his treatment in Hospital Radon in Algeciras. he is having zolex and something begining with cent....... ill find out later. he has 3 rounds every 21 days. he will be having 500mg of one of them and 150mg of the other (TDS) 3 times a day. ill try to get all the details later as yesterday we were all so concerned with how he wud tolorate his treatment that it all seems a blur. anyway he went to town this morning for a coffee. so whoevers praying...pls pls pls...keep it up ...thxxxx
Scans Pet and cea not showing anything ,so doctors are keeping me on stand by!
Gabrielle, I suggest you to open new threads ,otherwise people who have been posting in this one will not post any more in here as they will think is
more of the same, so, if you open a new one you will have much more answers!.
Concerning your dad l never hear about this chemo so can't help you about! Again thank you for asking and hope to see you more often in the board!
Un beso! Rezare por vosotros!0 -
48-hour fast
I wish I had seen your question a year ago. I hope your dad is still a survivor.
My wife has advanced colon cancer since 2008. It has spread to her liver, lungs, and several lymph nodes. She has been on chemo for almost 4 years now and for 3 of those years she has been doing the 48-hour fast that Dr. Valter Longo of USC has been advocating and is now doing clinical trials at USC. She is not a participant in those trials, but she has been doing the fast on her own.
My observation of the fast is that it definitely works! I know this is true because her doctor's assiatant wanted her to skip the fast for just one cycle so she did (against our better judgment). The result was that she was so tired that she slept for most of 2 days due to fatigue. This had NEVER happened before so we know that it was the result of her good cells being damaged by the chemo.
I've read some of the comments from people who say that it is nonsense. I say they don't know what they are talking about, they have never tried it, and they are the last people I would take advice from. Keep in mind that the fast will not cure advanced cancer, but it will make many of the side effects of chemo more tolerable. She is still doing the fast and is about to restart her chemo. I have even been communicating with Valter Longo and he indicated to me that what we have observed is what he has been seeing in his clinical trials.
Fasting for 48 hours is definitely doable, so it is not like you are starving to death. It doesn't cost you anything but a little inconvenience. As long as one is in reasonably good health, I don't see a problem with it. My personal feeling is that fasting is one way of being proactive instead of just being pumped full of toxic chemicals. It is no secret that being upbeat and positive makes a difference and fasting is something that takes some personal commitment abd a desire to survive.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. My wife's oncologist told us that someone with her type of cancer only lives 12 months tops, but here she is 4 years later. I did my share of research before deciding that the 48-hour fast was based on good scientific research. Everyone on chemo should try it unless they enjoy feeling tired and sick because they will be surprised.0 -
Fasting is definitely worth a try!
Hi Gabrielle,
I have also been following this research. I have the privilege of having access to medical research articles from my university, but there have also been several articles in the news lately as well. This research looks very promising - so much so that the Mayo clinic has started a clinical trial. My Dad starts chemo this wed. and we are definitely giving the fasting a try! He may not be up for it the rest of the treatment, but at least we can hit this thing with everything we have for the first round.
Here are some links:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01175837
http://www.impactaging.com/papers/v1/n12/full/100114.html
http://www.hemonctoday.com/article.aspx?rid=94984
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120209/Fasting-and-chemotherapy-drugs-more-effectively-treat-cancers.aspx
And a quote from one of the articles:
“The take-home message for oncologists should be to consider it and decide whether, based on each specific case and the options available, it is reasonable to suggest fasting to the patient before clinical trials are completed,”
- Karrie0 -
Thanks for this detailed information.asuehiro said:48-hour fast
I wish I had seen your question a year ago. I hope your dad is still a survivor.
My wife has advanced colon cancer since 2008. It has spread to her liver, lungs, and several lymph nodes. She has been on chemo for almost 4 years now and for 3 of those years she has been doing the 48-hour fast that Dr. Valter Longo of USC has been advocating and is now doing clinical trials at USC. She is not a participant in those trials, but she has been doing the fast on her own.
My observation of the fast is that it definitely works! I know this is true because her doctor's assiatant wanted her to skip the fast for just one cycle so she did (against our better judgment). The result was that she was so tired that she slept for most of 2 days due to fatigue. This had NEVER happened before so we know that it was the result of her good cells being damaged by the chemo.
I've read some of the comments from people who say that it is nonsense. I say they don't know what they are talking about, they have never tried it, and they are the last people I would take advice from. Keep in mind that the fast will not cure advanced cancer, but it will make many of the side effects of chemo more tolerable. She is still doing the fast and is about to restart her chemo. I have even been communicating with Valter Longo and he indicated to me that what we have observed is what he has been seeing in his clinical trials.
Fasting for 48 hours is definitely doable, so it is not like you are starving to death. It doesn't cost you anything but a little inconvenience. As long as one is in reasonably good health, I don't see a problem with it. My personal feeling is that fasting is one way of being proactive instead of just being pumped full of toxic chemicals. It is no secret that being upbeat and positive makes a difference and fasting is something that takes some personal commitment abd a desire to survive.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. My wife's oncologist told us that someone with her type of cancer only lives 12 months tops, but here she is 4 years later. I did my share of research before deciding that the 48-hour fast was based on good scientific research. Everyone on chemo should try it unless they enjoy feeling tired and sick because they will be surprised.
