Hacker News Reader

Comment by jan_g | Hacker News Reader

My mother had lung cancer which spread to other parts of her body. Throughout her sickness, she ate very little, then almost nothing as the disease progressed. By the time of her death, she was practically just skin and bones. "Starving the cancer" didn't seem to work in her case. Then again, chemo also seemed to have zero effect. Cancer just spread, more and more, with each passing month.

View on HN

That sucks, and I'm sorry. But: chiming in to clarify: it's not "stop eating to starve cancer"; its, "change diet to route energy through metabolic pathways that cancer is disadvantaged for".

The parents point is valid though.

If not eating sugar could slow (all) cancers, then not eating at all would clearly cover that case, and should have slowed the lung cancer.

At the very least, his anecdote is convincing to me that it "starving the cancer" doesn't work with lung cancer.

In the more general sense though my first impression of the phrase "route energy through metabolic pathways that cancer is disadvantaged for" is that it sounds like random word salad.

> If not eating sugar could slow (all) cancers, then not eating at all would clearly cover that case, and should have slowed the lung cancer.

Umm.. This sounds to me to be very simplistic thinking. What about the effects of complete starving on the immune system for example?. Or for that matter, the proposed no sugar diet triggers some mechanisms from here. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer_immunology)

I do agree, it's not yet accepted through experiments via the scientific method though.

> In the more general sense though my first impression of the phrase "route energy through metabolic pathways that cancer is disadvantaged for" is that it sounds like random word salad.

"Eat food that cancer/tumors don't like as much as sugar."

Doesn't everything convert to glucose? Isn't that what cells live on?

Regular cancer cells can use ketones for fuel. Cancer cells, with damaged mitochondria cannot.

It sure as hell doesn't work with lung cancer. My dad had been sugar free for almost a decade prior to his diagnosis of small cell adenocarcinoma. He lasted almost a year.

Sorry for your loss.

Can you elaborate on whether his diet excluded rice, refined grains and any other sort of simple carbs?

I was rather shocked to see in the documentary 'Fed Up' that all these carb rich foods get broken down to simple sugar molecules pretty darn quick and as far as the body is concerned are identical to sugar.

Simple carbs are known to cause big spikes in insulin levels. So it's not a sugar-free diet alone, but also one has to contemplate glycemic index and glycemic load of apparently non-sugary foods....

http://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/glycem...

As reflected in the article, the key is keeping the insulin levels at bay.

Metformin helps too.

Dad had adopted a (basically) ketogenic diet. He wasn't obsessively strict about it, he'd cheat, but he did a pretty good job of avoiding cheap complex carbs like bread/pasta.

In all honesty, I'm pretty touchy about alternative cancer treatments. Probably too touchy. :) I watched Dad choke down blended flaxseed and cottage cheese. I had to talk him out of handing over what little money he and Mom had to some charlatan who claimed to be able to cure cancer with sound waves. And he was also pitched this "cancer lives on sugar, starve the cancer" horsecrap. It was all complete bullshit and he fucking died right when the doctor told me he would after Dad was diagnosed.

There are vampires and leaches out there selling fraudulent hope to the desperate. It's amazing to watch them crawl out of the woodwork.

I really can't imagine how horrible that must have been to experience. I'm sorry you went through it.

Cancer is a bunch of different diseases. I think we get into a lot of trouble when we talk about it in simplified terms.

There are stories about certain kinds of cancers having a metabolic component. I have a friend who had a very, very serious cancer which appears to have responded to metabolic therapy. It may not all be "horsecrap". But it's surely not a cure-all, either.

"It may not all be 'horsecrap'"

It's probably not. Bitterness creeps in far too easily and my words became caustic.

> In all honesty, I'm pretty touchy about alternative cancer treatments.

Can completely understand, a lot of prats out there who take advantage of desperate folk struggling with an awful, awful disease.

All in all we're all saying what researcher are saying more and more since a few years. Cancer is 'multi-variate' and no silver bullet, no one cure will work blind.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com