Also see Thomas Seyfried's work on ketogenic diets for cancer https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/bcnews/science-tech-and-health/bio...
Also see Thomas Seyfried's work on ketogenic diets for cancer https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/bcnews/science-tech-and-health/bio...
He had a rare form of pancreatic cancer that grows from the tip of the pancreas and can sometimes be snipped out without consequence early enough that it doesn't spread.
He presumably freaked out about it all nevertheless (because it's terrifying), avoided surgery for too long and ended up having a Whipple procedure, which is fucking brutal.
But there's still a pretty good chance he would have had early surgery and still ended up needing a Whipple procedure and still have passed away on roughly the same timescale. Because pancreatic cancer is a stealthy thing, and the Whipple procedure comes with its own frightening future.
It's really sad he freaked out, it's really sad he didn't listen. But it's not that unusual. He's far from unique in making irrational decisions in the face of terrifying diagnoses. Should it have been a slam dunk decision? Yeah. Of course. But there we are.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16172215/
I mean... in terms of our scientific understanding at this point, sporadic pancreatic cancer just comes from nowhere. We don't know why. In the case of the parent I lost to it, it could have been triggered by a response to inflammation from previous surgery. It seems plausible. But nobody knows.
I just think people snarking or factoiding about Steve Jobs' panicked response to an awful disease comes across as projection of other judgements more than anything else. He was a complicated, self-reliant person who made a bad decision when he was scared. And it probably (but by no means certainly) cost him a few years of health. And now he is gone. And it's still sad for the people who lost him and for the wider world.
I didn't mean to dunk on Steve Jobs, but I'm sure even he would agree he had an eccentric and extremist personality and the bit about fruitarianism seems very relevant esp with happenings like [Ashton Kutcher being hospitalized when he tried to mimick it](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/jan/28/ashton-kutcher-...)
relevant quote:
> "First of all, the fruitarian diet can lead to, like, severe issues," Kutcher told USA Today. "I went to the hospital like two days before we started shooting the movie. I was like doubled over in pain. My pancreas levels were completely out of whack. It was really terrifying … considering everything."
on the other hand, I wonder what kind of steve jobs would the world have had, had he survived.
would he have pushed cancer research further, somehow? maybe by getting involved and providing funding and technology, maybe novel technology, for cancer research? or would he have gone full-cynical and focused on something else entirely?
we'll never know, for sure.
Jobs' fruitarianism meant he didn't eat eggs, meat, dairy, or other sources of selenium. Fruit doesn't contain selenium. One of Selenium deficiency's side effects, well established in the literature: pancreatic cancer.
Pancreatic cancer will fuck you up pretty much no matter what you do. I think it literally is the cancer with the smallest survival rate
That is true – and probably didn't help. But his case is a poor example since he delayed treatment for months.
EDIT: Also, actual fruits are probably not an issue. It's difficult to eat too much fruit, unless in juice form... which he did.
Though obviously "stop eating everything that gives you cancer" is also a good start, and you can definitely eat processed garbage even on keto.