I haven't talked to anyone who has tried this yet, so I appreciate you sharing this!
I have a questions if you don't mind asking...Was your wife also going through radiation? My Dad is having radiation treatments on monday and tuesday of next week, and then doing the first chemo wed morning. He has been keeping his weight and strength up getting ready for the 48 hours fast starting monday morning.
My question is about the anti-nausea radiation meds given on monday and tuesday - cand we take them without food?
Thanks again for sharing!
- Karrie0 -
NOT SO FAST ASUEHIROasuehiro said:48-hour fast
I wish I had seen your question a year ago. I hope your dad is still a survivor.
My wife has advanced colon cancer since 2008. It has spread to her liver, lungs, and several lymph nodes. She has been on chemo for almost 4 years now and for 3 of those years she has been doing the 48-hour fast that Dr. Valter Longo of USC has been advocating and is now doing clinical trials at USC. She is not a participant in those trials, but she has been doing the fast on her own.
My observation of the fast is that it definitely works! I know this is true because her doctor's assiatant wanted her to skip the fast for just one cycle so she did (against our better judgment). The result was that she was so tired that she slept for most of 2 days due to fatigue. This had NEVER happened before so we know that it was the result of her good cells being damaged by the chemo.
I've read some of the comments from people who say that it is nonsense. I say they don't know what they are talking about, they have never tried it, and they are the last people I would take advice from. Keep in mind that the fast will not cure advanced cancer, but it will make many of the side effects of chemo more tolerable. She is still doing the fast and is about to restart her chemo. I have even been communicating with Valter Longo and he indicated to me that what we have observed is what he has been seeing in his clinical trials.
Fasting for 48 hours is definitely doable, so it is not like you are starving to death. It doesn't cost you anything but a little inconvenience. As long as one is in reasonably good health, I don't see a problem with it. My personal feeling is that fasting is one way of being proactive instead of just being pumped full of toxic chemicals. It is no secret that being upbeat and positive makes a difference and fasting is something that takes some personal commitment abd a desire to survive.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. My wife's oncologist told us that someone with her type of cancer only lives 12 months tops, but here she is 4 years later. I did my share of research before deciding that the 48-hour fast was based on good scientific research. Everyone on chemo should try it unless they enjoy feeling tired and sick because they will be surprised.
The study as of Feb 2012 still talks about the testing in mice. And here I quote Dr. Longo's own words:
"We don't know whether in humans it's effective," Longo says, adding that for now fasting should be "off-limits" to cancer patients, although they should feel they can ask their doctors about the possibility."
AND the human trials weren't started UNTIL 2010 and no results are in, and Dr. Longo, did NOT advocate that humans do this until testing has been done. As you can see in is above statement, he recommends you do NOT try it at this time. And they only claim in the trial so far, people PERCEIVE it as helping,(which means if you think it is doing good, then yes, I have to agree it's a good thing, but when the Dr. states that it should be "off-limits" to cancer patients at this time, I think I would listen to that first. And since this was a trial that was done in 2010 and we haven't heard further about it, I'm assuming it wasn't successful. BUT, no matter what it SHOULD be discussed with their ONCOLOGIST FIRST as Dr. Longo recommends.
I see this is your first post and I highly recommend you don't recommend highly something WITHOUT mentioning that even Dr. Longo recommends you FIRST talk to your oncologist, the good Dr. Longo even states should NOT be done at this moment, hence as you previously stated you "would be that last person I would take this advice from".
Winter Marie0 -
Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories
Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories from one or two people on this board.
Use formal study results and discuss with ONC. Also, for blood testing purposes, 10 to 12 hours hours is nomrally sufficient to bring glucose to fasting levels. My wife suffers so much from not eating enough for many days after chemo that I would never advocate she go without food for two days prior. it would be dangerous in her case.
Google scholar and PubMed ar great search tools and info here is often a good starting point. But be careful and be thorough.0 -
why not fast , i love stories, i'll not wait for a trialpeterz54 said:Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories
Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories from one or two people on this board.
Use formal study results and discuss with ONC. Also, for blood testing purposes, 10 to 12 hours hours is nomrally sufficient to bring glucose to fasting levels. My wife suffers so much from not eating enough for many days after chemo that I would never advocate she go without food for two days prior. it would be dangerous in her case.
