I stumbled upon an article that made me wonder if PC is an affliction that has arisen, partly, as a result of our evolving need to feed our big, fat, energy-hogging and ever-(over)-thinking brains. Here's a link: direct-ms.org/wp-content/up...
This article popped up as I was thinking about why dogs are the only other species that seems to die from prostate cancer with any kind of regularity. What do we have in common with our best friends, and with them alone? Well, we are both omnivores that have developed the ability to survive (but not always THRIVE, as aging individuals) on diets that have strayed from their evolutionary ideal.
Coffey's article asserts this, and I think Coffey was on the right track when saying, "There has not been sufficient time for biological selection to evolve a proper defense for human DNA against the insults perpetuated by the modern Western diet." But perhaps the "higher risk associated with increased intake of red meat, animal fats, dairy products" that he notes needs a bit more exploration than given here.
After all, it seems odd to think that dogs somehow also failed to evolve in the same way we did. They couldn't likely be omnivores or carnivores in nature that somehow, once domesticated, suddenly started getting meat diets that meat-eaters could not process in ways that did not promote disease.
Is it the fat that promotes cancer? Animal fat is the staple energy source of human Inuit and Siberian tribes of the far north, where prostate cancer is historically quite rare. (And in the Artic, the dogs got the LEANER meat and the fatty good stuff went to the humans. Were dogs getting TOO LITTLE fat?) It is certainly true that "only in the last 10 to 15 thousand years ago did humans and dogs dramatically alter their diets." But they did not alter primarily by adding animal fat and meat, or by suddenly switching from raw to cooked diets.
As he notes, "this is the time when humans domesticated the dog, bred animals, grew crops, and cooked, processed, and stored meats and vegetables." Yet cooking may have already been going on for a million years. Why would he ignore the prior 990,000 years and suppose the cooking of meat is suddenly a new factor worthy of mention?
I think he is understating the obvious new and very recent biggie here, in addition to dairy: the extensive cultivation of grain. When we domesticated and "grew crops" of GRAIN, and not merely of fruits and vegetables and legumes and tubers that perhaps had been part of our diets for many millennia, we introduced an entirely new staple that dramatically helped to sustain and expand existing population centers. Grains sustained those who might have otherwise starved or died in infancy or never even have been born... and perhaps also influenced the potentials of our metabolic and hormonal regimes, for better and/or worse. (We evidently started getting a lot more cavities and gum disease, at the very least.)
I had always assumed that men had fed domesticated dogs a diet of real meat until only very recently. But it turns out that dogs have been getting a lot of grain-and-dairy-based feed for a few thousand years! Even the horse-meat Ken-L-Ration of the 1920s was loaded with grains. So could it be that dogs/humans get prostate cancer not because they have been getting too much meat and animal fat, but because they have been getting too much grain and/or dairy along with that meat and fat?
Coffey says: "All current epidemiologic evidence and suggestions for preventing prostate and breast cancer in humans indicates that we should return to the original diets under which our ancestors evolved. The recent development of the Western-type diet is associated with breast and prostate cancer throughout the world."
I probably agree, for the most part. But I do not think fat intake in itself is the primary problem, except for the fact that our fats are increasingly from industrial seed-oils and grain-fed animal products (increasingly omega-6) rather than from wild fish and game and whole "natural" foods. Maybe a reversion to a better omega-6 to omega-3 ratio would help? Perhaps we are best served with lots of fats, but the right fats in the right proportions.
If we had diets from birth that aligned with how we evolved to metabolize fats, carbs and proteins, in conjunction with the natural cycles of day/night and seasonal feast/famine, perhaps many of us could harbor nothing but harmless micro-cancers in our prostates that never amounted to any threat. (Except of course for the enhanced individual risks of inherited predispositions, environmental toxins, radiation, random mutations, etc.)
I really like this piece from Nat'l Geo on the diets of cultures that have not fully modernized: nationalgeographic.com/food...
DarkEnergy recently posted that "scientific exploration is useless in understanding what we are, and why we got cancer." And I think that's true in the context of comparing ourselves to each other, individually. But what about in the context of comparing ourselves to other animals, and to our ancestral selves going back well beyond the past 10-20 thousand years?
