Questioning the legitimacy of cancer specific foods
Comments
-
Would like to add that I follow beesie's posts along with those of others who take an incredible amount of time to research and analyse information for the good of this whole community and i have never seen her suggest anyone is ignorant or blinkered. Perhaps if you (maud) adjusted your tone then you could share your knowledge as eloquently. Your blood pressure might also be lowered? The op was an obvious question to a complex issue on the appropriate forum and not a bait to you. Best wishes x
0 -
Same people - just love scapegoating: "Process in which the mechanisms of projection or displacement are utilised in focusing feelings of aggression, hostility, frustration, etc., upon another individual or group; the amount of blame being unwarranted."
This thread, it was Dr. Oz (BTW, I'm no personality), then I saw a thread bashing S Somers.
Has BCO turned into a tabloid ?
No wonder people like me who take this seriously lose patience !
0 -
Maud, Curcumin may help in prevention...I don't know because I haven't researched it, therefore I am respectfully not agreeing or disagreeing with you. However, once again, the OP was asking the validity of specific foods for specific cancers and ironically three pages later that hasn't been addressed.
Maybe you have seen an overwhelming amount of research that specific nutrients prevent cancer but what specific nutrients are beneficial to specific types of cancer? Not to beat a dead horse, but that was my interpretation of the OP's original question.
I don't think anyone is conveniently ignoring your "first" post here although I wouldn't blame them considering that the opening of your post was rude and sarcastic. Like I said before, a person will lose credibility if that's their approach. Perhaps if your approach was more diplomatic and less accusatory and belittling then you could turn the tone of this topic into something constructive and we all may benefit. I hate using cliches but I think this one is fitting."A person can catch more flies with honey"
0 -
Pickle:
Examples of nutrient compounds with anticancer activity on the regulatory proteins/receptors above:
Inhibition of NF-kB: (resveratrol, curcumin, EGCG, isoflavones, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin D3, pomegranate extract, ashwagandha, gingerol, milk thistle, lycopene)
Reduction in 5-LOX: (omega-3 fatty acids, boswellia extract/AKBA, curcumin, lycopene)
Inhibition of Ras: (curcumin, limonene, vitamin E, garlic extract/diallyl sulfide)
Reduction in COX-2: (omega-3 fatty acids, berberine, feverfew, gingerol, EGCG, curcumin, resveratrol, milk thistle, gamma tocopherol)
Inhibition of Caspases: (cucumin)
Inhibition of PARP: (curcumin)
Inhibition of AMPK: (curcumin)
Inhibition of Galectin-3: (modified citrus pectin)
Inhibition of E-selectin: (alpha-linolenic acid, omega-3 fatty acids)
0 -
I've read that book too nancy and found it helpful in understanding the complex relationship between food and health
0 -
Much better approach Maud. It's wonderful to see that Integrative Oncology Essentials supports Dr. David Schreiber approach which was to be treated with conventional as well as complimentary medicine. I have his book. In all honesty, I think alot of the nutrition basics come down to the recommended food guide with lots of fruits and veggies, nuts, less red meat, lean proteins, whole grains and more. In essence it's good healthy eating whether you have cancer or not. I don't have time tonight to review the whole website but I will tomorrow.
0 -
0 -
I never mind "doing the heavy lifting" if it will help another out. If I make a claim or statement and I have already sourced it, it would be a mitzvah (blessing) to pass it along.
Caryn0 -
Maud, no I was not alluding to chemo. Not even close. In keeping with the topic of discussion, I was thinking about different factors that either increase or decrease the risk of cancer. Thinking specifically about breast cancer, although there may be some nutrients or food products that marginally reduce (or increase) risk, most of the major risk factors (either increasing or decreasing risk) are things that are more outside of our control. One of those risk factors that comes to mind is breast density. The increase in risk that I have because I have extremely dense breasts (likely inherited from my mother, who still has dense breasts in her late 80s) would hardly be dented by the small benefit I might get from increasing or decreasing consumption of any particular food or nutrient. That doesn't mean that it might not be worth it for me to make those dietary changes but the relative benefit is peanuts compared to the risks I face from other factors.