Google scholar and PubMed ar great search tools and info here is often a good starting point. But be careful and be thorough.
fasting is good for our health and soul,
heaps of possible benefits, some great examples. and of course lots a caveats.
my favourite story , is my lord jesus. he went for a 40 day fast a few thousand years ago.
he survived and floated off to heaven. then now days gandi, or here in sydney petria king.
i just consulted with "alec burton" the worlds leading long faster. i am ready to do it.
imagine eating your tumour from within to stay alive.
it will never make it into clinical practice for onc's
but a few adventurous soles on the bleeding edge, willing to absolutley anything to beat cancer could give it a try.
i have based my life on the bible, thats a few great stories. its how civilization developed.
technically when the stomach is full satiety.
some chemical messages get sent out cck i think.
our immune cells have receptors for these, when they see a cck the immune cells goto sleep.
this way we can digest food without suffering a bad autoimmune response. based on molecules emotion by pert.
so when you fast, you enable your immune system. thats also what happends when you sleep, unless you eat and then sleep.
so resting digestion is fasting.
the other area of benefit i suspect is removing the load from the liver and kidneys.
so when the toxic by products of chemo need to get flushed out the out detox systems are firing hopefully.
did you know platinum gets flushed out the liver the bile, liver, intestine path, not the kidney and pee.
a few studies proved no weight loss doing alternative day fasting. of course this depends on the patient.
sorry mate , but ask your onc how good her survival numbers are ?
i asked mine and cannot even get a straight answer.
onc's have the double blind handcuffs on. all modern medicine does. the establishment wants profit, our lives pay for their yatchs and holidays.
i am not blaming my doctors, i appreciate them, i owe my life and current health to them, but i also see the constraints they have to operate under. the legal, effical.
i'll never wait for a clinical study, if the science has merit, and it won't kill me, then i will try it.
i'd rather die trying then live waiting for a trial. but thats my decision.
to each his own of course.
and i always get medical advice before taking any supplements and trust your own instincts and remember if you put 1000 doctors onto a yatch you will get 1,000,000 opinions about the best holiday resort or conference to goto. now i am not doctor bashing just explaining my view that they are human, they are apart of a medical system based on profit motive, not patient care and legal self interest and self protection.
and then they care for us.
that why nd's naturopathic doctors are often getting real results because they are not handcuffed and they address the real causes of peoples illnesses, cellular dysfunction. drugs don't fix these issues, fix the real cause which is often diet and life style does.
sorry for the long winded answer. all fasting needs to be supervised, on the longer fasts blood and urines are done daily to ensure essential organs are coping.
if we lived under a different legal framework i suspect many of us would have a longer and happier life. just my opinion. in my own country our fta will not allow a patient to attend a medical seminar. the doctors have exclusivity over information, the good news, try as they will, i will get in the back door by hook or by crook. it was easier to attend a conference in the usa then it is in my own country.
sorry but i won't wait for trials. but if they comeout and offer benefits i will certainly adopt them.
as we head into individualised molecular medicine, we leave the dinosaurs in the medical establishment behind trying to workout trials. then the results get fudged look at the multi billion dollar fines the drug company have paid.
i have asked my onc about my immune dysfunction every visit for almost two years. only yesterday did i find, i have platinum poisoning from oxaliplatin that disabled elements of my immune system.
this is more of a vent at my frustration at our medical system here and the headaches i am having trying to get the care i need.
i wish one doctor had all the answers, my life would be so much easier.
what you said about your wife and not fasting sounds right for her.
and of course pubmed is worth its weight in platinum.
i liked this discussion, i will seriously lookinto the above studies if i start chemo again. i really really hope not.
some of us will just do the clinical standard of care.
some of us will do the opposite.
some of us will do a hybrid.
we just can make the best decisions based on our own circumstances.
these are not easy decisions to make, but they have to be made.
hugs,
pete0 -
Fasting has been shown to be of value,pete43lost_at_sea said:why not fast , i love stories, i'll not wait for a trial
fasting is good for our health and soul,
heaps of possible benefits, some great examples. and of course lots a caveats.
my favourite story , is my lord jesus. he went for a 40 day fast a few thousand years ago.
he survived and floated off to heaven. then now days gandi, or here in sydney petria king.
i just consulted with "alec burton" the worlds leading long faster. i am ready to do it.
imagine eating your tumour from within to stay alive.
it will never make it into clinical practice for onc's
but a few adventurous soles on the bleeding edge, willing to absolutley anything to beat cancer could give it a try.
i have based my life on the bible, thats a few great stories. its how civilization developed.
technically when the stomach is full satiety.
some chemical messages get sent out cck i think.
our immune cells have receptors for these, when they see a cck the immune cells goto sleep.
this way we can digest food without suffering a bad autoimmune response. based on molecules emotion by pert.
so when you fast, you enable your immune system. thats also what happends when you sleep, unless you eat and then sleep.
so resting digestion is fasting.
the other area of benefit i suspect is removing the load from the liver and kidneys.
so when the toxic by products of chemo need to get flushed out the out detox systems are firing hopefully.
did you know platinum gets flushed out the liver the bile, liver, intestine path, not the kidney and pee.
a few studies proved no weight loss doing alternative day fasting. of course this depends on the patient.
sorry mate , but ask your onc how good her survival numbers are ?
i asked mine and cannot even get a straight answer.
onc's have the double blind handcuffs on. all modern medicine does. the establishment wants profit, our lives pay for their yatchs and holidays.
i am not blaming my doctors, i appreciate them, i owe my life and current health to them, but i also see the constraints they have to operate under. the legal, effical.
i'll never wait for a clinical study, if the science has merit, and it won't kill me, then i will try it.
i'd rather die trying then live waiting for a trial. but thats my decision.