I think "what we are" as a species is one that has become domesticated, not "wild," and whose diet now consists primarily of other organisms (plant or animal) that are ALSO domesticated and not wild: industrially raised and processed foods of farmed grains and seed oils, farmed meat, dairy and fish, and farmed legumes, fruits and vegetables.
So... time for another glass of red wine, from wonderfully farmed Shiraz and Cabernet vinifera grapes from South Eastern Australia. The Neolithic Revolution of 10,000 B.C. still has more upside than downside, as a 750 ml. glass bottle (and contents) perfectly illustrates.
Written by
noahware
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
Interesting, The real question for me is does reverting to the diet of 135,000 years ago hold any benefit in fighting PC? My choices on lifestyle directly mirror the items in Table V's left column and I hope I can maintain them. So far, being 1 year, I have. Of course this whole thread assumes PC is a metabolic disease. I am pretty sure the medical community doesn't have consensus on that at this time unless I am mistaken. Maybe I need some wine to take another look at this all
Sadly, I think preventing PC with diet holds more promise than fighting it, after decades of feeding its development. I suspect my first two decades (0-20) of pro-growth high-cal intake served me quite well, while the next three decades (20-50) of pro-growth high-cal intake served my PC quite well. What was all that excess nutrition helping to grow, besides a gut and a tumor?
I wouldn't say all PC is predominately a metabolic disease, but I'd bet that quite a bit of it is. And of course what matters for me is not whether or not my PC is metabolic, but whether its lethal aspect is. I'm perfectly happy to share my body with a PC that is content to remain non-lethal and asymptomatic so long as I do what is required to tame it. Live and let live!
You can't reverse it by going to an 'old' or ancient diet. It will again take many hundreds or maybe thousands of year for evolution to take it's course and change the genetic makeup to reduce certain illnesses which might have a metabolic basis. Of course it is being highlighted by medical science that gut biome has a huge role to play in shaping one's health.
I am aware and did not say cure, I said fight and I am also aware of some of the information on gut microbiome which is why I have decided to eat for its health. Thanks.
To take a step beyond diet, I have to wonder if there are numerous cancer causes that are environmentally based. One has to consider the more recent (relatively) additions of BPH, medicines which prevent us from fevering, nicotine intake which gives our lungs polonium intake, living inside ever-more leakproof houses that keeps our exposures constant, transfer of poisonous materials around the world, like asbestos, use of gasoline which is known to cause cancer, electronic wearables and phones, increasing exposure to x-rays medically, and use of pesticides on imported foods all are conspiring to increase cancer among us.
Interesting but a little late to prevent Pca in those of us here. Don't eat feedlot beef, grass fed only and enjoy wild caught fish from our polluted seas and lakes.
I agree completely with noahware and NecessarilySo. For what it is worth, I changed my diet to plant based five years ago to save my life. I'd spent sixty-eight years consuming the Western diet, and I'd slowly clogged my vascular system with calcium plaque creating coronary artery disease (CAD) and five cardiac blockages. I had a heart attack, and I was told I required open heart surgery and five by-passes.
I sought a second and third opinion, got a PET scan, then a second PET scan to confirm the diagnosis. I decided that unless I was prepared to change what I was putting into my vascular system, the by-passes would be a temporary fix, and I'd eventually die of another more serious heart attack.
So, I became a vegan, and I have not consumed any diary, fish or meat products since 11/24/15. I lost fifty pounds, no longer have had any gastrointestinal problems, and I greatly reduced all my lipid numbers. My cardiac system grew collateral arteries by-passing my heart blockages and restored blood to my ailing heart muscles. My heart is functioning as it should be normally. I take a 40 mg statin and a beta-blocker to help keep my cardiac arteries and veins flexible. I see my cardiologist once a year to review my blood work, and I suspect that this year I'll get a five year PET scan internal look.
In 8/2019, I was diagnosed with PCa. I'm a Gleason 9/10 pT3a NO EPE. I had a RARP at MGH on 9/24/19, and the surgery went well. Three follow-up uPSA tests have been undetectable. But, some micro-specs of PCa were detected in the margins in the pathology following surgery, so I expect BCR eventually.
Like Noah, I believe that my PCa began growing in my second or third decade of my life, and had I not been feeding it with the Western high animal fat diet, the PCa cells might not have grown rapidly enough to become the aggressive cancer they are now.
