Cancer Nutrition

bubba29
bubba29 Member Posts: 14
edited January 2014 in Breast Cancer #1
Has anyone done any reading on cancer nutrition? Seem keeping blood sugar down would help a lot.

http://escapetheherdblog.blogspot.com/2012/06/cancer-minus-glucose-equals-dead-cancer.html
http://escapetheherdblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/cancer-post.html
«1

Comments

  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #2
    Actually I have, and the
    Actually I have, and the bottom line is pretty much eat a balanced diet with the same recommendations as most any healthy diet, including for diabetes. One site that I particularly like on this subject is American Institute for Cancer Research: http://www.aicr.org/reduce-your-cancer-risk/diet/reduce_diet_recipes_test_kitchen.html

    I've also learned some useful tips for temporary diet changes to help with some transient side effects of chemo.
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #3
    NancyJac said:

    Actually I have, and the
    Actually I have, and the bottom line is pretty much eat a balanced diet with the same recommendations as most any healthy diet, including for diabetes. One site that I particularly like on this subject is American Institute for Cancer Research: http://www.aicr.org/reduce-your-cancer-risk/diet/reduce_diet_recipes_test_kitchen.html

    I've also learned some useful tips for temporary diet changes to help with some transient side effects of chemo.

    appears the AICR is not
    appears the AICR is not basing their recommendations on the latest information. carbohydrates feed cancer. their recommendations do not appear to restrict carbs at all, in fact they almost seem emphasized.
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #4
    bubba29 said:

    appears the AICR is not
    appears the AICR is not basing their recommendations on the latest information. carbohydrates feed cancer. their recommendations do not appear to restrict carbs at all, in fact they almost seem emphasized.

    The latest information
    The latest information doesn't necessarily mean the most reliable information. I have not been able to find any reliable evidence that carbohydrates feed cancer. All I have seen are a few zealots with unsupported theories. If carbohydrates feed cancer then we should stop eating all vegetables and eat nothing but meat and fat. There are 3 macro-nutrients......protein, carbohydrates, and fat. Carbohyrates are the only macro-nutrient that feed the brain. They are also critical for proper functioning of many vital organs including the liver, kidneys and intestines. The FDA, ACS, ADA, and any licensed dietitian have always and still do recommend that carbohydrates (in the form of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains) comprise over half of our nutritional intake. Everything we eat, whether it is carbohydrate, protein, or fat, eventually is converted to sugar in order for our bodies to be able to use it as fuel. All reliable nutrition sources including AICR recommend limiting simple sugar intake. But simple sugars are only one type of carbohydrate. Unfortunately, a lot of people have come to equate refined sugar with carbohydrates and label them both as "bad" and just isn't true.

    You might find this article informative: https://www.caring4cancer.com/go/cancer/nutrition/questions/sugar-and-cancer-is-there-a-connection.htm
  • Rague
    Rague Member Posts: 3,653 Member
    #5
    DUH!
    Have any of us done any reading - that is a DUH! Of course - many/most have.

    I became hypoglycemic a while after last TX so I have to keep my 'sugar' level up. So yes I do work at keeping 'sugar' levels within normal with my balanced diet which includes a lot of FRESH veggies and fruit but there are times I have to resort to 'sweets' to keep the level up.
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #6
    NancyJac said:

    The latest information
    The latest information doesn't necessarily mean the most reliable information. I have not been able to find any reliable evidence that carbohydrates feed cancer. All I have seen are a few zealots with unsupported theories. If carbohydrates feed cancer then we should stop eating all vegetables and eat nothing but meat and fat. There are 3 macro-nutrients......protein, carbohydrates, and fat. Carbohyrates are the only macro-nutrient that feed the brain. They are also critical for proper functioning of many vital organs including the liver, kidneys and intestines. The FDA, ACS, ADA, and any licensed dietitian have always and still do recommend that carbohydrates (in the form of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains) comprise over half of our nutritional intake. Everything we eat, whether it is carbohydrate, protein, or fat, eventually is converted to sugar in order for our bodies to be able to use it as fuel. All reliable nutrition sources including AICR recommend limiting simple sugar intake. But simple sugars are only one type of carbohydrate. Unfortunately, a lot of people have come to equate refined sugar with carbohydrates and label them both as "bad" and just isn't true.