to each his own of course.
and i always get medical advice before taking any supplements and trust your own instincts and remember if you put 1000 doctors onto a yatch you will get 1,000,000 opinions about the best holiday resort or conference to goto. now i am not doctor bashing just explaining my view that they are human, they are apart of a medical system based on profit motive, not patient care and legal self interest and self protection.
and then they care for us.
that why nd's naturopathic doctors are often getting real results because they are not handcuffed and they address the real causes of peoples illnesses, cellular dysfunction. drugs don't fix these issues, fix the real cause which is often diet and life style does.
sorry for the long winded answer. all fasting needs to be supervised, on the longer fasts blood and urines are done daily to ensure essential organs are coping.
if we lived under a different legal framework i suspect many of us would have a longer and happier life. just my opinion. in my own country our fta will not allow a patient to attend a medical seminar. the doctors have exclusivity over information, the good news, try as they will, i will get in the back door by hook or by crook. it was easier to attend a conference in the usa then it is in my own country.
sorry but i won't wait for trials. but if they comeout and offer benefits i will certainly adopt them.
as we head into individualised molecular medicine, we leave the dinosaurs in the medical establishment behind trying to workout trials. then the results get fudged look at the multi billion dollar fines the drug company have paid.
i have asked my onc about my immune dysfunction every visit for almost two years. only yesterday did i find, i have platinum poisoning from oxaliplatin that disabled elements of my immune system.
this is more of a vent at my frustration at our medical system here and the headaches i am having trying to get the care i need.
i wish one doctor had all the answers, my life would be so much easier.
what you said about your wife and not fasting sounds right for her.
and of course pubmed is worth its weight in platinum.
i liked this discussion, i will seriously lookinto the above studies if i start chemo again. i really really hope not.
some of us will just do the clinical standard of care.
some of us will do the opposite.
some of us will do a hybrid.
we just can make the best decisions based on our own circumstances.
these are not easy decisions to make, but they have to be made.
hugs,
pete
maybe great value, for healthy people and animals. It may be of value for the sick as well under certain circumstances. And some evidence points to lower glucose, which fasting will cause, to be of value in terms of overall survival for cancer patients.
But my point really is to be informed.
no one here should go to an oncologist if you don't value trials and studies as that is exactly what your oncologist will base your regime upon. I agree, though, that there is often more you can do, but what you add to the basic regime should have evidence and not anecdotal stories to back it up.0 -
thanks peterpeterz54 said:Fasting has been shown to be of value,
maybe great value, for healthy people and animals. It may be of value for the sick as well under certain circumstances. And some evidence points to lower glucose, which fasting will cause, to be of value in terms of overall survival for cancer patients.
But my point really is to be informed.
no one here should go to an oncologist if you don't value trials and studies as that is exactly what your oncologist will base your regime upon. I agree, though, that there is often more you can do, but what you add to the basic regime should have evidence and not anecdotal stories to back it up.
agreed informed is the key, and to each of us thats different.
i saw 4 doctors yesterday, each had valuable input.
none of it based on cancer trials, most of its based on clinical experience.
no trials available for me, no treatment at this point either.
so i can do what i want to myself. remember a cea problem and no evidence of disease after two pets and two ct scans and an ultrasound.
the world is my oyster, lots of interesting therapies to try. few have legitamite double blind studies. in the absence of studies, i rely on expert opinions and experience. lot of which is ancedotal.
doing that dam cea today, its been 5 weeks.0 -
Pete,pete43lost_at_sea said:thanks peter
agreed informed is the key, and to each of us thats different.
i saw 4 doctors yesterday, each had valuable input.
none of it based on cancer trials, most of its based on clinical experience.
no trials available for me, no treatment at this point either.
so i can do what i want to myself. remember a cea problem and no evidence of disease after two pets and two ct scans and an ultrasound.
the world is my oyster, lots of interesting therapies to try. few have legitamite double blind studies. in the absence of studies, i rely on expert opinions and experience. lot of which is ancedotal.
doing that dam cea today, its been 5 weeks.
"so i can do what i want to myself"
You're right Pete, if you want to you can drink hemlock, green tea or even 2 gallons of OJ. You can try bullet therapy, chelation or lymphatic massage. And while some of the other posters said this wasn't for them, no one said it was not for you, and almost all of them recommended discussing it with a doctor, a caveat that says:
"I am not trained, and my experience is limited, before you follow my lead or take my advice please discuss this with a professional."
Leave that out, as you often do, and you are probably giving medical advise, or something close to it, something we are not supposed to do and could have dire consequences.0 -
RadiationKarrie42 said:Thanks for this detailed information.
I haven't talked to anyone who has tried this yet, so I appreciate you sharing this!
I have a questions if you don't mind asking...Was your wife also going through radiation? My Dad is having radiation treatments on monday and tuesday of next week, and then doing the first chemo wed morning. He has been keeping his weight and strength up getting ready for the 48 hours fast starting monday morning.
My question is about the anti-nausea radiation meds given on monday and tuesday - cand we take them without food?
Thanks again for sharing!