I believe, but I cannot prove, that my Western diet contributed to the growth of my CAD and my PCa. A lot of medical evidence points to a diet of animal fat as the cause of coronary artery disease, and I believe that is what caused my CAD. What we put into our bodies is the fuel that keeps us alive, and I believe that same fuel carries environmental toxins that help cancers grow and thrive. We are crapping where we eat!
Like Noah, now I want to keep the PCa cells from killing me without having the SEs from the PCa medical treatment be so nasty that my QOL sucks making the time that I have left not worth the trip.
Pass the celery and carrot sticks.......and I'll wash it down with a glass of red wine.
Hi Jeff! We differ a bit here, in that I think there is also a "higher-animal-fat" path to good health. But it would include the healthier fats of wild fish and game, and grass-fed meat and dairy, not the factory fats of fried fast food.
I think the vegan path is more straightforward, and certainly a lot more affordable, unless you happen to be raising your own livestock. My brother (who raises his own fruits and vegetables) has been on a mostly-vegetarian path, but not vegan, for decades. From his 20s into his 60s he has never put on any extra weight, and by all accounts and metrics he appears to be just as healthy as ever.
His kid brother (me) started a beer-and-pretzel belly at 30 that kept on growing as a steak-and-bread belly to add fifty pounds by age 50. Personally, I think the carbs from the bread, beer, potatoes, pretzels and pasta can do far greater damage than than the fat from the steak and cheese and eggs. But perhaps that depends on the sourcing of the meat and dairy: factory farm or grass fed.
An even bigger difference between the diets of me and my brother, aside from me eating more meat, was the fact that his was basically a lower calorie whole-foods diet and mine was a higher calorie processed-foods diet. The carb intake for both of us included beer, bread and potatoes but then diverged in that he ate very little junk food and I ate tons of it.
My life mirrors yours until about 10 years ago when my son got sick and the whole family changed our diets for the better. When I think of the beer and the chicken wings and everything you named above I have to wonder. Shortly after dx I had to deal with feeling of guilt of doing this do me and my family. May not have been rational and was not long lasting but I remember it well as one of the many steps I dealt with after knowing I have PC.
Well, anecdotally, I know for a fact that people with a high-animal-fat diet CAN live long and healthy lives, because I've seen it. So the path certainly exists for some. I suspect there must be a wide variety of other dietary factors that influence the likelihood of the that path working well for any individual (the types, amounts and proportions of all the OTHER fats, carbs and proteins in one's diet) as well as non-dietary factors like genetics, exercise, stress, sleep, etc.
There do appear to be some tribes and populations with diets of proportionately high fat that have low levels of PC and heart disease, and there are mouse studies that show keto diets can extend lifespan, so it certainly seems possible that some formulations of higher-fat diets can work, for some. The problem is, how can one estimate with any confidence what the best formulation is, for any given individual? (After all, the certain tribes that might do well with high-fat may have EVOLVED to do well.)
Jeff spent sixty-eight years consuming the Western diet. Do we know exactly what aspect of that diet most greatly contributed to his heart condition? Yes, some evidence points to a diet of animal fat as a cause of coronary artery disease. But some evidence points to a diet of high sugar and simple carbs (and developing insulin resistance) as a cause of coronary artery disease.
The hallmark of the Western diet is NOT simply that it has animal fats, but that is has high-processed- carb AND high animal fat/protein AND high industrial seed oil, all combined.
So perhaps the most important thing is switching from a sugary, starchy processed-foods diet to a more healthy whole foods diet, regardless of whether the whole foods are "low-fat" or "higher-fat."
"...... The hallmark of the Western diet is NOT simply that it has animal fats, but that is has high-processed- carb AND high animal fat/protein AND high industrial seed oil, all combined." ----very true & well said. So, given individual differences (many of which we can not at this time tease out), what is the best diet for the most people. Seeing a few people live long on a Keto diet is interesting but anecdotal. It might be due to specific genetics or other factors unrelated to diet. A study of a population on a keto diet is much more interesting. I am just wondering if you know of any of these studies?? Presently, I know of no "Blue Zones" (areas in the world with larger than normal population percentages who live to 100 years old) where high fat diets are consumed.
Oh, I don't have much doubt that it's a whole-foods Med-type (or Blue Zone) diet that is highest in veg and beans and olives/olive oil, with additions of limited fruit, nuts, fish, grains, dairy, etc.
