Jump to content
Science Forums

Cancer As A Metabolic Disease


Recommended Posts

Moderation note: The first 4 posts of this thread were split from Does This Story Damage Trust In Research?, because that thread was about the role of sugar in coronary heart disease, while these posts are about cancer, a different kind of disease.

 

We now know that cancer uses glucose as energy , which turns into lactic acid.

 

So starve the cancer cells of glucose and these cells will shrink .

 

Here is one link ;

 

http://www.singlecausesinglecure.org

 

 

Another link ;

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/vividlifetalks/2015/12/09/tripping-over-the-truth-about-cancer-with-travis-christofferson-sandie-sedgber

Edited by CraigD
Split from other thread and added moderation note
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We now know that cancer uses glucose as energy , which turns into lactic acid.

 

So starve the cancer cells of glucose and these cells will shrink .

 

Here is one link ;

 

http://www.singlecausesinglecure.org

Those of us with a smattering of science have always known cancer cells use glucose for energy. So does every cell in the body. Glycolysis is the main respiration process in biology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolysis

 

(Lactic acid, or lactate, is only produced in anaerobic glycolysis. If enough oxygen is available, as it normally is, the end product is pyruvate rather than lactate. Sportsmen - I rowed for many years - know that lactate accumulation is what causes muscle stiffness after exercise, especially if one is not fit enough.)

 

There is no news here and no magic bullet, as it is quite impractical to starve the body of glucose. Even fat metabolism results in the production of a certain amount of glucose during the process.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatty_acid_metabolism

 

It strikes me as absurd to rely on avoiding sugar to prevent or treat cancer. I think people who promote this notion are likely to be dangerous quacks. 

 

Cancer has multiple causes, including virus infections, exposure to chemical agents, cosmic rays and God knows what, and each cancer is individual, since it arises from uncontrolled mutation. This is why it is hard to prevent and treat and why so many of us obsess about it. Seizing on simplistic solutions, from unqualified people*, is not the way to go.

 

 

* This Christofferson person only has a qualification in materials science, it seems. 

Edited by exchemist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We now know that cancer uses glucose as energy , which turns into lactic acid.

 

So starve the cancer cells of glucose and these cells will shrink .

 

Here is one link ;

 

http://www.singlecausesinglecure.org

 

Sure, but all cells in the human body use glucose for food. The problem is to deny the glucose to the cancer cells only, without adverse effects on the other non-cancerous cells. That will not be easy!

Exchemist beat me to it again! :cussing: :cussing:  :cussing:  

 

One way to target only the cancer cells is to use a virus. It seems that cancer cells suppress the immune system response, which is one reason why the immune system is ineffective in fighting cancer. But, certain viruses also seem to prefer to target cells with a weakened immune response. So, these viruses can be used to target cancer cells. The problem with that is the virus may go on to attack other healthy cells after it destroys the cancer. I am supposing that the virus itself will need to be genetically modified so that it can be attacked by the immune system after the cancer cells are destroyed. It is a complicated web being weaved but it looks hopeful.

Edited by OceanBreeze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Moderation note: The first 4 posts of this thread were split from Does This Story Damage Trust In Research?, because that thread was about the role of sugar in coronary heart disease, while these posts are about cancer, a different kind of disease.

 

We now know that cancer uses glucose as energy , which turns into lactic acid.

 

So starve the cancer cells of glucose and these cells will shrink .

 

Here is one link ;

 

http://www.singlecausesinglecure.org

 

 

Another link ;

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/vividlifetalks/2015/12/09/tripping-over-the-truth-about-cancer-with-travis-christofferson-sandie-sedgber

 

Base on your theory to starve cancer is to not eat. Sure that may kill the cancer or slow it down but kill the person who has cancer. Your body needs glucose and with out glucose you tired, no energy, sleepy and have hard time doing very simple tasks so on.

 

Your brain needs glucose to function and live and if you starve your body of glucose this is bad.

 

Also people who have cancer lose lots of weight and if you not eating to starve the cancer you be really losing so much more weight it will be dangerous.

Edited by Parker99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but all cells in the human body use glucose for food. The problem is to deny the glucose to the cancer cells only, without adverse effects on the other non-cancerous cells. That will not be easy!

Exchemist beat me to it again! :cussing: :cussing:  :cussing:  

 

One way to target only the cancer cells is to use a virus. It seems that cancer cells suppress the immune system response, which is one reason why the immune system is ineffective in fighting cancer. But, certain viruses also seem to prefer to target cells with a weakened immune response. So, these viruses can be used to target cancer cells. The problem with that is the virus may go on to attack other healthy cells after it destroys the cancer. I am supposing that the virus itself will need to be genetically modified so that it can be attacked by the immune system after the cancer cells are destroyed. It is a complicated web being weaved but it looks hopeful.

 

I'm not sure how advance science has become today to engineer a virus to go after and target the cancer. That seems very science fiction or in movies.

 

May be in future when science advance such thing like that may be possible and replace chemo and radiation and the cancer survivor outlook will look better than what we have today.

 

May be more knowable members can explain this better or when that may be more possible.

Edited by Parker99
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...