- Karrie
Karrie,
No, my wife did not have radiation. Because her cancer had metastasized and spread to so many organs, chemo was the best solution. Radiation is useful when it can be effectively used in localized areas.
As for whether your Dad needs to take food with his anti-nausea medication, you will have to find that out.0 -
Good for youKarrie42 said:Fasting is definitely worth a try!
Hi Gabrielle,
I have also been following this research. I have the privilege of having access to medical research articles from my university, but there have also been several articles in the news lately as well. This research looks very promising - so much so that the Mayo clinic has started a clinical trial. My Dad starts chemo this wed. and we are definitely giving the fasting a try! He may not be up for it the rest of the treatment, but at least we can hit this thing with everything we have for the first round.
Here are some links:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01175837
http://www.impactaging.com/papers/v1/n12/full/100114.html
http://www.hemonctoday.com/article.aspx?rid=94984
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120209/Fasting-and-chemotherapy-drugs-more-effectively-treat-cancers.aspx
And a quote from one of the articles:
“The take-home message for oncologists should be to consider it and decide whether, based on each specific case and the options available, it is reasonable to suggest fasting to the patient before clinical trials are completed,”
- Karrie
Karrie,
I am impressed. You are doing your homework. Many people don't. Whether you are fighting for your own life or someone else's life, you have to be proactive. And the internet is a great way to be proactive for many of us.
There are those people who will absolutely not try the fast because they don't want to feel any worse off than they already are or they just lack the fortitude. That is their choice and their life. Of course, if they become so sick from chemo that they just call it quits, the cancer will win out sooner rather than later. Many of us know of people who did quit and they are no longer here.
Before my wife decided on doing the 48-hour fast I was also apprehensive about how hard it would be for her to do, but in retrospect it wasn't very difficult for her and you couldn't comvince her today not to do it.
When I first heard of Valter Longo's experiments with mice, I was really interested. And when he received a grant to do clinical trials I knew that the scientific community knew that he may be on to something. The interesting thing is that rather than waiting for a new miracle drug to cure cancer, there are people out there who are finding better ways to treat rather than cure cancer because the "miracle cure" may not be within reach in our lifetime. I call it "learning to lve with cancer".
And here is something that you can look up since you are the proactive type: There is a study going on right now at Ohio State University that involves the chemical dopamine. It has been discovered that dopamine (which our body produces) causes blood vessels to grow within cancerous tumors. On first glance, you might think that it is a bad thing to make cancerous tissue more healthy by enabling it to grow new blood vessels so that the cancer can grow even faster. I thought so too, until I read that by developing more blood vessels the chemo drugs have a much better chance of invading the cancerous tissue and destroying the cancer cells. Cancerous tissue has blood vessels on the outside where it can find the nutrients to feed itself (and cancer likes to grow...and quicly), but the internal network of blood vessels is not as well developed or as extensive, so getting more chemo drugs into the tissue will naturally make the chemo more effective. I mentioned this to my wife's oncologist and he found it very interesting and will "keep his ear to the ground" concerning that research and keep an eye open for local clinical trials concerning dopamine. He also doesn't discourage my wife from doing the 48-hour fast and he was somewhat awestruck that she is still alive and so full of life. And when he found out that she still works 16 hours a week, he was speechless. It is that positive outlook thing again.0 -
it is not all black or whitepeterz54 said:Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories
Do NOT base therapy on anecdotal stories from one or two people on this board.
Use formal study results and discuss with ONC. Also, for blood testing purposes, 10 to 12 hours hours is nomrally sufficient to bring glucose to fasting levels. My wife suffers so much from not eating enough for many days after chemo that I would never advocate she go without food for two days prior. it would be dangerous in her case.
Google scholar and PubMed ar great search tools and info here is often a good starting point. But be careful and be thorough.
Peterz54,
In an ideal world, what you say is correct, but we do not live in an ideal world. In my wife's case, she has stage 4 colorectal cancer and shouldn't even be alive today. Also, when you consider doing a 48-hour fast on a reasonably healthy person it is a walk in the park.
The theory behind fasting prior to doing chemo is that your good fast growing cells (hair, skin, nails, gastrointestinal tract, etc.) will put up a "shield" to protect itself from harm caused by starvation. At the same time, the bad fast growing cells (cancer) aren't as capable and still get hit by the chemo drugs as expected.
In your wife's case, I don't know her general health so I can't say that fasting is for her. It is also possible that if she did do the fast, she won't be as nauseated after chemo and will be able to eat. Thas is just my guess.
My wife figured she has advanced cancer, her prognosis is not good, so why not? And Valter Lomgo's theories are nothing to sneeze at from a scientific point of view. I am just sharing my "anecdotal story" and you can take it for what its worth. I believe that Valter Longo's clinical trials won't be done until 2015 and we weren't going to wait that long. For us the risk is minimal when compared to the alternative. Again, it is a personal choice type of thing and sometimes you only have one shot at it.0 -
we are all experts on us, our journeyBuckwirth said:Pete,
"so i can do what i want to myself"
You're right Pete, if you want to you can drink hemlock, green tea or even 2 gallons of OJ. You can try bullet therapy, chelation or lymphatic massage. And while some of the other posters said this wasn't for them, no one said it was not for you, and almost all of them recommended discussing it with a doctor, a caveat that says:
"I am not trained, and my experience is limited, before you follow my lead or take my advice please discuss this with a professional."
