Gallstones are a characteristic of chronic gallbladder inflammation, and a history of gallstones is a strong risk factor for gallbladder cancer.
Obese people have increased levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), high levels of IGF-1 may promote the development of multiple cancers.
Correlations between several cancers and obesity range between 5-50% (eg: ~10% in women can be directly attributed to obesity, ~50% of gallbladder cancer in women can be directly attributed to obesity).
Correlations between cancer risk and healthy weight levels are strong, where (for example) those that maintain healthy weight levels are more likely to be more mindful of what they eat.
* soda, snack bars, candy, baked sweets
* mayonnaise, most salad dressings, barbecue sauces, most crackers, most breads, most potato chips
* fried foods (fries, fried chicken, fish sticks, chicken tendies, onion rings)
* refined white flour foods (pizza, white bread, most pasta, pretzels, flour tortillas, breakfast cereals, bagels)
* most milks and milk-based products (soft cheeses, butter)
* grain-fed meats, processed meats (bacon, hot dogs, bologna, sausage, jerky)
* chronic intake of alcoholic beverages
* doughnuts, cookies, muffins, frosting
While this list might seem excessive and it is by no means exhaustive or applicable or every person suffering from chronic inflammation, I'm sure you can speak from personal experience that several items on these lists have caused you some manner of discomfort.
There are so many substitutions available in every large grocery store and substituting fractions of every meal can go a long way. It's tough to get into the habit of regularly purchasing (for example) a variety of fruits and vegetables but it is definitely worth it.
For many of the items in the lists above, there are plenty of low-inflammatory options (eg: switching to whole grain breads instead of refined white flour breads, having dark leafy greens instead of Caesar salad, adding almonds, swapping in skim milk and yogurt from regular full-fat milk, any of the berries).
EDIT: removed coffee
Should not be on that list.
"In the most comprehensive study of coffee drinking and systemic markers of inflammation and immunity to date, we found that heavier coffee consumption was associated with lower levels of a number of different inflammatory markers, including chemokines (CX3CL1/fractalkine, CCL4/MIP-1β), cytokines (IFNγ, sTNFRII) and basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF-2)." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490956/
Another comment suggested that even eggs and fish should be avoided. Is that valid?
Eggs: https://www.forksoverknives.com/whats-wrong-with-eggs/#gs.Sd...
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/eggs-choline-and-cancer/
Fish: https://www.forksoverknives.com/is-fish-a-health-food-or-hav...
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/omega-3s-and-the-eskimo-fis...
If it's a food you can't live without, having it once in a while on special occasions isn't going to hurt you much, just like smoking a cigarette a few times a year wouldn't hurt you much. You decide what's right for you. As far as I can tell, though, the science seems pretty clear that fish and eggs aren't health foods.
Whole grain bread and pasta instead of white bread and pasta. Brown rice instead of white rice. Vegetables, vegetables, vegetables, and fruit. Beans, chickpeas, split peas, and lentils. Things to avoid: Meat, fish, dairy, eggs, OIL (of any sort), junk food (of course).
Whole foods mean foods where nothing bad has been added, and nothing good has been taken away.
This diet is scientifically proven to reduce inflammation, and in fact, make you live longer. The closer you can get to it, the better off you'll be. The only thing to be wary of is that if you cut out animal protein entirely, you'll need a vitamin B12 supplement, unless you get your water from natural streams and eat vegetables without washing off the dirt :) (B12 comes from bacteria -- that's where grazing animals get it from).
If you're interested in the science, here's a long (but good) talk by Dr. Michael Greger (creator of nutritionfacts.org) at google: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rNY7xKyGCQ
Note that he's different from most of the diet advocates out there in that he seems to try quite hard to remain focused on the science, his website is entirely free, he's not selling supplements, and all the proceeds of his books go to charity. I'm a big fan :)
I think you should consider fasting - or, at the very least, reducing the size of your "feeding window".
This is quite simple, actually - don't have any calories of any kind after dinner, and then wait until noon to have any calories of any kind.
Just like that, you've increased by 50% the time your body spends in fasting state.
If you think of what your metabolic markers look like when you wake up in the morning (blood pressure, free cholesterol, insulin levels, blood sugar ...) imagine what you're doing for yourself when you extend the length of that state by 50% a few days per week.
It's quite easy and I think you may find that markers of inflammation (like eczema, asthma, etc.) decrease in ways they never did with changes in diet.
Remember: no matter how "whole" or "healthy" or "nutritious" your diet is, you're still stoking all the fires of metabolism when you eat it - and that radiates out through your entire body.
I drink coffee (black) or tea while in a fasting state but any calories of any kind (the milk) will start all of the processes of metabolism.
The current thought is that cancer arises by tissue stem cells accumulating mutations at a low rate until it goes out of control. Every division there is some chance of error. If you have more divisions, there is a higher chance of cancer.
If you always keep this in mind: cell division -> cancer, so much will make sense. Anything requiring an increase in cell division will increase the chances of cancer in that tissue (smoking damages lung cells which need to be replaced, uv damages skin cells, being larger means you have more cells).
That is not to say that immune surveillance for clearing these bad cells plays no role, or that DNA damage sensitivity/repair can't be increased/decreased, or that those rates need be similar in different species. However, the main idea behind the entire modern cancer research programme is that cell division -> cancer.
More info: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC54830/
I am not so sure this is a good heuristic.
An athlete, or even a moderately active (fit) person is inducing quite a bit of cell division due to the teardown and regrowth of muscle and bone, etc., caused by exercise.
However, activity and exercise seem to be (strongly) negatively correlated with cancer.
Instead, I think a better mental model is the winnowing of a population. When you subject your (muscles/bones/heart/lungs) to a highly stressful exertion, some of the cells just can't maintain that output and so they are killed off, or commit suicide by the process of apoptosis.
But if you never subject your cell population to an apoptosis-inducing level of stress, you're just cultivating an increasingly weak population of cells.
I highly recommend the book by Nick Lane titled: Power, Sex, Suicide which explores these topics...
Would you mind to explain this a little bit further? It seems paradox at first.
Also, sugar. Can easily dump 30% by weight of sugar into what amounts to edible “plastic” and have it taste “good” as well as being super cheap, but of course, completely lacking in any birdies other than carbs/sugars.