But that does not mean 1) that is the best diet for a given individual, or 2) there are not other well-formulated diets that might be as good or better than the general Med-type.
A well-formulated keto diet is just that - "formulated" - a therapeutic diet, and nothing that would likely evolve naturally in any population. So you are not going to find it in populations. The Inuit diet was forced on people by nature, and not an ideal diet, even though it apparently led to PC incidence of near zero (but not bone-healthy, for example).
And the higher-fat anecdotes I was speaking of were not keto-people, but those like my grandmothers, who lived disease-free to 93 and 97 on more of a late 1800s type American diet that was very heavy on cream, butter, eggs and meat. (Beans and veg were part, too, but the veg was mostly over-cooked and slathered in butter, LOL!) It was low in highly PROCESSED foods, and desserts were for dessert only (not breakfast and snacks).
My point is simply that a "high-fat" diet could be fatty fish, grass-fed meat and dairy, avocado, olive and nuts... and I expect that might provide better health typically than a low-fat, plant-based diet that consisted primarily of refined sugars and grains, starchy vegetables and high-sugar fruits and juices.
In contrasting diet from birth against a dietary change in mid- or late-life, it certainly would seem strange to raise a child from birth on a keto-type diet, unless as a treatment for epilepsy or type-1 diabetes or some other condition. But as a later-in-life change from a SAD diet, I could see going in a variety of real-food directions with realistic hopes of helping prevent (or slow the progression of) cancers, heart disease, diabetes, dementia, etc. I tend to think the biggest factor would be a reduction in overall energy intake, specifically of refined carbs and industrial seed fats (rather than animal fats alone).
I had EPE & PSM (Pos Surg Margins) with Gleason 7 and no cancer in lymph nodes. I was offered and received adjuvant RT. Adjuvant RT has become controversial but I am glad I got it.
I have not seen any evidence diet can reverse PCa but there is some population evidence our western diet contributes to the incidence/frequency of PCa in the western world. Whereas, there is evidence a vegan diet can both prevent and reverse most heart disease.
One also has to consider a genetic component. To my knowledge there are no populations with a zero incidence of PCa. We know only a little about human genetic make-up currently and cannot as of yet alter it to our benefit. If everyone were on a "cancer prevention diet" (whatever the specifics of that diet were) all cancer would not be eliminated ...... certainly not all PCa.
With dietary musings one has to always separate merely thoughts & evidence of associations from actual causal evidence. There is much evidence that Fire Trucks are associated with fires but no evidence that Fire Trucks cause fires.
More crap on this site. Posts like this do so much damage as some will believe that diet alone is responsible for their disease, and if they change what they eat, it will cure their prostate cancer. So dangerous to post this trash on an advanced prostate cancer site, which deals with scientifically supported research and findings.
I suggest you do some, make that a lot of reading on prostate as well as other cancers before you put posts like this on. Try to remember that our ancestors only lived into their 40's so many of our ills today are in part a resultant of much longer lives.
Check back in with an update to your post in say, ten years!
Incorrect information here or anywhere else can only be refuted or even examined if it is presented. It only is dangerous if it is incorrect and not examined & corrected.
If you actually read this post, you will see it is a musing on the hypothetical possibilities of how and why humans and dogs, alone, evolved to become prone to prostate cancer. There is NOTHING in this post that refers to treatment.
How would one read about the enhanced individual risks of inherited predispositions, environmental toxins, radiation, random mutations, etc. that I mention and then assume "diet alone is responsible?" How would one read about the conjecture if "we had diets from birth" and assume that is something we can address as aging men? Are you afraid some of the readers here have time machines, and are going to make mistakes when they travel back to infancy?
Unlike you, I am going to continue to assume that the men who look at this site have reading and comprehension abilities beyond the grade-school capacity that you attribute to them.
Just so you know, Donald Straley Coffey was a distinguished professor of urology at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. I shared his article here for those who MIGHT be interested. Unlike your insistence that such "trash" by distinguished professors MUST NOT ever be shared or discussed here, I do not insist that those who are uninterested must read what I share.
Regardless of your diet, one of the correlations between PCa (both rate and aggressiveness) that appears in many clinical studies, is BMI (body mass index). Some of the risk nomographs also have this built into their model.