Leave that out, as you often do, and you are probably giving medical advise, or something close to it, something we are not supposed to do and could have dire consequences.
all i ever say is do what feels right for you.
i may add try and do it with a smile.
me give medical advice, i doubt it, no one listens,
few replies.
i am the john the batpist,
the voice in the wilderness.
mate, mondays result is a big one for me,
is any of the alternativres, helping, well i feel great, look good,
in the best health of my life except for a few shitttty cells.
thanks for keeping me on the straight and arrow, remember over a year ago i was.
i do my own thing, i cannot even get my care right, let alone give medical advice to anyone.
my advice, which is really just my approach is to pursue health,
ok a bit extremely, but i feel absolutely desparate.
we know the truth of mcrc, its relentless.
i just am fighting fire with fire.
hugs,
pete
ps if i ever give advice, you or any of my buddies here just post and remind me. i don't want the responsibility. if giving people advice to get the best care they have access to , to obtain real health, then i am guilty, and not ashamed of that. i have moved most of my research to my blog, ok its a mess, but i know have a few great doctors around the world following my case, my results, offering insights for my treatment, noone elses.
agreed i don't accept the onc's have all the answers, if they said they could save me, with a money back guarantee, i'd give the alternative universe a break.
all my onc said was, pete your ships coming in and theirs nothing we can do to turn it around.
yes for the green tea, no for the oj and hemlock. is hemlock got any anticancer possibilities ? only joking. got to dash and have a coffee.
if anything i am not a great advertisement for alternatives, my cea went up. alas.
if it goes down maybe its the oj, but i don't drink it, i get mine iv. that said tonight i purchased a jewlry cleaning machine, that we can ad ascorbate to, with lecithin, which then allows us to get iv concentrations of vit c, but orally. the cost oh about $40 for a coupel of months supply.
did you see the comment weeks ago about iv vit c and colorectal trial for stage 3 to prevent recurrence. its so far off the radar, its not on the web anywhere. all i can say is the roulette wheel is spinning. i hope we all get some lucky numbers coming up.
my lucky number would be under 10, now that would be great. i might as well hope. its all i got.0 -
thanks auehiroasuehiro said:it is not all black or white
Peterz54,
In an ideal world, what you say is correct, but we do not live in an ideal world. In my wife's case, she has stage 4 colorectal cancer and shouldn't even be alive today. Also, when you consider doing a 48-hour fast on a reasonably healthy person it is a walk in the park.
The theory behind fasting prior to doing chemo is that your good fast growing cells (hair, skin, nails, gastrointestinal tract, etc.) will put up a "shield" to protect itself from harm caused by starvation. At the same time, the bad fast growing cells (cancer) aren't as capable and still get hit by the chemo drugs as expected.
In your wife's case, I don't know her general health so I can't say that fasting is for her. It is also possible that if she did do the fast, she won't be as nauseated after chemo and will be able to eat. Thas is just my guess.
My wife figured she has advanced cancer, her prognosis is not good, so why not? And Valter Lomgo's theories are nothing to sneeze at from a scientific point of view. I am just sharing my "anecdotal story" and you can take it for what its worth. I believe that Valter Longo's clinical trials won't be done until 2015 and we weren't going to wait that long. For us the risk is minimal when compared to the alternative. Again, it is a personal choice type of thing and sometimes you only have one shot at it.
i really like your approach.
i hope you with was an improvement in her health.
after reading your post above, i also notes lomgo's been mentioned in the post steve colocan made about the limitations of molecular based medicine.
your choice is against the mainstream, you are to be congratulated as pushing the envelope of treatment in the alternative universe is what provides the case studies, that then may provide the evidence for pilot studies, and then clincal trials. that cycle takes decades, if what you try works and it has no downside, i will be following your updates with interest.
we are free here to express our opinions and share our journey. thanks for sharing yours, it has as much merit as everyones , and to me a little more interesting becuase the chemo journey on the clinical path was been well trodden here, is well known.
your journey is different and i hope brings success, whatever that means to you!
hugs,
pete0 -
Wish you and your wife wellasuehiro said:it is not all black or white
Peterz54,
In an ideal world, what you say is correct, but we do not live in an ideal world. In my wife's case, she has stage 4 colorectal cancer and shouldn't even be alive today. Also, when you consider doing a 48-hour fast on a reasonably healthy person it is a walk in the park.
The theory behind fasting prior to doing chemo is that your good fast growing cells (hair, skin, nails, gastrointestinal tract, etc.) will put up a "shield" to protect itself from harm caused by starvation. At the same time, the bad fast growing cells (cancer) aren't as capable and still get hit by the chemo drugs as expected.
In your wife's case, I don't know her general health so I can't say that fasting is for her. It is also possible that if she did do the fast, she won't be as nauseated after chemo and will be able to eat. Thas is just my guess.