    You might find this article informative: https://www.caring4cancer.com/go/cancer/nutrition/questions/sugar-and-cancer-is-there-a-connection.htm

    technically there is no
    technically there is no minimum requirement for carbohydrates in the diet. humans can survive without it. the body can produce glucose from protein through a liver process called gluconeogenisis. the body will produce glucose in this way when it needs it but it will be very small amounts. fat is actually a very good source of energy for the body. that is why it is stored in this form, not as a carbohydrate.

    when doctors want to image for cancer, they often order PET scans with a dose of oral glucose beforehand. the glucose they use causes cancer cells to light up on PET scans. all forms of carbohydrate break down to glucose.

    i suggest people absorb info from these sources:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120626131854.htm
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100407121219.htm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WUlE1VHGA40

    if you really want to prevent cancer, it is well worth your time to look at that material. problem is, dieticians keep making the same recommendations and cancer rates continue to grow.
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #7
    NancyJac said:

    The latest information
    The latest information doesn't necessarily mean the most reliable information. I have not been able to find any reliable evidence that carbohydrates feed cancer. All I have seen are a few zealots with unsupported theories. If carbohydrates feed cancer then we should stop eating all vegetables and eat nothing but meat and fat. There are 3 macro-nutrients......protein, carbohydrates, and fat. Carbohyrates are the only macro-nutrient that feed the brain. They are also critical for proper functioning of many vital organs including the liver, kidneys and intestines. The FDA, ACS, ADA, and any licensed dietitian have always and still do recommend that carbohydrates (in the form of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains) comprise over half of our nutritional intake. Everything we eat, whether it is carbohydrate, protein, or fat, eventually is converted to sugar in order for our bodies to be able to use it as fuel. All reliable nutrition sources including AICR recommend limiting simple sugar intake. But simple sugars are only one type of carbohydrate. Unfortunately, a lot of people have come to equate refined sugar with carbohydrates and label them both as "bad" and just isn't true.

    You might find this article informative: https://www.caring4cancer.com/go/cancer/nutrition/questions/sugar-and-cancer-is-there-a-connection.htm

    regarding that caring 4 cancer link.....they make it sound so simple. they forget to mention that all carbohydrates turn into glucose in the blood. whole wheat bread raises blood glucose as much or more than table sugar. this in turn causes a spike in insulin.

    bottom line is, if cancer is starved of glucose, cancer cells die.
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #8
    bubba29 said:

    regarding that caring 4 cancer link.....they make it sound so simple. they forget to mention that all carbohydrates turn into glucose in the blood. whole wheat bread raises blood glucose as much or more than table sugar. this in turn causes a spike in insulin.

    bottom line is, if cancer is starved of glucose, cancer cells die.

    Bottom line is, if people
    Bottom line is, if people are starved of glucose, people die.

    All proteins and fat turn into glucose in the blood too. Eating a diet free of low in carbohydrates is not healthy. It can lead to many life threatening problems including blocked arteries, heart failure, stroke, high blood pressure, gastro intestinal disorders, and the list goes on and on. Managing blood glucose levels is certainly healthful, but that isn't done by by not eating carbohydrates. And not eating carbohydrates does not prevent or cure cancer.

    I'm not going to try to talk you out of your beliefs, but feel obligated to point out the proven evidence supported by vast research and study.
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #9
    NancyJac said:

    Bottom line is, if people
    Bottom line is, if people are starved of glucose, people die.

    All proteins and fat turn into glucose in the blood too. Eating a diet free of low in carbohydrates is not healthy. It can lead to many life threatening problems including blocked arteries, heart failure, stroke, high blood pressure, gastro intestinal disorders, and the list goes on and on. Managing blood glucose levels is certainly healthful, but that isn't done by by not eating carbohydrates. And not eating carbohydrates does not prevent or cure cancer.