So - whatever you do and whatever works for you - reducing your BMI is a reasonable risk reducer. And it is cheap, "easy", and has positive side effects.
What has worked for me (and I have some nice graphs to show this) is keto-style and intermittent fasting (16-8 style). I think the spectrum covers vegan to vegetarian to .... to keto .... to carnivore. All with trade-offs and personal preferences.
The biggest risk factor is the cost of buying new clothes when your old large pants no longer stay up
No need to "argue" about what or if, or preach the gospel on the "right" approach. Just give folks support and ideas for what they can do that could be a positive help.
I am not a fan of the long--term health benefit "evidence" for Keto or Carnivore diets .... I think there is good evidence against these .... at least long term. We do agree on BMI as a factor. No diet eliminates all cancer which is a point many miss.
FYI I do follow a vegan diet, however I would quickly change if there were convincing evidence to support some other kind of diet.
Being vegan has primary an ethical meaning of not harming, exploiting or killing other living beings for our food, clothes or amusement. Having that in mind, it is not only a diet, but a philosophy. If you think you can swich to other diet so easily, you can describe yourself better as a plant based eater, but not a vegan.
I use no animal based products. I use the word "vegan" since the connotation is zero animal based products. Whereas, "plant based" can have the connotation to some of being only mostly, but not necessarily completely, plants. I do agree some associate vegan with those who eat only plants to avoid injuring, or taking advantage of animals.
For me the object is a healthful diet .... maybe another term say, "An evidence based completely plants diet." (I do not consume added oils plant or otherwise .... evidence suggests this is unwise) would be more accurate but sadly is not a common term.
If you prefer to call me Plant Based I have no objection. I get your point.
While the goal is the most healthful diet, I see no reason to, or advantage in, harm/harming other creatures and today with ample food available (vs say during the "Little Ice Age" where dairy & meat consumers had an Darwinian advantage .... crops failed but grass grew and animals ate the grass & survived) smacks a bit of arrogance on the part of humans.
p.s. comment on the Coffey paper at the start of this post. We do know that the role of hormones in prostate cancer is more complicated than just "testosterone" and there are effects of other "female" hormones e.g. prolactin and estrogen. I certainly do not understand all of this, and it is my impression that there is not yet a clear view among the experts (if someone has a good reference on this please post).
Note the Coffey paper is from 2001. The qualifies in my view as "ancient history" in this field. Still worth reading (and maybe evên helpful), but would be good to find more recent work if it is out there.
Well said on the "Ancient History" .... also well said is, "Still worth reading (and maybe evên helpful), but would be good to find more recent work if it is out there."
Great post. You make my day. Cheers 🥂 he also ignores the lack of selective pressure against diseases that arise with aging, after our reproductive years have passed or our sperm degraded from accumulated genetic damage. Disposable soma. Then it’s always a trade off between virility/ reproduction and longevity.
I’ve been thinking about the Intuits too lately. And how ketosis is the metabolic pathway for hunters and migrations when even natural grains etc were scarce. (Disclosure: I eat mostly keto, with some short breaks, and intermittent fasting and love it. )
Thanks! I'm trying to get back to the keto, but the autumn cravings are slowing me down. Summer is the season where I can easily eat nothing but veg and fish and not be bothered by my food addictions. (Maybe the answer is to get out of New England and move to where it's always summer?)
The point I was attempting to make here was my concern over statements made on this site that may cause some new advanced prostate cancer men to ignore scientifically proven medical treatments and think that by changing their diet, running 5 miles a day etc. will cure them or stop the war.
It is therefore important to NOT throw in needless wrenches that will only confuse some. I have lost several men in my various circles of life that believed some witchcraft or homemade remedy, or some magic potion made in a kitchen sink, or suddenly running a marathon is going to stop the advancement of advanced prostate cancer.
I do agree that living better and healthier, are indeed factors to several or perhaps many types of cancer, including there been some evidence that a diet can play a role in a man getting prostate cancer. Common sense would prevail that smoking, excessive drinking and eating junk foods, i.e. overweight, all play a role in longevity.
" statements made on this site that may cause some new advanced prostate cancer men to ignore scientifically proven medical treatments "
Please quote such statements in my post, or in the article linked. If you can find anything here that would in itself CAUSE a man to decline medical treatment, I would like to meet that man... I'll bet he has bigger problems than having read this thread.
