Sugar?

Sit back and watch the debate (again).

Sugar –does not- feed cancer. The cancer cell uses more sugar than an ordinary good cell, because the cancer cell can not take orders from the body/brain to limit it’s uptake of glucose. The cancer cell can be said to “steal” the glucose away from the good cells that need it to survive.

Eliminating sugar will  not do a damned thing to fight cancer, but eliminating it –will- starve your good cells that require it for survival and growth.

A cancer cell is a good cell that’s been damaged to the point of death, where it can no longer receive instructions from your body/brain for it’s survival. The now defective cell is not expelled from our system by our immune system (for whatever reason) and instead begins to stay alive using the fermentation process. The fermentation process uses glucose for survival and expels lactic acid as it’s waste. Your liver converts lactic acid back to glucose, adding to the supply that the cancer cells (and the rest of your body needs).

If/when the cancer cells grow large enough (tumors), more glucose is used by the cancer faster than the glucose can be used by the good cells. The reason for that? The good cells are taking instructions from the brain to only take as much as they require, while the cancer cells receive no instructions; they run rampant and uncontrolled.

The bottom line? No-one should eliminate from their diet what is normal for growth and health. Glucose is a normal and natural requirement; sugar substitutes and other products that are “sweeter than  sugar” are -not- normal for our bodies and can be detrimental to what is required for good health.

Forget the bologna about "white sugar", but do eat a well rounded diet the way we were intended to.

Best wishes,

John

manwithnoname said:

I think you should research more on this life or death question.

“Cancer is not a collection of unrelated diseases that each need to be treated individually, cancer is one disease—a mitochondrial disease—and diseased mitochondria prefer glucose and glutamine for fuel.  Healthy cells with healthy mitochondria are flexible and can adapt to just about any fuel source, but not cancer cells.  In fact, the majority of cells in our body function best when they burn fat for energy.  Cancer cells are bad at burning fat, because fat burning requires respiration, which requires healthy mitochondria.” Dr Thomas Seyfried

Dr. David Servan-Schreiber MD, PhD, writes in regards to sugar, “when we eat sugar, or white flour, or foods with a high ‘glycemic index’, the blood levels of glucose rise rapidly.  The body immediately releases a dose of insulin to enable the glucose to enter the cells.  The secretion of insulin is accompanied by the release of another molecule, called IGF (insulin-like growth factor), whose role it is to stimulate cell growth. He writes that “insulin and IGF not only stimulate the growth of cancer cells, but also their capacity to invade neighboring tissues.”  Furthermore, insulin and IGF have another effect: “They promote the factors of inflammation, which also stimulates cell growth, and acts in turn as fertilizer for tumors.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaDt3AJQ98c

http://medicalxpress.com/print294574490.html

being cured by the removal of all sugar from their diet.  And I mean cured, as in "visible tumors - all sugar=tumors disappear and don't return".  I really don't need to hear any more anecdotes about people who had surgery, had all tumors removed, and then, having reached NED via surgical means, claim that it was diet that did the trick.  I personally am an anecdote that suggests the opposite...multiple surgeries to remove cancer, no effective chemo, no dramatic dietary changes (pretty healthy diet to begin with, but I eat sugar in moderation, and drink gin on a weekly basis...figured it worked for the Queen Mum), and here I am.  NED for 20 months.  Maybe a weekly application of martinis is the answer?

Anyway, I think you can do whatever you want when it somes to diet. It probably isn't going to hurt one way or another (except possibly to make one feel more miserable than one already does).

Cheers~AA

ETA that I just read Steve/Colocan's study...again, research involving fruit flies is interesting, but there is a ton of research out there that falls into that category, and is never proven to have any bearing in reality.  In fact, if you want to read an eye-opening article on scientific research, and how the "law of diminishing returns" applies to virtually every study ever done, you might want to read "The Truth Wears Off".http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer

Nana b said:

Sugar may not feed cancer,

Sugar may not feed cancer, but Cancer sure makes you want it!     I will sitck with very limited sugar  I don't eat sweets so that s a plus and I dont drink soda, so that is another plus.   If it's in the fruit great, but I won't give in to temptaions, it's not good for me, period! 

 

 

History, prior to Cancer I never had sugar in the house, I would not even eat my birthday cake.  Ice cream was a one time a year thing at Baskin Robbins.  After Cancer, I had bowls of M&Ms next to me, and I was baking peach cobbler, banana bread, eating ice cream, then I said, "what the hell."  I stopped.

 

 

http://medicalxpress.com/print292498575.html

manwithnoname said:

Of course we are all unique

Hi Ann, I can provide links to show patients cured of 'incurable' brain tumours by a no sugar ketogenic diet, and also various metatastic advanced cancers stabalised by low carb/sugar diet or even genes changed by diet, but I'm not as I have done so many times already, really the evidence is 'low' 'more research needed' etc....

