Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

acsh.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 158 posts

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#61

Post by kingkawn »

dev_dull wrote: post #6

> your body closely regulates the level of glucose in your blood. Your brain would literally starve without it. Is this actually true? Having done the ketogenic diet and bringing carbohydrates down to almost nothing, my brain definitely didn't starve. In fact, running on ketones was amazing.

In the diet you describe the body would preferentially reserve all glucose for the brain and run the rest on ketones. The body can manufacture glucose when needed from other energy sources but it’s an energy intensive biochemical process and not ideal for efficient use of available nutrients.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#62

Post by usaphp »

Zelphyr wrote: post #37
justsomeone88 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keto/carnivore is incredibly dangerous to the human body in the long run (5+ years out). Excess protein (in fact, even in the amounts society recognizes as "normal") is bad for you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R07FL1wVo4

I've been on Keto for almost two years and recently had someone adamantly scold me about how bad it is for my brain. My n=1 suggests otherwise. Things like focus and mood are all significantly better than they were before. Physical and mental stamina have both increased. I went from an "Obese" body fat percentage to "Athletic" in six months. But still, I gave him the benefit of the doubt and sincerely asked him, and…

> things like focus and mood are all significantly better then before...

Was your keto diet the only change in your life? Going from obese to athletic in 6 months probably includes some other good habits like going to gym/physical activity and good sleep etc. So maybe your change in a lifestyle helped you improve you mood and focus, not necessarily the keto diet in particular?

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#63

Post by daniel_iversen »

newen wrote: post #58
anon1m0us wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my research, yes it can. I read a study that said patients who fast during chemotherapy treatments fare better too. The mechanism seems to be that during periods of fasting, normal cells "hunker down" and restrict the consumption of nutrients and other materials. Cancer cells don't do this though and continue to consume the nutrients, which are actually chemotherapy drugs in the patients. Fasting therfore increa…

Got any links to the research? Would be helpful to me and other readers. Thanks.

I’ve read and heard about it quite a bit recently. Not sure but maybe start here, Valter Longo seems to be doing some interesting stuff: https://valterlongo.com/cancer/

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#64

Post by tryptophan »

arcticbull wrote: post #36
itchyouch wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

with protein only, the protein goes through gluconeogensis and the protein is converted into glucose, whereas in keto, the fat is used as fat...

The glycerol backbones in triglycerides also undergo gluconeogenesis.

Yes. Red blood cells literally can only eat glucose. Without it you would be super dead.

I find it amusingly absurd how so many people here seem convinced that our primary food source is somehow a poison. People with 0 carbs in their blood are colloquially known as 'dead'.

I wonder if people even know what ketone bodies are... They are a downstream product of glucose processing(also downstream of fats - the inputs are different but the outputs are identical in a few ways), acetyl-coA, stuck together for bloodstream transport with the coenzyme temporarily removed.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#65

Post by atwebb »

dev_dull wrote: post #6

> your body closely regulates the level of glucose in your blood. Your brain would literally starve without it. Is this actually true? Having done the ketogenic diet and bringing carbohydrates down to almost nothing, my brain definitely didn't starve. In fact, running on ketones was amazing.

It was in the next line:

Your brain would literally starve without it. If you do not consume enough carbohydrates in your diet, your body will synthesize the glucose you need.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#67

Post by Diederich »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #47
TimSchumann wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of carbohydrates you need in your diet to survive is exactly zero. They’re a non-essential macronutrient. The amount of glucose you need in your blood stream to keep everything running smoothly is a very small amount easily produced by your body through a process called gluconeogenesis. I went 60 days sans any calories and my body self regulated glucose just fine.

You went 60 days without eating?

Apparently yes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18928489

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#68

Post by entee »

Cancer favoring glucose has been known for a very long time, this is called the Warburg Effect:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warburg_effect_(oncology)

Interesting new pharmacology for sure, but the end of the article is critical here:

"Additionally, an accompanying commentary by William Katt and colleagues indicated that there are no FDA-approved drugs that target glucose and glutamine metabolism. This is because previous drug candidates proved to be too toxic for use in humans."

It's really hard to go after glucose because it's kind of everywhere. If there's a way to target this compound more specifically, maybe it could be useful. As it stands now, it's very very far from being a viable drug (and it doesn't sound like the authors claim otherwise). Cool science though.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#69

Post by robotbikes »

selectodude wrote: post #53
omarchowdhury wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You went 60 days without eating?

Maybe he ate nothing but protein? I don’t even know...

I looked at his comment history and found 37 weeks ago that he says he only drank water and salt the first 30 days and added supplements the last 30 so I'm pretty sure he meant no calories. I also don't think that is a world record by any means. I found this site where someone they cite a 1972 NIH study of someone who fasted for 382 days but evidently I can't paste in this android client. Hunger strikes have definitely gone on for longer than 60 days. Water is essential but the body can subsist for a lot longer without food.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#70

Post by iikoolpp »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #47
TimSchumann wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of carbohydrates you need in your diet to survive is exactly zero. They’re a non-essential macronutrient. The amount of glucose you need in your blood stream to keep everything running smoothly is a very small amount easily produced by your body through a process called gluconeogenesis. I went 60 days sans any calories and my body self regulated glucose just fine.

You went 60 days without eating?

People with eating disorders do that sometimes, yes.
Post reply on HN