Your comment "Now, I would like to see the research that discredits the use of let's say curcumin against all the research that concludes it does prevent cancer. You are making the claims, up to you to produce the research.", confuses me. If you are claiming that curcumin prevents cancer, shouldn't the onus be on you to provide the support, rather than the onus be on someone else to disprove what you say? To quote you, you are the one "making the claims". You present a chart that suggests that there is benefit and your provide a website link, but the website merely makes statements (and has interesting graphics showing suggested relationships) without seeming to provide any supporting evidence or research. Someone (even a doctor) saying that there is a connection is not my definition of validating research.
0 -
And that's what we do amongst ourselves on the Alternative Forum until we get attacked.
Why pass on info on this thread that's gonna get ridiculed. The OP started this thread by calling research 'allegations', that she was tired of allegations and was asking everybody to agree with her.
In my first post, I did pass on valuable info, but samepeople much preferred to focus on a few words of mine instead of focusing on the research, just goes to show
I won't be dragged into this kind of mud again
0 -
Beesie, if you are asking me to dig up the research that's backing up the diagram and I am inviting you to do it yourself, please. Good place to start is PubMed.
I have tons of research that I will pass on when I am ready not when I am ordered to do so and definitely not in the context of this thread where the antagonism is stressing me to no end. On this note, these are my final words here.
0 -
Maud, the OP was questioning "allegations with no scientific proof". If you have scientific support, then it's not an allegation. Certainly for some foods and nutrients related to some types of cancer, there is the proof. Even I know that. And I can provide the studies and the data.
Edited to add: Maud, if you are posting the chart and making the claim, then the onus is on you to do the Pubmed search to provide the supporting data, not on me.
0 -
I am assuming those diagrams are some sort of April Fool's joke. The only rational explanation I can think of.
0 -
Just when I thought Maud was taking a new approach...Jeesh... when will my Pollyanna thinking smarten up?
Beesie..as usual, the voice of reason and reliable sources0 -
I think stress is bad and then everyday they come out with something new that is bad but 6 months ago it was good which causes me stress. And then something new that is good, whereas six months it was bad. All this stuff makes my head spin which induces stress which can't be good..on the other hand maybe stress will be good in six months. Let's face reality...no one and I mean no one, knows the cause of breast cancer. Good nutrition is just good for you no matter what. Nutrition and exercise make you feel good. That's it. Then beyond that...it's a role of the dice as to who gets it and who doesn't IMHO. So my suggestion is nutrition, exercise, sleep, relaxation may not prevent this nasty disease but it does help in coping with the day to day matters of everyday life.
0 -
Robo .. I missed the segment on 60 minutes about sugar. Did they say how they knew that some breast cancers have insulin receptors? I'm curious about this too ... and wonder why there isn't a test for it like we have for estrogren and progesterone receptors.
Bren
0 -
Here's the 60 Minutes sugar segment:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7403942n&tag=contentBody;storyMediaBox
0 -
Beesie, Once again, thank you for your mature, reasonable voice. You are truly a "mensch". Regardless of the information one is imparting, if your intention is to educate and inform then you need to provide a credible source. I agree that the onus is on the person trying to deliver the information and not only that, but in a support forum that is just the kind and right thing to do! Why would we want to withold information we already have?
Caryn
0 -
Belinda .. thanks for the link. Very interesting what was said about insulin and breast cancer. The segment said they were looking for a cure for sugar in the blood and not a test to see if your tumor is insulin receptor positive.
Bren
0 -
Curcumin and breast cancer:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014579302022925
0 -
Curcumin and breast cancer more research:
0 -
and my fav site:
http://www.naturalnews.com/020527.html
re: research curcumin/breast cancer
Enjoy the reads
0 -
I've read a lot about turmeric/curcumin and it all sounds very promising. Except for my fish oil supplement and my calcuim/D3 pill, I prefer to get my nutrients from real food and not supplements. So, last year I started adding turmeric to much of my cooking.