    I'm not going to try to talk you out of your beliefs, but feel obligated to point out the proven evidence supported by vast research and study.

    i am curious if you bothered
    i am curious if you bothered to to look at the links i posted? the evidence is pretty compelling that starving cancer cells of glucose causes those cells to die.

    btw, fat is not turned to glucose. because the body can create glucose from protein, we do not technically need to eat carbohydrates. converting protein to glucose only creates small amounts of glucose comapred to getting it from food. also, i am not saying EVERYONE should avoid carbs. i am saying people with cancer or recovering from cancer should drastically reduce their carb intake especially high glycemic index carbs.
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #10
    bubba29 said:

    technically there is no
    technically there is no minimum requirement for carbohydrates in the diet. humans can survive without it. the body can produce glucose from protein through a liver process called gluconeogenisis. the body will produce glucose in this way when it needs it but it will be very small amounts. fat is actually a very good source of energy for the body. that is why it is stored in this form, not as a carbohydrate.

    when doctors want to image for cancer, they often order PET scans with a dose of oral glucose beforehand. the glucose they use causes cancer cells to light up on PET scans. all forms of carbohydrate break down to glucose.

    i suggest people absorb info from these sources:
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120626131854.htm
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100407121219.htm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WUlE1VHGA40

    if you really want to prevent cancer, it is well worth your time to look at that material. problem is, dieticians keep making the same recommendations and cancer rates continue to grow.

    Quoted from the article you
    Quoted from the article you cited:

    "Graeber and his colleagues demonstrate that glucose starvation -- that is, depriving cancer cells of glucose -- activates a metabolic and signaling amplification loop that leads to cancer cell death as a result of the toxic accumulation of reactive oxygen species, the cell-damaging molecules and ions targeted by antioxidants like vitamin C."

    This study has nothing to do with diet and nutrition. It is about how glucose affects cells. As you and I have both said, everything we eat converts to glucose to provide fuel. The results of this study suggest possibilities for further research to develop drugs that can target cancer cells by preventing or reducing the amount of glucose available to cancer cells. That has absolutely nothing to do with what we eat.

    And quoted from your second cite:

    "Researchers at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center-Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute have designed an experimental drug that chokes off that sugar supply, causing the cells to self destruct.
    The agent, called OSU-CG12, is an example of a new class of anticancer drugs called energy-restriction mimetic agents. It is described in a paper published recently in the Journal of Biological Chemistry."

    Once again, the effort is to develop targeted drug therapies that can prohibit glucose from entering cancer cells while allowing the glucose to enter healthy cells. Without glucose, the healthy cells would die and we would die along with them. In any case, this has nothing to do with what you do or don't eat.
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #11
    bubba29 said:

    i am curious if you bothered
    i am curious if you bothered to to look at the links i posted? the evidence is pretty compelling that starving cancer cells of glucose causes those cells to die.

    btw, fat is not turned to glucose. because the body can create glucose from protein, we do not technically need to eat carbohydrates. converting protein to glucose only creates small amounts of glucose comapred to getting it from food. also, i am not saying EVERYONE should avoid carbs. i am saying people with cancer or recovering from cancer should drastically reduce their carb intake especially high glycemic index carbs.

    Yes I did. Please see my
    Yes I did. Please see my reply above.

    We need carbohydrates in our diet for much more than just producing glucose.

    Underproduction of glucose is hypoglycemia which can be life threatening.

    Fat is turned into glucose. It just takes a little longer (we are talking a difference of a couple of hours).

    The glycemic index, while a useful general tool can be misleading. The number assigned to any food in the index is actually an estimated average not an absolute. The glycemic effect of a piece or bread or potato for instance varies more depending on what other foods it is eaten with than the inherent "carbohydrateness" of the food itself.
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #12
    NancyJac said:

    Quoted from the article you
    Quoted from the article you cited:

    "Graeber and his colleagues demonstrate that glucose starvation -- that is, depriving cancer cells of glucose -- activates a metabolic and signaling amplification loop that leads to cancer cell death as a result of the toxic accumulation of reactive oxygen species, the cell-damaging molecules and ions targeted by antioxidants like vitamin C."

    This study has nothing to do with diet and nutrition. It is about how glucose affects cells. As you and I have both said, everything we eat converts to glucose to provide fuel. The results of this study suggest possibilities for further research to develop drugs that can target cancer cells by preventing or reducing the amount of glucose available to cancer cells. That has absolutely nothing to do with what we eat.

    And quoted from your second cite:

    "Researchers at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center-Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute have designed an experimental drug that chokes off that sugar supply, causing the cells to self destruct.
    The agent, called OSU-CG12, is an example of a new class of anticancer drugs called energy-restriction mimetic agents. It is described in a paper published recently in the Journal of Biological Chemistry."

