Post: #1

Quote:A ketogenic diet is one in which carbohydrates, and to a lesser extent, protein are restricted in the diet and replaced with fat

Quote:a ketogenic diet may work simply through decreasing available glucose to tumor cells. Many decades ago, Otto Warburg stated that a hallmark of cancer was the uptake of glucose by cancer cells.5 Cancer cells rely on glucose for energy; therefore any method of limiting this may help to “starve” cancer cells.

Quote:Due to their faulty mitochondria, cancer cells also rely on glucose to fix free radical damage.9-13 Much like our normal cells, cancer cells are constantly experiencing bombardment with free radicals, and maybe even more so than our cells. Since their mitochondria do not function properly, they rely on even more uptake of glucose, which is used to counter free radical damage. Limiting this glucose will inhibit their cell damage repair.

Quote:Cancer cells require more than just fuel to survive, much like our normal cells, they use signaling hormones that tell them to grow and survive. Cancer cells have receptors on them, like the insulin growth factor receptor (IGF-1R). Insulin growth factor (IGF) can bind to this, as can insulin, which is secreted in our bloodstream in response to carbohydrate consumption. Insulin then activates several pathways that increase cancer growth and survival. A recent study in advanced cancer patients confirmed the ability of a ketogenic diet to significantly decrease the insulin pathway in tumor cells.

Quote:some people have hypothesized that ketones themselves may fight cancer. This is more speculative with little data, but reports on many societies, most notably those in Africa17 and the Inuit Eskimos reveal few cases of cancer. Dr. Urquhart served as the district surgeon of the far north, and in 7 years with all the x-rays and surgical equipment of his day, has published that he never say a single case of cancer, and this was in people of all ages.

http://www.cavemandoctor.com/2013/01/01/...or-cancer/

at the 9:25 mark he discusses the role of paleo diet in preventing cancer

Post: #2

Yeah supposedly cancer is like a 1-in-a-million rarity in truly wild animals and hunter-gatherer societies.

Standard Western Diet throws our bodies so far off their natural balance point that this 1-in-a-million disease becomes an everyday fear and serious concern. Same with heart-disease.

200 years from now, societies will look back on our diet and all the problems it's created (and the "treatments" like chemotherapy we've concocted that ravage the body and for many cancers only increase survival rates by a couple of percent). It'll be like us looking back on scurvy and leeches and blood-drawing or something. Ah well. It's awesome that people are figuring this stuff out.

Post: #3

I didn't like getting spoon fed medical information to me by that busty milf, but I'll keep this in mind in case of future cancer risk. Good video, never considered that keto diets could prevent cancer.

Post: #4

(03-15-2013 04:09 PM)RichieP Wrote:  Yeah supposedly cancer is like a 1-in-a-million rarity in truly wild animals and hunter-gatherer societies.

Standard Western Diet throws our bodies so far off their natural balance point that this 1-in-a-million disease becomes an everyday fear and serious concern. Same with heart-disease.

200 years from now, societies will look back on our diet and all the problems it's created (and the "treatments" like chemotherapy we've concocted that ravage the body and for many cancers only increase survival rates by a couple of percent). It'll be like us looking back on scurvy and leeches and blood-drawing or something. Ah well. It's awesome that people are figuring this stuff out.

Cancer is extremely rare in wild animals, a animal left it its natural ways simply does not get radical cell mutations that turn into cancer. The doctors in here can try and toss that statement down but it is true, the only cases of rampant cancer in animals have been animals in some type of human captivity or exposed to extreme human pollutants.

I am not sold 100% on Paleo because I feel it needs to be tweaked to represent modern life, meaning that Paleo hacks over-do-it with the aid of modern energy and conveniences that are hunter relatives did not have. But that's a convo for another day.

Post: #5

Pat Robertson, the voice of science...

Post: #6

IMO eat a lot of things paleo suggests but fucking have a sandwich and a beer when you want too!


Steak Ciabatta > paleo

Post: #7

Can you link me to some of the studies mentioned?