Here's some more info.....(I like the fact also, that it's mentioned as being anti-inflammatory).
0 -
http://www.aicr.org/foods-that-fight-cancer/
American Institute of Cancer Research.
Enough scientific research for you skeptics?
0 -
tuckertwo~
I was just going to thank you for putting up the links but you had to go and add that last line...
Why the skeptic comment?
0 -
Tucker, Thank you for taking the time to post the link. I don't think anyone here is disputing a healthy diet has benefits. This article states "No single food or food component can protect you against cancer by itself. But strong evidence does show that a diet filled with a variety of plant foods such as vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans helps lower risk for many cancers."
As it says..."helps lower risk for many cancers." Just like other common sense things like maintaining a normal weight, moderate alcohol consumption, moderate exercise and not smoking have many health benefits. There is nothing in the article that states factually specific foods for specific cancers which was the OP's question.
I think most here would agree that a balanced diet that is high in fruits, veggies, whole grains and beans is healthy for you instead of processed junk food.
Why add the uneccessary comment of " enough scientific research for you skeptics"? It just sounds sarcastic and demeaning.0 -
Ang I think we were posting the same thought at the same time..lol
0 -
Issues (skip if you want no part in the issues, topic info below)
To people who wonder why there are attitudes, and in my case, dreadful sadness over this issue, do some research by going into the alternative and natural forums and read several threads. Hounded. Often. Repeatedly. Without hesitation. Therefore, the defensiveness is a culmination of thosse experiences and an attempt to defend one's hope for a way to survive.
A swarm of bees cannot deny that they are not a swarm of bees.
Cancer specific foods --
This thread, to me, was an opinion with a request for agreement. Cool, fine. I have no problem with this thread topic and am interested since it is where I am right now, dealing with nutrition and getting more pros on my med team inclluding a nutritionist/acupuncturist.
I don't agree and I do agree. Don't agree because I definitely think there is scientific proof, sitting here with two stacks of books as high as my head.... but I do agree that there is too much conflict of info, as with anything, and it often leaves us scratching our heads and doing what Motheroffoursons said, just eating balanced and healthy.
But this sugar post called to mind a Sugar thread I read when first joining bco - I remember it because about all I did for a month was read threads of interest and this one shocked me, I was going nnnnnnnnooooooooo - but being on a Stage IV thread, I could not comment, since I was Stage II....
http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/8/topic/777405?page=1#idx_22
.....where someone asked about consuming sugar, a Stage IV who was getting a test heard for the first time that sugar fed cancer. But on here, she was told that the sugar info was a bogus myth. An opinion given to a person who desperately needs all the info to be honest and true and it is a matter of life to understand, she was asking and she was told with no evidence or research presented that the sugar is not harmful, this said by the person here who initiated this thread. Only realized that when I went back to find the Sugar thread and that remark and had an omg moment. Yes, that is a direct allegation, and I own it, and I call that presentation irresponsible, to be given against the honest proof that sugar feeds some cancers or all cancer, we do not know all of the story yet, yes, to be irresponsible beyond belief. Perhaps someone who can post in Stage IV and knows the truth will go to that thread and help. Simple title is Sugar, link above.
Also sugar raises pH. Proven. And now we have a 60 Minutes mass media report for 15 minutes on the issue, condensed version of a lifetime of research and trials and studies, someone's passion in an effort to help others.
There are threads on Metformin here on bco. IMO, they... as in Pharma, are now taking it up a step for a cancer rx to stop the receptors, but until then there are the Metformin trials and the cancer people taking the legal limit doses or less across the world with good results for many, not all. I will be interested to see what this rx will cost, hope not more than can be afforded, but we could stop eating sugar..... I know I need to.