This is a personal choice, and people should do there own research and make an educated decision.

Excellent article BTW.

I am very much a "science has all the answers (or will have)" kind of person, and that article really knocked me back.  I had no idea that replication of research was so difficult.  I really give the side-eye to every study I see nowadays...

manwithnoname said:

Me too

But I did read a while back that many studies can't be replicated or get conflicting data, which is worrying for the empirical system, I'm also finding that a lot of things I took for granted as true aren't.

Thanks to QI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwdcGhPTkhA

So I'll try to make this short and sweet (sorry, bad pun):

Cutting down a little on your sugar intake - not to mention processed foods and red meat - will NOT have a bad effect on your health.  And it just MIGHT help, based on what I consider a mountain of evidence.  I'm not suggesting going crazy with diet changes, but just eating a little more healthy - especially since, as cancer survivors, we need to boost our health and immune system with good foods.  In addition, getting a little more moderate exercise is a good idea for us, for many reasons (including controlling blood sugar).

I will also say that way too many people oversimplify the debate to "sugar feeds cancer".  I highly recommend the conversation shift towards minimizing SPIKES in blood sugar - because these are what causes the body to release insulin and IGF-1 which DO feed cancer (and yes, other cells too).  P.S. manwithnoname thanks for mentioning this in your response above.

gfpiv said:

sugar

So I'll try to make this short and sweet (sorry, bad pun):

Cutting down a little on your sugar intake - not to mention processed foods and red meat - will NOT have a bad effect on your health.  And it just MIGHT help, based on what I consider a mountain of evidence.  I'm not suggesting going crazy with diet changes, but just eating a little more healthy - especially since, as cancer survivors, we need to boost our health and immune system with good foods.  In addition, getting a little more moderate exercise is a good idea for us, for many reasons (including controlling blood sugar).

I will also say that way too many people oversimplify the debate to "sugar feeds cancer".  I highly recommend the conversation shift towards minimizing SPIKES in blood sugar - because these are what causes the body to release insulin and IGF-1 which DO feed cancer (and yes, other cells too).  P.S. manwithnoname thanks for mentioning this in your response above.

eliminate sugar completely it is in everything

kennyt said:

how do you

eliminate sugar completely it is in everything

Yes the body can make sugar almost everything: fat, protein, carbohydrates, nails, paper lol. More of the reason you don't want to much straight up sugar (glucose) in your diet. Gradually decrease the sugar you put in your coffee, tee, cut out every thing that has corn syrup in it. Everything that's made of white flour ( pastry, white bread, pasta) turns into sugar in a second. Whole wheat too, but slower. Desserts, chocolate, candy, ice cream, sodas: pure sugar. Dark-dark chocolate is good for you.

Regardless of healthy or sick, we consume ten times more sugar than we should.

Laz

Coloncancerblows said:

I thought the same thing

I thought the same thing about sugar.  I'm not a big sweets person but after every chemo session, I would crave all kinds of sweets.  I told my onc about this and he told me to eat whatever I wanted.  Now that I'm done with the chemo, the cravings for sweets has mostly gone away. 

Typical oncologist answer.

John23 said:

Sugar.....

Sit back and watch the debate (again).

 

Sugar –does not- feed cancer. The cancer cell uses more sugar than an ordinary good cell, because the cancer cell can not take orders from the body/brain to limit it’s uptake of glucose. The cancer cell can be said to “steal” the glucose away from the good cells that need it to survive.

 

Eliminating sugar will  not do a damned thing to fight cancer, but eliminating it –will- starve your good cells that require it for survival and growth.

 

A cancer cell is a good cell that’s been damaged to the point of death, where it can no longer receive instructions from your body/brain for it’s survival. The now defective cell is not expelled from our system by our immune system (for whatever reason) and instead begins to stay alive using the fermentation process. The fermentation process uses glucose for survival and expels lactic acid as it’s waste. Your liver converts lactic acid back to glucose, adding to the supply that the cancer cells (and the rest of your body needs).

 

If/when the cancer cells grow large enough (tumors), more glucose is used by the cancer faster than the glucose can be used by the good cells. The reason for that? The good cells are taking instructions from the brain to only take as much as they require, while the cancer cells receive no instructions; they run rampant and uncontrolled.

 

The bottom line? No-one should eliminate from their diet what is normal for growth and health. Glucose is a normal and natural requirement; sugar substitutes and other products that are “sweeter than  sugar” are -not- normal for our bodies and can be detrimental to what is required for good health.

 

Forget the bologna about "white sugar", but do eat a well rounded diet the way we were intended to.

 

Best wishes,

 

John

No one is debating about Glucose, the debate is about sucrose. 

Best Always,  mike