My wife figured she has advanced cancer, her prognosis is not good, so why not? And Valter Lomgo's theories are nothing to sneeze at from a scientific point of view. I am just sharing my "anecdotal story" and you can take it for what its worth. I believe that Valter Longo's clinical trials won't be done until 2015 and we weren't going to wait that long. For us the risk is minimal when compared to the alternative. Again, it is a personal choice type of thing and sometimes you only have one shot at it.
my wife is also stage IV, and her extensive liver mets were not operable at outset. She is in the middle of a grueling 12 course chemo program. I consider the clock to be ticking. I have found some valuable information in this forum, but my approach, being a skeptic in nearly all things, is to find supporting data or rationale, studies, trials, etc. to try to rank the potential value of what I learn. So much of what I find places us in a gray world, neither black or white, and for those gray options we do have to make individual choices.0 -
Being Open-mindedpete43lost_at_sea said:thanks auehiro
i really like your approach.
i hope you with was an improvement in her health.
after reading your post above, i also notes lomgo's been mentioned in the post steve colocan made about the limitations of molecular based medicine.
your choice is against the mainstream, you are to be congratulated as pushing the envelope of treatment in the alternative universe is what provides the case studies, that then may provide the evidence for pilot studies, and then clincal trials. that cycle takes decades, if what you try works and it has no downside, i will be following your updates with interest.
we are free here to express our opinions and share our journey. thanks for sharing yours, it has as much merit as everyones , and to me a little more interesting becuase the chemo journey on the clinical path was been well trodden here, is well known.
your journey is different and i hope brings success, whatever that means to you!
hugs,
pete
Pete,
Thanks for your open-mindedness. There is a lot of fear and skepticism out there when it comes to cancer treatment. There are also a lot of scammers and people with screwball ideas. It is tough, especially for those people who are suddenly thrown into this vortex of information and misinformation. And I feel for those people who just want to do the right thing. It is not easy, but you just have to do the best you can.
I am fortunate to know people with heavy science backgrounds. My wife and I are also very fortunate to have an oncologist who is young, bright, inquisitive, and willing to go the extra yard for his patients. Many doctors become "set in their ways" or are forced to follow the standard guidelines of their hospital and will not waver from that direction. They would never recommend a patient to do a fast because it is not standard procedure. My feeling is that sometimes you have to take a chance if your life is at stake, but doing a fast is not the same as drinking a gallon of poison. In fact, when you think about it, the toxicity of chemo drugs is akin to pouring poison into one's body. It is very toxic stuff.
My wife is very important to me and I am using my best judgment and intuition to seek out the best and practical route for her to take under the circumstances. I also feel obligated, as a human being, to share my knowledge and experience with anyone who sincerely seeks it.
And as to those naysayers out there (and there will never be a shortage of them), do whatever you want. We are all grown adults and are free to do as we wish. Just imagine if in early America, the colonists believed the tales of horror and deprivation that awaited them west of the Rockies. Everyone would be crowded on the East coast and California wouldn't even be a state. The pioneer spirit doesn't always mean hitching up a wagon and heading to parts unknown, sometimes it just means using ggod judgment and taking a leap of faith.0 -
I know how you must feelpeterz54 said:Wish you and your wife well
my wife is also stage IV, and her extensive liver mets were not operable at outset. She is in the middle of a grueling 12 course chemo program. I consider the clock to be ticking. I have found some valuable information in this forum, but my approach, being a skeptic in nearly all things, is to find supporting data or rationale, studies, trials, etc. to try to rank the potential value of what I learn. So much of what I find places us in a gray world, neither black or white, and for those gray options we do have to make individual choices.
Thank you.
My wife also has inoperable cancer in her liver and lungs and has been doing the chemo thing for abour 4 years. What I failed to mention is that this past January she was told that her chemo was no longer effective. Her cancer cells have mutated and become resistant to her chemo treatment, so she has been taken off of chemo. This is not an uncommon scenario in the world of cancer treatment. However, as luck would have it, her brilliant oncologist (who has only been her doctor for less than 6 months) discovered in her medical history that the frontline chemo drug oxaliplatin was taken off her list of chemo drugs in the first 6 month of her chemo treatment by a previous doctor. He thought that this occurred because oxaliplatin wasn't working, but then he discovered that this happened because of the bad side effects and the oxaliplatin was effective. So, now she restarts her chemo this coming Tuesday with oxaliplatin and some other drugs. Her doctor will start her off gradually and monitor the side effects. During those early months of her chemo she was not doing the 48-hour fast because it was still an unknown concept. Maybe this time the side effects of oxaliplatin won't be as bad because she will be doing the 48-hour fast. In fact, she is willing to make it a 60-hour fast and see if it helps any. She remembers the negative side effects and wants to do her best to avoid that scenario. She is a tough little cookie, so I have no doubt she will do it.
We know the clock is ticking and we won't waste a moment.0 -
a few more thingsasuehiro said:I know how you must feel
Thank you.