One I found by the German guy (though it was the only paper I could find and it was a review paper nevertheless, so he didn't do any actual research):

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/8/1/75

"Human studies

Until now, no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to evaluate the effects of a KD on tumor growth and patient survival. It has to be noted in general, however, that any dietary intervention requiring a dramatic change of life style makes randomized studies nearly impossible - however, even prospective cohort studies are missing. There is only anecdotal evidence that such a diet might be effective as a supportive treatment. One study investigated whether a high-fat diet (80% non-nitrogenous calories from fat) would inhibit tumor cell replication compared to a high-dextrose diet (100% non-nitrogenous calories from dextrose) in 27 patients with gastro-intestinal cancers [137]. Diets were administered parenterally and cell proliferation assessed using thymidine labeling index on tumor samples. After 14 days, the authors found a non-significant trend for impaired proliferation in the high-fat group."

I found one actual study by Ulrike Kammerer (the colleague of the German guy in the second video). Though that study didn't really impress me.

http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/8/1/54

"Effects of a ketogenic diet on the quality of life in 16 patients with advanced cancer: A pilot trial
Melanie Schmidt, Nadja Pfetzer, Micheal Schwab, Ingrid Strauss and Ulrike Kämmerer"

"Results
One patient did not tolerate the diet and dropped out within 3 days. Among those who tolerated the diet, two patients died early, one stopped after 2 weeks due to personal reasons, one felt unable to stick to the diet after 4 weeks, one stopped after 6 and two stopped after 7 and 8 weeks due to progress of the disease, one had to discontinue after 6 weeks to resume chemotherapy and five completed the 3 month intervention period. These five and the one who resumed chemotherapy after 6 weeks report an improved emotional functioning and less insomnia, while several other parameters of quality of life remained stable or worsened, reflecting their very advanced disease. Except for temporary constipation and fatigue, we found no severe adverse side effects, especially no changes in cholesterol or blood lipids.

Conclusions
These pilot data suggest that a KD is suitable for even advanced cancer patients. It has no severe side effects and might improve aspects of quality of life and blood parameters in some patients with advanced metastatic tumors."

I don't really get how they got to that conclusion especially since:

"Influence on the tumor itself

A statistical evaluation of the effect of the diet on tumor characteristics is not feasible, due to the low number and heterogeneity of patients enrolled in our study. Instead, a description of the course of disease is given: Four patients who dropped out of the study early were not evaluated, two patients died early. Progress of disease occurred in 5 patients who then discontinued the diet, whereas 5 of the patients who adhered to the diet throughout the study had stable disease (Table 4)."

Although a ketonic diet could be an actual cure for cancer, the first video is not that impressive to me because:
1. It has Pat Robertson (not exactly the most scientifically educated man)
2. They talk about a few people's personal experiences (anecdotal evidence, although I understand stories make for better TV than statistics)
3. They bring up mice (I'm not convinced what works for mice will necessarily work for human beings, especially since it has been shown in the past that there's not always a 1-to-1 correlation)

Post: #8

Tubers are paleo. They were digging them up and eating a long time. Far longer than the neolethic era. How you react to to those type of carbs depends on your bodies health and probably genetics.

Although I have heard about sugar fueling cancer growth. So if I have cancer at some point I will try it, along with raw garlic and hot peppers. I remember reading that they help kill tumors. Probably try that before chemo.
Ketogenic diet works great for seizures too.

Post: #9

Post: #10

'Paleo' or not, "Biologically optimal diet given the modern food sources we have" is a pretty good goal to shoot for. Turns out we function best when we eat closely to what we've evolved to eat. Who would have thought. Lol.

Post: #11

(03-15-2013 10:23 PM)JayMillz Wrote:  

Somehow that guy reminds me of this guy:




One of the best cult classics by the way. I went to some of the places where they shot the movie in New York.

Alright back on topic.

I'm also trying out paleo and i'm dropped about 1.5 kilo in a week but it came with feeling hungry the whole day and and a big fat grocery bill. I don't like neither of them.

Thinking of adding at least some bread or porridge for breakfast.