    Once again, the effort is to develop targeted drug therapies that can prohibit glucose from entering cancer cells while allowing the glucose to enter healthy cells. Without glucose, the healthy cells would die and we would die along with them. In any case, this has nothing to do with what you do or don't eat.

    not everything converts to
    not everything converts to glucose, only protein and carbohydrates. protein converts to glucose at very small rates. small enough that it only provides enough glucose for the small amounts required by the healthy body. for the people who do not want to sit around waiting for a magic pill to come onto the market, it would be wise to restrict carbohydrate to help manage, avoid, and/or fight cancer.

    http://ramblingsofacarnivore.blogspot.com/2011/09/carbs-and-cancer.html
  • bubba29
    bubba29 Member Posts: 14
    #13
    NancyJac said:

    Yes I did. Please see my
    Yes I did. Please see my reply above.

    We need carbohydrates in our diet for much more than just producing glucose.

    Underproduction of glucose is hypoglycemia which can be life threatening.

    Fat is turned into glucose. It just takes a little longer (we are talking a difference of a couple of hours).

    The glycemic index, while a useful general tool can be misleading. The number assigned to any food in the index is actually an estimated average not an absolute. The glycemic effect of a piece or bread or potato for instance varies more depending on what other foods it is eaten with than the inherent "carbohydrateness" of the food itself.

    can you provide a reference
    can you provide a reference showing that fat is metabolized to glucose?

    you are right about GI but it is typically a decent guideline to use when assessing how much something raises blood glucose levels. i found this interesting:
    http://www.glycemicindex.com/faqsList.php#8
  • ksf56
    ksf56 Member Posts: 202
    #14
    Rague said:

    DUH!
    Have any of us done any reading - that is a DUH! Of course - many/most have.

    I became hypoglycemic a while after last TX so I have to keep my 'sugar' level up. So yes I do work at keeping 'sugar' levels within normal with my balanced diet which includes a lot of FRESH veggies and fruit but there are times I have to resort to 'sweets' to keep the level up.

    Say what?
    How did this site become about dueling articles? I sat here with my mouth hanging open reading all of this. This site, unless it's changed suddenly, is about supporting each other. If it has changed, I'm leaving. The slap fight is unnecessary, in my opinion!
  • MAJW
    MAJW Member Posts: 2,510 Member
    #15
    Rague said:

    DUH!
    Have any of us done any reading - that is a DUH! Of course - many/most have.

    I became hypoglycemic a while after last TX so I have to keep my 'sugar' level up. So yes I do work at keeping 'sugar' levels within normal with my balanced diet which includes a lot of FRESH veggies and fruit but there are times I have to resort to 'sweets' to keep the level up.

    I eat...
    I eat anything I want! Now because my taste buds are out of whack due to chemo, again, I am limited as to what tastes good...I've lost 25 pounds that I didn't need to lose...okay maybe 10 was okay...lol. So I tend to eat whatever I can over and over....some things taste normal others, no...

    My feeling is, eat what you want, life is short....start with dessert!
  • MAJW
    MAJW Member Posts: 2,510 Member
    #16
    MAJW said:

    I eat...
    I eat anything I want! Now because my taste buds are out of whack due to chemo, again, I am limited as to what tastes good...I've lost 25 pounds that I didn't need to lose...okay maybe 10 was okay...lol. So I tend to eat whatever I can over and over....some things taste normal others, no...

    My feeling is, eat what you want, life is short....start with dessert!

    Ksf...
    Don't leave us....let em duke it out!!!! ....lol

    Hugs, Nancy
  • MAJW
    MAJW Member Posts: 2,510 Member
    #17
    MAJW said:

    I eat...
    I eat anything I want! Now because my taste buds are out of whack due to chemo, again, I am limited as to what tastes good...I've lost 25 pounds that I didn't need to lose...okay maybe 10 was okay...lol. So I tend to eat whatever I can over and over....some things taste normal others, no...

    My feeling is, eat what you want, life is short....start with dessert!