My wife also has inoperable cancer in her liver and lungs and has been doing the chemo thing for abour 4 years. What I failed to mention is that this past January she was told that her chemo was no longer effective. Her cancer cells have mutated and become resistant to her chemo treatment, so she has been taken off of chemo. This is not an uncommon scenario in the world of cancer treatment. However, as luck would have it, her brilliant oncologist (who has only been her doctor for less than 6 months) discovered in her medical history that the frontline chemo drug oxaliplatin was taken off her list of chemo drugs in the first 6 month of her chemo treatment by a previous doctor. He thought that this occurred because oxaliplatin wasn't working, but then he discovered that this happened because of the bad side effects and the oxaliplatin was effective. So, now she restarts her chemo this coming Tuesday with oxaliplatin and some other drugs. Her doctor will start her off gradually and monitor the side effects. During those early months of her chemo she was not doing the 48-hour fast because it was still an unknown concept. Maybe this time the side effects of oxaliplatin won't be as bad because she will be doing the 48-hour fast. In fact, she is willing to make it a 60-hour fast and see if it helps any. She remembers the negative side effects and wants to do her best to avoid that scenario. She is a tough little cookie, so I have no doubt she will do it.
We know the clock is ticking and we won't waste a moment.
working from memory here, which is likely faulty, but on the slim chance you are not aware of some of this and have the time to followup and validate...
if your wife is KRAS-Mut (will not let EGFR inhibitors work) it may be all the more important to dial down mTOR, which fasting and/or protein deprivation does. So, if she can tolerate fasting well, you are probably OK. In any case, the signaling path of which mTOR is part of, is implicated in aging and cell proliferation, and there is evidence (google scholar/pubmed) to suggest that inhibiting mTOR slows aging related diseases. There is research ongoing to create mTOR inhibitors for use in oncology but the literature also suggests that a number of polyphenols (plant chemicals) will help dial mTOR down as well, but degree unknown.
may also check out the angiogenesis foundation which has done good work to identify potential natural angiogenesis inhibitors in foods (mostly plants, again)
as for oxaliplatin, our ONC was not keen on calcium and magnesium infusions or glutamine usage to stave off neuropathy, a major side effect. but again, the literature suggest that they can help.
our ONC also suggests that of a year or more has passed then reintroducing former drugs is more likely to work, hence going back to oxaliplatin...
good luck....0 -
I had a similar experienceasuehiro said:I know how you must feel
Thank you.
My wife also has inoperable cancer in her liver and lungs and has been doing the chemo thing for abour 4 years. What I failed to mention is that this past January she was told that her chemo was no longer effective. Her cancer cells have mutated and become resistant to her chemo treatment, so she has been taken off of chemo. This is not an uncommon scenario in the world of cancer treatment. However, as luck would have it, her brilliant oncologist (who has only been her doctor for less than 6 months) discovered in her medical history that the frontline chemo drug oxaliplatin was taken off her list of chemo drugs in the first 6 month of her chemo treatment by a previous doctor. He thought that this occurred because oxaliplatin wasn't working, but then he discovered that this happened because of the bad side effects and the oxaliplatin was effective. So, now she restarts her chemo this coming Tuesday with oxaliplatin and some other drugs. Her doctor will start her off gradually and monitor the side effects. During those early months of her chemo she was not doing the 48-hour fast because it was still an unknown concept. Maybe this time the side effects of oxaliplatin won't be as bad because she will be doing the 48-hour fast. In fact, she is willing to make it a 60-hour fast and see if it helps any. She remembers the negative side effects and wants to do her best to avoid that scenario. She is a tough little cookie, so I have no doubt she will do it.
We know the clock is ticking and we won't waste a moment.
Most of the details are here:
My Story
I will say that Folfox is easier for me the second time around, no nausea, very little neuropathy, no bowel changes and no stomach cramping.
While I would not dream of intentionally fasting prior to chemo (I have appetite problems as it is) I am neither for nor against this as an option. My only point is that your oncologist should be consulted, and anyone telling a personal story be clear that it is just that, personal, and your mileage may vary.0
Discussion Boards
- All Discussion Boards
- 6 CSN Information
- 6 Welcome to CSN
- 121.8K Cancer specific
- 2.8K Anal Cancer
- 446 Bladder Cancer
- 309 Bone Cancers
- 1.6K Brain Cancer
- 28.5K Breast Cancer
- 397 Childhood Cancers
- 27.9K Colorectal Cancer
- 4.6K Esophageal Cancer
- 1.2K Gynecological Cancers (other than ovarian and uterine)
- 13K Head and Neck Cancer
- 6.4K Kidney Cancer
- 671 Leukemia
- 792 Liver Cancer
- 4.1K Lung Cancer
- 5.1K Lymphoma (Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin)
- 237 Multiple Myeloma
- 7.1K Ovarian Cancer
- 61 Pancreatic Cancer
- 487 Peritoneal Cancer
- 5.5K Prostate Cancer
- 1.2K Rare and Other Cancers
- 539 Sarcoma
- 730 Skin Cancer
- 653 Stomach Cancer
- 191 Testicular Cancer
- 1.5K Thyroid Cancer
- 5.8K Uterine/Endometrial Cancer
- 6.3K Lifestyle Discussion Boards