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

91–100 of 158 posts

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#91

Post by guiambros »

TimSchumann wrote: post #82
norswap wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it was a typo and he meant 60 days without carbohydrates.

No, 60 days, first 30 water/salt only, second 30 I added in a few supplements, nothing that could really count as calorie intake though. I also adhered to a strict no coffee/tea policy.

In the other thread you mentioned strict "no flavored anything". Can you elaborate why not?

In my case I tend to feel less hungry after drinking lots of flavored water (e.g., lemon juice or flavored electrolyte powder [1]), but I haven't yet done long fasting. I want to try soon.

Also, have you noticed any cognitive decline when you were fasting for weeks? Difficulty concentrating, memory loss, lightheadedness, mood, ability to interact with people?

[1] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01IIGVUQA

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#92

Post by TimSchumann »

ereyes01 wrote: post #83
rorykoehler wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was fasting for 60 days like? Any negative experiences?

Does hunger count as a negative experience?

After the first two weeks, it was a mild background noise. I never even felt ravenous or anything, just 'Eh, it'd be nice to eat again'. Even at the end I felt like I could have gone another 30 days easily. Which, given that I ended my fast at around 25% bodyfat, I probably could have.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#93

Post by [deleted] »

caenorst wrote: post #26
justsomeone88 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Start here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R07FL1wVo4

When did Youtube videos started to be reference source ? I can't find any academic references on her work despite her putting "Ph.D" title after her name on every plateform existing.

[deleted]

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#94

Post by frisco »

topmonk wrote: post #71
frisco wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need ATP. The Krebs cycle can manufacture it from either ketone bodies or from glucose.

You also need glucose. With a blood glucose level of zero, you die.

Again, the important thing is ATP, and you can get it from either glucose or ketone bodies:

> In fact, the late George Cahill did an experiment many years ago (probably would never get IRB approval to do such an experiment today) to demonstrate how ketones can offset glucose in the brain. Subjects with very high levels of B-OHB (about 5-7 mM) were injected with insulin until glucose levels reached 1 mM (about 19 mg/dL)! A normal person would fall into a coma at glucose levels below about 40 mg/dL and die by the time blood glucose reached 1 mM. These subjects were completely asymptomatic and 100% neurologically functional.

https://peterattiamd.com/ketosis-advantaged-or-misunderstood...

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#95

Post by maximente »

ilyaeck wrote: post #38
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.

We are down to anecdotal evidences here. So as another anecdote, a guy I know went on a carb-free diet and developed diabetes as a result. His body lost the ability to process sugar. Bottom line, most people needs a balanced diet - including carbs that are one of the pillars of nutrition. A given individual's body may be able to compensate for the imbalance on its own, but let's not generalize that to the entire popu…

this makes no sense biochemically.

your hypothesis seems to be that a lack of carbohydrates (read: sugar) caused an individual to develop diabetes, but "diabetes" generalizes down to:

- the body (pancreas) does not produced insulin at all (type I)

- the body's cells are resistant to the produced insulin (type II)

we should be able to basically rule out type II because there should have largely been no insulin produced by this individual (glucagon would take priority due to low blood sugar), so insulin resistance seems super unlikely. and type I has a mix of factors but they are largely all autoimmune, where various pancreatic cells are destroyed by the body itself, causes generally unknown.

"losing the ability to process sugar" seems really sketchy, because those are all critical cellular processes that don't just go away. i realize you're probably not biologically trained but that statement doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

so which form of diabetes did this individual get diagnosed with?

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#96

Post by Madmallard »

koboll wrote: post #35
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

That video has a lot of pseudoscience ("leaky gut" syndrome, paleo humans never ate meat, etc.) so I'm inclined to distrust it entirely

Leaky gut pseudoscience :)

There's literally thousands of articles on it on pubmed.

Paleo humans never ate meat sounds silly, though.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#97

Post by maximente »

frisco wrote: post #94
topmonk wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also need glucose. With a blood glucose level of zero, you die.

Again, the important thing is ATP, and you can get it from either glucose or ketone bodies: > In fact, the late George Cahill did an experiment many years ago (probably would never get IRB approval to do such an experiment today) to demonstrate how ketones can offset glucose in the brain. Subjects with very high levels of B-OHB (about 5-7 mM) were injected with insulin until glucose levels reached 1 mM (about 19 mg/d…

no, you're both oversimplifying. the brain needs some glucose to sustain itself, a little bit, according to present day research. yes, it can principally function on ketones but not /exclusively/.

it is not controversial that the brain can survive long periods of time on principally ketones, but what has not yet been proven (for obvious ethical reasons) is whether or not the brain can sustain itself with absolutely no glucose whatsoever.

again, the ratios are key. i'm not contesting that ketones can be used as the principal fuel source, just that "the important thing is ATP" because the brain needs some glucose.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK28048/

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#98

Post by stephenSinniah »

decebalus1 wrote: post #49
i_am_nomad wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry, YouTube is too academic and dense. Could you post a TikTok or a meme with the same info?

Dear stranger, I was/am having a pretty bad day and then I read your comment and laughed out loud for the first time since yesterday. Thanks!

Let's save these kind of interactions for reddit, please.

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#99

Post by dev_dull »

TimSchumann wrote: post #92
ereyes01 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does hunger count as a negative experience?

After the first two weeks, it was a mild background noise. I never even felt ravenous or anything, just 'Eh, it'd be nice to eat again'. Even at the end I felt like I could have gone another 30 days easily. Which, given that I ended my fast at around 25% bodyfat, I probably could have.

What did you finally eat to beak your fast?

Re: Starving cancer by cutting off its favorite foods

#100

Post by dev_dull »

atwebb wrote: post #65
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.

So then you don’t need to eat any carbohydrates at all? I’m really confused by the statement. You’ll never starve your brain by not eating carbs.
Post reply on HN