Diet and lifestyle of course, but mostly diet. I suggest everybody interested listen to this interview of Dr. Thomas Seyfried with an open mind https://youtu.be/qa3j40c8iAo?si=DTeIAaO2_Unn-dpL
In short, chronically elevated insulin + inflammation + mutagens = cells with degraded ability to breathe => switch to fermentation = cancer. This is known as the Otto Wartburg effect and has been known for a century.
Metabolic therapy is tremendously successful in eradicating cancers even in later stages. I have seen so many direct testimonials and stories I wouldn't even know where to begin.
No it isn't. Warburg effect is observed in cells as a result of cancer.
>Metabolic therapy is tremendously successful in eradicating cancers even in later stages.
[citation needed]
Every time anything medical gets posted in HN, the amount of disinformation and bad medical advice is insane. It's easy to imagine (because it keeps happening over and over) a newly diagnosed cancer patient reading your comment and declining chemotherapy because apparently "keto diet beats cancer".
Sorry it was a sloppily-written comment in which I mixed up some things but the main point stands.
The video I posted has a detailed explanation by someone vastly more qualified than either of us.
> easy to imagine
People can make up their own minds.
Why the disparaging comment? After my own health concerns, I stumbled upon this information, and I can tell you, again, that I have seen people have success with a metabolically-oriented approach which involves lowering glucose exposure (principally but not solely), that's not saying just saying "do keto", and in fact some of the people that have done this (see https://braintumourresearch.org/blogs/in-hope/andrew-scarbor...) have done much more than that. And often it's because there was NO other option.
'''
"Metabolic therapy", including administration of laetrile, was promoted for cancer patients by John Richardson in the San Francisco Bay Area in the 1970s, until his arrest for violating the California Cancer Law and revocation of his license by the California Board of Medical Quality Assurance.[4]
...
"...retrospective reviews of the Gerson, Kelley, and Contreras metabolic therapies show no evidence of efficacy."[5]
Also, you should try following the references you posted. Have you looked at [5]? See what is discussed there, and if it's really relevant to what we're discussing here https://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/integrative-medicine/herbs.... Note how information and reference-poor that page is.
You're trying to paint it as something cooky. I asked Claude 3 Opus:
> Metabolic therapy for cancer is an approach that aims to exploit the differences in metabolism between cancer cells and normal cells. The idea is to target the unique metabolic vulnerabilities of cancer cells to slow down their growth or cause their death. While there has been some promising preclinical research, the efficacy of metabolic therapies in human cancer patients is still an area of active investigation.
> Some key points about the efficacy of metabolic therapy for cancer:
> Ketogenic diet: High-fat, low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets have been proposed as a way to starve cancer cells of glucose, their primary fuel source. Some animal studies and small human trials have shown potential benefits, but larger, well-controlled clinical trials are needed to establish efficacy.
> Insulin potentiation therapy (IPT): IPT involves administering insulin alongside low-dose chemotherapy, with the idea that insulin makes cancer cells more susceptible to the effects of chemotherapy. While some case reports and small studies have suggested benefits, the efficacy of IPT remains unproven.
> Targeting metabolic enzymes: Researchers are investigating drugs that inhibit enzymes involved in cancer cell metabolism, such as glutaminase and pyruvate kinase M2. While some of these agents have shown promise in preclinical studies, their efficacy in human patients is still being evaluated in clinical trials.
> Combination with other therapies: Metabolic therapies may be most effective when combined with other cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy, radiation, or immunotherapy. More research is needed to identify the most promising combinations and to assess their efficacy and safety.
LLM's are pretty much the oppisite of a reliable source.
They _confidently hallucinate_
Honestly very concerning to see someone using them like this on HN of all places
I am very well aware of how LLMs work, this was just to summarize some information that is widely available online. None of what Claude output here is amenable to a hallucination. There ARE animal studies. Insulin potention thepary exists, and so on.
It's funny because you say you are the one concerned, I was pretty much certain I'd get a reply about how silly I am to believe LLM output, in HN of all places.
And yet as conpared to a real source, all thst you've added
To your aegument is "this LLM is a summary of real sources (that are trustworthy) I've seen elesewhere, trust me bro".
I know people who belive confidently in many different conspiracy theories. If asked they would claim there are supporting studies, docters say so, etc..
Summarizing information online that's not from a verifiable source just isn't very useful.
> Major conclusions: The ketogenic diet probably creates an unfavorable metabolic environment for cancer cells and thus can be regarded as a
promising adjuvant as a patient-specific multifactorial therapy. The majority of preclinical and several clinical studies argue for the use of the
ketogenic diet in combination with standard therapies based on its potential to enhance the antitumor effects of classic chemo- and radiotherapy,
its overall good safety and tolerability and increase in quality of life. However, to further elucidate the mechanisms of the ketogenic diet as a
therapy and evaluate its application in clinical practice, more molecular studies as well as uniformly controlled clinical trials are needed
I don't understand why people are so rejecting of this information. I'm not a researcher, just someone with interest in health and again, it looks to me as if there is evidence, anecdotal, experimental, and a theoretical basis.
It also seems obvious that a chronically anabolic state such as what modern lifestyles and eating habits encourage, with chronically elevated insulin, prevent the body from entering the catabolic state such as what happens during fasting, in which damaged cells get recycled. In fact, fasting is also potent against cancer, and I've seen many anecdotes of such. You're not going to appreciate any mention of anecdotes though, I presume.
In short, chronically elevated insulin + inflammation + mutagens = cells with degraded ability to breathe => switch to fermentation = cancer. This is known as the Otto Wartburg effect and has been known for a century.
Metabolic therapy is tremendously successful in eradicating cancers even in later stages. I have seen so many direct testimonials and stories I wouldn't even know where to begin.