If you were to read a discussion of how diet might hypothetically make bones more prone to fracture, would you be afraid that men reading that who then experience fractures would try to treat a fracture with diet, rather than go to the ER?
You throw up stuff that was published some 19 years ago. Don't you think that this may confuse some, and for the record, there in fact MANY men who are not well educated, who come to our site for information!!!!-they rely upon us to show them the path to stay alive a little longer and perhaps get a little more from what is remaining of their lives.
Maybe we need to start a site so that anything can be tossed onto it and let buyer BEWARE.
I also think that some need to spend some time and I mean LOTS of time, with end stage men to get a better understanding of just how bad this war is and the toll it takes, then. maybe you can understand why I am so sensitive to ensuring that we provide up to date information and advise to those who come here.
Dr. Ruth Heidrich was diagnosed with breast cancer in her 40's. She had a double mastectomy but refused chemo and radiation for metastases on her ribs choosing instead a vegan diet designed for cancer patients by Dr. McDougall. Within a year her metastases had disappeared. This is not to say that radical diet changes will work as well for everyone--but what has one to lose?
Some that have reversed cancer by diet have felt that they have been cured and reverted back to the diet that had been successful only to have cancer return again but the diets no longer worked.
Dr. Heidrich was diagnosed in her 40's and competes in athletic events into her 80's!
Ruth Heidrich: The 81-Year-Old Triathlete On Going Vegan ...
I also do NOT want to encourage men to spend all of their money and time in looking for what does NOT now exist. To suggest piling on lots of hypotheticals on a new man is NOT helpful in my view. My own experience was that, starting on 28 or more vitamins and supplements, becoming a vegan, etc. ALL of which did NOTHING to ward off the progression of my cancer, but did make ALOT of money for some snake oil salesmen. It also delayed me in getting early treatment were I NOT to have had all of the bs that was floating around to attempt to sift thru at that early stage of the war.
Men need to focus on getting the right information in order to make the best choice of treatment options etc. and throwing all kinds of what ifs etc. into the mix, only causes delay and confusion-gee you have been around a while, so think about it!!!!!!!
I also lost friends etc. because they waited to long to get into war mode while making like mad scientists trying every damn tincture and believing every scrap of crap that they could find, all in order to stay alive.
Again, think carefully about what and how you post, We are an advanced prostate cancer site, here to assist men in having the BEST and most UPTODATE information possible to assist them in the war. Sidetracking even one man into some false sense of going off into never never land over some bizarre treatment can KILL some early, some very very early before their time.
This post is not even about this (it's about the evolution of WHY humans and dogs might both get PC, while other animals don't), but trying to consider a better diet in addition to our chosen medical treatments hardly seems like "some false sense of going off into never never land" or an example of "bizarre" thinking.
In fact, I'll go further and say the the medical establishment routinely IGNORES the potential influence of diet, exercise, sleep, sunshine, etc. on cancer treatment. That is the bizarre thing. If you consider medical treatments as the ONLY thing worthy of discussion on a cancer forum, then it is YOU who is endangering men, by limiting their ability to intake and process a wide variety of information from a variety of sources and then augment their medical treatments.
You are suffering from either/or thinking. A man who reads about potential ADDITIONAL benefits of diet, exercise, sleep, sunshine, etc. on cancer treatment does not automatically discard the notion that medical intervention is important. Most men consider BOTH, not just one or the other.
Hey noahware! I’ve been on the all out holistic diet and nutrition plan for over five years now . I think that it has made a huge difference in my immunity towards pc . I did high dose vit c ivs for my first year and a half . It was costly .. But, I went into remission along with double adt and 8 weeks imrt . Diet and exercise are two things that we can control . I got pc from my dad . Let’s face it many a man will take the treatments but no change their diets at all .each to their own . I’m just trying to live .. You will get much flack on this web site about diet or natural plans . Soc cares rules the minds for many older guys that either can’t or just won’t change ..
I was delighted to read this post and learn about the possible evolution of PCa in man and his canine pals. Coffey's article whether it is nineteen years old or not is fascinating information, so thanks for taking the time to post your commentary and the link to the article.