    Pops..double post

    Sorry
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #18
    bubba29 said:

    not everything converts to
    not everything converts to glucose, only protein and carbohydrates. protein converts to glucose at very small rates. small enough that it only provides enough glucose for the small amounts required by the healthy body. for the people who do not want to sit around waiting for a magic pill to come onto the market, it would be wise to restrict carbohydrate to help manage, avoid, and/or fight cancer.

    http://ramblingsofacarnivore.blogspot.com/2011/09/carbs-and-cancer.html

    Sigh.....
    It is true that excess fat not needed for energy stays stored as fat in the body until and if it is needed for energy, this is not a good thing. Excess body fat leads to obesity which actually puts us at a higher risk for diabetes, some cancers, and many heart and blood related illnesses. Excess protein can also lead to many medical problems including kidney failure, dehydration, and ketosis, not to mention that many essential vitamins are non-existent in protein/fat foods.

    Eating a healthy balanced diet is beneficial in many, many ways, including lowering the risk of cancer. Eliminating/restricting carbohydrates from your diet just doesn't accomplish that and does more harm than good. Your diet is systemic; that is, it effects all systems of your body equally and you can't tell the food you eat to only act on cancer cells. By the same token, you can't substitute diet for targeted drugs that are able to act on just a certain body system or type of cell. You can literally kill yourself trying.

    A key component of the recommendation for macronutrients is how they are distributed in the diet; in other words, the percent of calories coming from protein, carbohydrate and fat. The DRIs (Dietary Reference Intakes, formerly known as RDA (Recommended Daily Allowance)) express this distribution as the Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range or AMDR.

    Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Ranges for Adults (as a percentage of Calories) are as follows:
    Protein: 10-35%
    Fat: 20-35%
    Carbohydrate: 45-65%

    Deliberately and significantly altering this balance over a prolonged period of time isn't going to do a thing to prevent or cure cancer, but it will do harm in many ways.

    While I am certified in teaching nutrition, I am not asking you to take my word for any of this. But please, take all this internet information you have been citing to a doctor or nutritionist or dietitian that your know and trust before you harm yourself. I am sure you don't want to do that because of misinterpretation of information. Please get a second opinion from someone who is trained and experienced in the field of nutrition.
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #19
    bubba29 said:

    can you provide a reference
    can you provide a reference showing that fat is metabolized to glucose?

    you are right about GI but it is typically a decent guideline to use when assessing how much something raises blood glucose levels. i found this interesting:
    http://www.glycemicindex.com/faqsList.php#8

    here ya go
    http://www.livestrong.com/article/273899-do-fat-protein-turn-into-glucose/

    Scroll down to about the middle of the page to the paragraph titled Fat Conversion. I'm sure there are many other references, this just happened to be the first one that came up when I googled.
  • fauxma
    fauxma Member Posts: 3,577 Member
    #20
    MAJW said:

    Pops..double post

    Sorry

    Bubba,What is your cancer
    Bubba,
    What is your cancer diagnosis? I didn't see anything on your profile so I am curious about your stage, grade, type of breast cancer. Are you in treatment now? Please introduce yourself to us.
    I think it is great to open a dialog about nutrition and you and Nancy both seem to have knowledge about each of your positions. I always appreciate hearing different views on every aspect of cancer.
    But the one thing that you haven't mentioned is that your oncologist, doctor have made these recommendations or supported them for your cancer. Do they feel that this is the best way for you to fight your cancer? Or are you not fighting cancer and just here to advise us how we should fight our cancers? Because if that is the case then we can take your suggestions back to our doctors and see how they feel about them. As a diabetic and cancer survivor my doctors recommend a balanced diet (including carbs), exercise, and regular doctor visits to my oncologists and PCP. So that is what I will continue to do.
    Thank you for expressing your views and the many links you have provided.

    Stef
  • NancyJac
    NancyJac Member Posts: 91
    #21
    ksf56 said:

    Say what?
    How did this site become about dueling articles? I sat here with my mouth hanging open reading all of this. This site, unless it's changed suddenly, is about supporting each other. If it has changed, I'm leaving. The slap fight is unnecessary, in my opinion!

    Sorry
    Maybe I still still don't have a good handle on the culture of this site. I thought it was also for the exchange of information and experiences. I am an admitted info junkie and info sharing is a strong suit for me while emotional support, not so much. I see this thread as an exchange of information, not a slap fight, but I apologize if it has made you uncomfortable.

Discussion Boards