Post: #12

I'd like to point out a flaw in all this. Yes, Paleo might be preventative, but that's minor compared to other life choices.

For every hour of sleep you don't get at night, you're risking cancer no matter what. Paleo won't do anything. Sleep trumps it.

If you smoke, you are fucked, that overrides everything else you do. All the sleep and Paleo in the world won't

Post: #13

(03-16-2013 04:41 PM)MrLemon Wrote:  I'd like to point out a flaw in all this. Yes, Paleo might be preventative, but that's minor compared to other life choices.

For every hour of sleep you don't get at night, you're risking cancer no matter what. Paleo won't do anything. Sleep trumps it.

If you smoke, you are fucked, that overrides everything else you do. All the sleep and Paleo in the world won't

Diet is at least as important as sleep and non-smoking each are. Tobacco and Diet get about 1/3 of the "Causes" pie each:
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20...auses.jpeg

Post: #14

bacon, do you even lift?

Post: #15

There is a lot of hype surrounding Paleo and I don't really buy all that pseudo scientific talk about our ancestors and how healthy and happy they were because they weren't.

Post: #16

(03-18-2013 02:55 PM)sheesh Wrote:  There is a lot of hype surrounding Paleo and I don't really buy all that pseudo scientific talk about our ancestors and how healthy and happy they were because they weren't.

Yeah, back when life expectancy was in the 30s obviously people weren't going to die from cancer, heart disease and a lot of the other diseases we experience primarily as we get older.

Post: #17

(03-18-2013 07:25 PM)Lemmo Wrote:  

(03-18-2013 02:55 PM)sheesh Wrote:  There is a lot of hype surrounding Paleo and I don't really buy all that pseudo scientific talk about our ancestors and how healthy and happy they were because they weren't.

Yeah, back when life expectancy was in the 30s obviously people weren't going to die from cancer, heart disease and a lot of the other diseases we experience primarily as we get older.

Cancer rates are creeping up in young and healthy populations at large rates also. That is what troubles me more.

My beef with Paleo is simply its misguided views on energy utilization the modern human idea of what is Paleo is not realistic to what actual gatherers would of done prior.

Post: #18

Paleo is largely based on a Flintstones-based version of anthropology which bears no resemblance to reality.
Our closest relatives in the primate world such as gorillas and chimps barely consume meat/fat (it constitutes 0 - 5 percent of their diet).

The truth to long-term, successful dieting is to avoid gimmicks - keep eating the foods you really like in moderation, eat more greens, cut out fast food and avoid excess sugar.
This diet plan would solve 95% of dietary problems which people have, but it'll never sell any books or TV shows because it can be explained in one sentence.

Post: #19

Pat Robertson is such a crock. He claims he can leg press 2000lbs and he has predicted the apocalypse many times claiming god told him when the world was going to end. The list of all the false predictions and claims he makes is endless.

That being said the paleo diet is a pretty optimal diet but to say it cures cancer might be a little stretch. Anything diet or foods that claim to cure cancer are pretty much just healthy foods that dont cure cancer but stop feeding the disease. Anything bad on the other hand always is claimed to cause cancer or feed the disease such as sugar microwaving your food etc..

Ive read from multiple sources that Cancer cells are naturally present in the body and having "cancer" is when they reach a certain level that is dangerous and the body is not able to fight them off effectively so basically its just an accumulation of shit in your body feeding cancer and it cant keep up to rid the cancer cells

Post: #20

(03-18-2013 02:55 PM)sheesh Wrote:  There is a lot of hype surrounding Paleo and I don't really buy all that pseudo scientific talk about our ancestors and how healthy and happy they were because they weren't.

Most paleo diet people actually think they came from monkeys, so the diet itself is flawed. My ancestors came from the Garden if Eden, and later migrated to the land of milk and honey, which is what I'll continue to eat.

Post: #21

(03-18-2013 10:45 PM)kosko Wrote:  Cancer rates are creeping up in young and healthy populations at large rates also. That is what troubles me more.