I knew that when I posted my comment about my choices to change to a vegan diet I'd probably cause the turmoil of responses that has occurred. That's fine. Everyone on this site is a grown-up, and I think that everyone makes their own decisions about what they choose to eat. Sorry if someone ripped you off by selling you something that didn't help your PCa ailment.
I'm doubtful that a vegan diet can reverse PCa, but no one has proven that a vegan diet has a negative aspect on one's QOL. Maybe, just maybe, a vegan diet will slow down the growth of those elusive PCa cells. Did one's diet cause PCa? I doubt it, but one's diet may cause PCa to accelerate. I can't prove this, but I believe this may be true.
Full disclosure guys - I'm not a doc, and I may be full of shit!
We live in a country with a capitalistic based economy. The academic Centers of Excellence are in the business of selling medical school diplomas and providing on-the-job training for their students to learn how to become physicians. Big Pharma is selling their drugs to the COEs and the docs who prescribe Big Pharma's wares to the patients seeking relief from their ailments. Insurance companies are selling us medical insurance to pay the hospitals, the docs and Big Pharma because our country does not have government sponsored medical care as a right.
So, why get wound up when anyone tries to promote and sell grass clippings as a cure for anything? Its the American way. Everyone in the American capitalistic medical system is trying to sell something to someone every minute, and it is always buyer beware whether you read about the newest product or treatment on this forum or in the National Enquirer while buying veggies at Whole Foods.
Well said, thanks Jeff. I think also what some are missing is that we are not merely the sum of our one disease, PC, and its symptoms. As you say, certain diets may improve our QoL , and also may help with the many OTHER aspects of aging and the potential for deteriorating health that comes with aging.
Above all, I think a change from our high-sugar and low-nutrient SAD of processed foods can show benefits for conditions resulting from SOC treatments for PC, if not from the PC itself. Many man are on ADT, which can promote metabolic and lipid changes that might better serve a progression of PC rather than its regression, if not addressed.
Exercise and diet should be thought of not just as potential add-ons to the medical treatment of PC, but thought of as potential treatments for the effects of the PC treatment itself!
Prostate tumors in dogs only occur in about .3 percent of all dogs on the planet. They also can occur in cats. So not sure we can draw any conclusions between mans best friend and humans whatsoever.
Man didn't live past 35 thousands of years ago, despite a plant based diet.
My husband has always eaten healthy and is one of the thinnest people I know and he has PC. He's 5'9 and weighs 150 lbs. Not sure what he would have done differently.
Well, this discussion was certainly not about what any of us would have done differently as individuals, in the 21st century. It was more about the possible ramifications of the evolution of our diets thousands of years ago, as a species, towards cereal grains and dairy products (and, more recently, industrial seed oils and sugars).
The actual reason I even posted was that I took issue with Coffey's implication that a plant-based diet would have "saved us" as a species from PC. The fat-based diets of Inuit and other Arctic peoples (and perhaps dogs?) seemed to have served them very well so far as PC goes. My own thought is that it's possible that a GRAIN-based (=plant-based) diet has NOT served us well, and has not served dogs well, with respect to PC. Who else gets PC?
Yes, dogs are much luckier than men with regard to the odds, but it remains that dogs are still considered the only species apart from humans seen to have a significant incidence of prostate cancer. So I was just wondering: why us, and why dogs?
Cats are obligate carnivores. It would be interesting to know if those very few rare cases of feline prostate cancer had any correlation to diets of high-fat animal products, or to diets of high-carb Kit & Kaboodle (mostly ground yellow corn, corn gluten meal, and soybean meal)!
I tend to think my own diet of the human versions of high-carb Kit & Kaboodle didn't serve me well, even if it did not directly cause my PC.
I need to agree with billyboy3 - the risk of trying "alternative" or holistic approaches is that you waste your time (and money and energy) instead of following mainstream medical protocol.
This is obviously a very personal choice, with extreme potential consequences (e.g. increased suffering and earlier death).
So - make your choices with eyes wide open. Often easier said than done. I would say the path I am currently on is a bit "edgier" than normal. If I have good results, I will feel like a genius. Bad results - an idiot. Human nature for better or worse.
In any case, this forum's value is to exchange useful and new information, and actual experiences. Opinions are "nice" but without data or at least personal experience to back it up, of limited use. And of course emotional support as required is good.
And I do think mainstream medical does not emphasize health and nutrition as much as they could or should. The real issue is economics - it does not pay very well. But that is just the way it is (for now). Also not necessary to demonize "big pharma" etc.