The same with alkaline and pH, which is very important but 'someone' said that pH is not important and that water with lemon only makes your body more acidic. No - water with lemon makes body pH more alkaline because of how the acidic nature of grapefruit, lemons and such react with the body. It is so very important. The organic lemons in my RO water are how I keep my pH as high as it is, and it is not high enough because I do not eat right yet and I need more lemons to squeeze.
I am questioned by my integrative medical doctor each week, how is the pH each day? you HAVE TO keep it up, he says, and they always test, because the alkaline level needs to be high, acidic level in blood and body fluids are an environment for cancer to flourish. I believe it because this is in almost every book on cancer that I have read.
That is the in-brief explanation for the ones wondering, as there was a question back a page, I believe. To test pH, there are pH test strips to purchase as sticks or in a roll. You need both urine and saliva tests. Plenty of info on how.
To those requestiing research, I don't feel like showing my proof tonight, it takes so much time to type out these books and hunt down the info in my million online bookmarks, but I know I have read it, often I have given details and links in alternatives.
Tonight, I am going to go talk to some newbies, talk to some people who are scared like me bcz my breast skin feels like I wore wool sweater against it, play a few words games, visit the funniest threads on this site and laugh for my heart's sake - then do some more work and go to bed before one am.
0 -
Diane, thanks for the PH info. I remember the connection between body PH and foods was very "in" back in the 80s, but I had never come across it in connection with cancer.
My rad doc told me to limit sugar. However, when I reminded her that it is blood glucose levels that are the culprit, not sugar per se, she agreed. I have severely limited by sugar intake, which was low to begin with, since my dx. I have also cut out most white carbs, so I eat a piece of white bread or a bite of potato maybe once a week on average. This morning I had pancakes, made with buckwheat flour, no sugar, some raspberries and nuts in the batter and sweetened with half a teaspoon of concentrated grape juice (traditional Greek sweetener).
However, in spite of this, my fasting blood sugar remains hovering somewhere in the upper 90s and won't come down for anything.
This makes me wonder about the exact mechanism at play here. Considering all I am doing with my diet, my 19 BMI, daily exercise and lack of diabetes family history, my glucose should be lower. So I wonder if the connection between sugar and cancer may be related to faulty insulin regulation, for example, rather than sugar (and carbs) consumed.
I agree that the metformin studies are very interesting. Metformin is, by the way, an old drug and very cheap. Right now, however, we just don't have the evidence to start using it widely, nor do we understand yet how it may be providing the benefit it seemingly provides. Perhaps it only works on tumors with insulin receptors, like those mentioned in the 60 minutes segment. We also don't know if there are long term adverse effects when used in non-diabetics. I think this last part is why many doctors are still reluctant to prescribe it for breast cancer.
0 -
Diane, believe it or not, there was a time on these boards where everyone felt free to post in whatever forum they wanted to. As a matter of fact, the Stage IV forum was the busiest one there was. Everyone was friendly and helpful. The Alternative Forum, I can't honestly say....I didn't visit until I NEEDED to. I suspect though, that it wasn't the volatile forum it is now. It seems now everyone is hesitant to post anywhere and always made to feel unwelcome. Just my thoughts. I much appreciate the last paragraph in your post. It gets to you after a while. I find even when I have some information to share, it's just not worth the effort. It's too bad it all went so terribly wrong. The board jumped the shark, but I would miss it after all these years and you never know when you're going to find that one little precious nugget of info that can save a life. Anyhoo, I'm just rambling....just wanted to let you know that you're not alone in feeling that way. Personally, I check out when I have to read some long scientific study. It must be just as tedious to post it as it is to read it. The constant need to have to prove one's self is disheartening. It's not just about alternative treatments either. It seems it permiates everywhere....the cliques, some distrustful of anyone who hasn't been here for years, skeptical about a treatment that might actually be working for someone, dismissing members because they have trouble with grammar or clarity, suspicion of members having bc at all. Sad, really.
Edited for grammar.
0