That's not correct, certainly not at large rates.

Cancer death rates have been declining for years while the overall incidence of cancer has been relatively stable

http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/newsfro...portNation

Post: #22

I've just read through this thread, and I had seen other discussions about the role of glucose in the feeding of cancer cells. To me this makes a lot of sense, even though I believe there are many disincentives to really curing various diseases including cancer, diabetes and heart disease bc elites do not want the masses to be healthy and to live long lives.

Anyhow, it is somewhat up to us to find the pearls of wisdom within the various information sources and to be guided in our own lives by the pearls of wisdom rather than by the misinformation and the distracting information.

Many of modern diseases are affecting the youth in greater degrees, and we don't need studies to tell us whether or not kids are getting fat earlier and earlier bc we can see it in modern societies. It's up to us to decipher true causes from the bullshit that we are fed.

Yes we have figured out and there is considerable consensus that processed foods are problematic for our systems. Certainly would be ok to completely illuminate these foods from our diets, yet if we eat some processed foods (maybe 10%, we may be ok. People have various levels of tolerance based on a variety of factors, including the extent to which the person may have abused himself in the past with bad diet and other lifestyle choices (or even genetics which is not a choice).

I believe that we need not get distracted by technical arguments about whether if something is Paleo or not (questions about the extent or percentages to which we may have eaten meat versus plants). In actuality, I don't see why we have to eat many if any plants to survive and thrive, except maybe for variety. In essence, we can get all the nutrients we need from meat and fats, so those two should comprise the majority of our diet. There are a couple of plants that are naturally high in good fats, and that is coconuts and avocados. Maybe there are a few others, but in the end the remainder of plants should only be accessories to complement the meat and fat staples.

Probably more expensive and a little harder to preserve the foods and probably a little more work to prepare, but healthier. And throw a lot of eggs in the mix for good measure.

I recall Chris Kresser (he's a natural path counselor and researcher) had some good resources regarding cancer treatment, but probably lowering sugar availability in our systems will bring us a long way towards the goal of decreasing our own cancer risk so we would not have to cross the treatment path.

Who cares about what others do. Let them eat the processed foods including the sugars, and the high use of fillers of corn, soy and wheat. I eat those kinds of foods every once in a while to be sociable, but mostly, currently, I strive to minimize my intake of those modern processed foods to make them less than 10% of my diet. I can't say that I won't get cancer, but I think that I improve my odds of not getting it.

Certainly there is some needs to be concerned about exercise, sleep, and lessening exposure to toxins, but I think diet is probably the most important for us to fuel our bodies and create strong defense mechanisms. So if we are exposed to toxins or negative bacteria, we will be in better shape to fend against.

Post: #23

On cancer and the ketogenic diet:
There are several studies about a ketogenic diet and its influence on cancer.

For the religious folks here:
You could take the fasting seasons in Islam and Christianity as a sign. They force people in a ketogenic state. Of course, the fasting seasons might have evolved only because of seasonal episodes of food scarcity, but their existence is intriguing. Ramadan basically is intermittent fasting.

Post: #24

(03-18-2013 07:25 PM)Lemmo Wrote:  

(03-18-2013 02:55 PM)sheesh Wrote:  There is a lot of hype surrounding Paleo and I don't really buy all that pseudo scientific talk about our ancestors and how healthy and happy they were because they weren't.

Yeah, back when life expectancy was in the 30s obviously people weren't going to die from cancer, heart disease and a lot of the other diseases we experience primarily as we get older.

That's because average life expectancy included all deaths, specifically infant deaths that modern birthing practices and medicines prevent.

A more accurate measure for typical lifespans is life expectancy from age X (usually 10-15).

http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/0...-the-ston/

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/life-expe...z2gqs9S0L7

http://www.stoneagedoc.com/Short_lived_Stone_Age.htm

edit: clarified a point

Post: #25

It does not cure cancer. USA is full of pseudo-science and conspiracy tales. Only thing that cures cancer is cutting away any tissue with cancer if in a early stage otherwise nothing can be done as of today.