(uhhh I guess all of the above is just an opinion ....)
Let's just try to keep the information content as high as possible!
Medical treatments and drugs for PC are just trying to deal with consequencies, but not the couses of cancer. It is logical that the ones lifestyle (beside genetical issues) cause ones to have cancer. And what was that lifestyle deferes from person to person, and everybody should look for himself what was wrong wih his life before diagnosed PC, which led to it development.I can speak for myself, now 57 y.o. since 2014 diagnosed MPC:
1) Since childhood I had bad habbits in my ldiet: I used to fry 10 eggs for meal, eating it with chese cream and a pound of white bread; I was cheese addicted; Meal without meat, was not a decent meal, I could eat 1,5 kg of rosted meat for a meal; Processed food was naturaly on my menu; Coffee, drinking few times a day; Soda drinks, with and after unhealthy meals; Microwawe used for heating yesterday's meal; Bad oils, bad shugar... you name it
2) Smoking 20 cigaretes a day average.
3) STRESS evolving from educational period, specially in University. After that enterpreneur more than 30 years! Biggest stress was working on stock and bond market and forex market for 10 years, with significant loss in the 2008. Divorce! Forced to participate as a driver in the War in Yugoslavia! Economic sancions and povetry in country! Nato bombing campaign! Privatisation of state corporation (veterinary clinik)...
4) Running for money, as a goal of life, knowing deep in my heart that it is wrong!
5) I was opssesed with sex!
6) Lazyness and luck of phisical activity.
7) Always surounded by electric equipment (wireless phone, laptop, mobile phone, tv....)
etc.
I have change a lot of my life habits, since diagnosed PC.
1) I am Vegan already fifth year, before that some period I was vegeterian. I don't use sugar, bad oil, processed food, sodas and artificial juices (only fresh squized). I am gratefull for my every meal and nutrition that i take as a source of divine energy neded for my body and soul.
I am trying to eat more fresh food than cooked one, if it is posible and available (mainly fresh fruits and leafy vegateblas, since it was our main food mileniums ago when our ancestors were still on the trees, or just left it). I drink herb tea instead of coffe. I am trying to have intermiting fast more often (16/8), suplementing D3, magnesium, B12
2) I don't smoke cigarettes only weed :), beside ingesting Rick Simson Oil
3) Trying to avoid stress as much as posible, and look from different perspectives when the isue emerge. I know that we are comming here on Earth as spiritual being with the purpose to evolve our consesness since consesness has no material, phisical dimension, and after death we are leaving all the ego and material staff and body on earth, and our evolved consesnes will unite with the "supreme consesnes" (or God, Holly spirit, or Cosmical energy, you can find the concept that best suits for you), and will contribute to the evolution of "supreme consesnes", with the experience gathersed in phisical dimension. We use only 10% of our brain, don't tell me that mother nature, God or evolution will develop such an organ with no use. So in my opinnion in the following period (mesured in thousands of years) humans opsesed with materialism will develop more use of the brain, which I presume will be in the field of spirituality and consesnes, and new species will emerge THE HUMAN MAN and WOMAN. Before that many catastrophic periods will pass, horible wars, hunger, pandemics, climate induced catastrophics, and new Noa's boat (speaking in simbols) will save roots of that new human beings. No fear of death for me
4) Evolving my spiritual life and setting a new goal of life, which is to be the best human being that i can be, spreading love around me. Loving myself, loving my cancer that was sent to me in order to grow as a consence human being.
5) obviosly as being on ADT more than 6 years no more sex, but I develop real Love for my wife, as wel as for my children and other human beings, and also for all kind of animals and nature.
6) I saved 3 dogs and I love them an I am responsible of regulary walk with them in the park, forest...
7) I don't use TV (exept whwn Djokovic is playing tenis), I leave all electric equipment outside my sleeping room, I have bougt some protection for my mobile phone
So to answer your question, the best option for me is to avoid all grains, animals products, sugar, salt and bad oil, and go for a nature fruit and vegetable with bit of nuts in order to adapt our diet. My dogs love oatmeal for the breakfast but have a bad poop afterwords.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Prostate Cancer Diet Update - - 2
Organic Food Consumption & Cancer Risk.
Why do we stop treatment
