It seems that cancer requires sugar to grow. Is there a need to follow a sugar free or low sugar diet?
Sugar in food: It seems that cancer... - Prostate Cancer N...
Sugar in food
Written by
Runner1957
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
33 Replies
•
No. Prostate cancer prefers fats until late stages. All carbs (not just sugars) are stored as glycogen and sugar is released as your cells need it. Your cancer is fast growing and draws on nutrients faster than slower growing cells. If you are low on one nutrient, it will simply switch to another. The only way to slow it down nutritionally is to starve yourself to death.
Don't fancy that option. You explanation makes perfect sense. Thank you
You provide extremely important information, here! Thanks!
The TRI-FECTA winner is >>>
Don't eat + Don't drink + Don't breathe = EXIT Stage Left
I think that's how it generally works. . .
Tall Allen that is important information and I believe it is so important to get the right treatment for the stage our cancer is in. I’ve found what I ate played a role but there is much more to it than just food
Thanks Redsox1967. How did you find the best diet to suit, research or nutricianist ? There seems to be research to show a vegan diet has benefits ?
Did you read T A's reply ? Or you have decided to ignore it ?
I think I replied, see above. His comments make sense. Always appreciate his advice.
A vegan diet can work. Need to pay attention to insulin spikes, which will kill the diet. I do not eat white bread, white rice/potato nor anything that taste sweet. I include raspberries (min. 3-5/day) and some soy. Works with or without wild caught salmon, herring or scallops. Does not work with high "iron" foods.
Thank you, advice really appreciated. Did you use a nutritionist or just tailor the food you are?
My diet came through trial and error, and very tight control over what I eat. Been at it since 2013 with lots of reading and controlled experimentation. At first, I was happy that I could slow it down. About 4 years ago I could stop the growth, and over the last three years I have reverse it. Now, I am maintaining my PSA, following the principles of "Adaptive Therapy", out of the Moffitt Cancer Center.
I'm unaware of any nutritionist who understands the finer points of a successful cancer diet, although they have been making progress over the last few years. Hint, anyone who uses the phrase "in moderation" has never been successful in controlling cancer with food.
One of the tests they do to locate your cancer is they feed you glucose with some traceable marker. The cancer then gobbles up the glucose and they trace to where it is located by following the glucose.However, this isn’t the case for prostate cancer. It’s fats and proteins that promote the cancer growth. So, IMO, I would consider steering away from animal proteins and fats. A diet that is high in vegetables, fruit and is plant based looks sensible to me.
I’m not sure about fish though. I’ve read conflicting things about this so maybe someone could comment on that. It’s possible a pescatarian diet will be ok.
Hope that helps.
Excellent explanation of locating PC . In my experience with PCa, food intake doesn't matter. But I did find some excellent foods to ward off inflammation: some are tasty some are not.
Wild caught fish are OK, as are scallops and squid. Oysters, clams and mussels have too much iron. I use mussels to "increase" PSA, when my PSA gets too low. I believe a low and steady PSA is better than "undetectable".
There is very little to no data that ties sugar or meat to prostate cancer growth. As one specialist at the Prostate Cancer Research Institute noted in a recent seminar "....if it were as easy as diet we would have licked this a while ago."
Always willing to look at peer-reviewed studies.
As in most things - moderation is in order.
Yes. And on top of that if you are looking at an estimated life expiration date of a few years then one should eat within reason that which appeals to one's taste.Enjoy!
Maybe someone gleason 6 with a chance of 15, 20 years or so survival doesn't mind spending hours studying diet and concocting what food to eat.
I think someone here is masking and unmasking their PSA results. Not actually changing the real PSA levels. And again as a gleason 6 will survive many years no matter what they do or don't do. Maybe.
Society is breaking apart as millions of people are under the illusion that they cannot trust our established systems of science and peer-review.
"I think someone here is masking and unmasking their PSA results. Not actually changing the real PSA levels."
My PSADT is 7 months. It was that 10 years ago, and still is now w/o diet. If my PSADT remained 7 months since I started the diet, my PSA would be over 2000. My last Labcorp ultrasensitive test result is 0.154. So, you think that my actual PSA is 2000 and I'm masking down to 0.154?
I have been responding to members who are interested in diet and PC. Clearly, you are not. I'm not here to change your mind, it's a personal decision, and I respect yours.
Hi Cashlessclay..I would be very interested in your diet if you care to share. can I email you direct?
Joe
JVARA, just click on my icon, first post, first page has diet. If you need more info, let me know.
high cashless ..i see a post on breakfast but not total diet .maybe not finding the right one .. would you be able to email me beema-@hotmail.com
I see you have been a member of this forum for several years with almost two dozen posts. None of them list anything about your pathology except that you’ve had a RP and continuous bragging about your low PSA.
Every single one of those posts is about how diet is the reason.
One can draw their own conclusion from this.
London441 wrote --- "I see you have been a member of this forum for several years with almost two dozen posts. None of them list anything about your pathology except that you’ve had a RP and continuous bragging about your low PSA... "
The following might be the info you seek---
....... " cashlessclay• ........
5 months ago•......
Background: Biopsy, Oct 2006 (Gleason 4 + 3); Surgery, Jan, 2007 (Pathology, Gleason 3 + 3); PSADT @ 7 months. SRT, (Jan, 2011), PSA rising starting in March 2013."
GLEASON 3+3 is becoming more widely accepted to be indolent and as such not a metastasizing (deadly) form of PCa. Active Surveillance is also becoming more widely accepted instead of RP as initial treatment. Careful consideration must be given to PROPERLY DIAGNOSING the existing PCa as to not over treat when considering AS along with the proper follow-up protocol.
GLEASON 3+3 is becoming more widely accepted to be indolent and as such not a metastasizing (deadly) form of PCa. Active Surveillance is also becoming more widely accepted instead of RP as initial treatment.
Nice clarification which seems a fit for cashless.
I am still a bit confused as to the wide mix of brothers here in a group classified as advanced PC.
Actually have some that are on treatment vacation which blows my mind as I had skull to ankle bone mets and pelvis to collar bone lymph involvement.
Talk of extreme lifestyle changes doesn't really fit with my short life expectancy. I can see turning a new leaf in my life if I had a real chance of remission in my future but otherwise this do it yourself research and bragging of results by cashless doesn't fit well.
I stand corrected thank you-but it only confirms what I suspected. He is chronicling a 3+3 held in check through diet and exercise (of unknown type/intensity). Unless I missed that info also.
3+3, with presumably no other adverse features? It holds itself in check for so many, especially after local treatment, that it’s thoroughly unreliable speculation that diet has anything to do with it.
A good diet us important, and It’s great that his PSA remains low, I’m happy for him. But it’s best to see it as it is. So many men want to avoid treatment, and this type of thing feeds that.
If one is to forgo standard treatments entirely in favor of a ‘natural’ approach, best have a 3+3 organ confined disease also, that’s all I’m saying. Men with even a 3+4 may be hopping on this train unadvisedly.
. So many men want to avoid treatment, and this type of thing feeds that.
If one is to forgo standard treatments entirely in favor of a ‘natural’ approach, best have a 3+3 organ confined disease also, that’s all I’m saying. Men with even a 3+4 may be hopping on this train unadvisedly.
Well said. It sums up why this type of thing ruffles my feathers.
"3+3, with presumably no other adverse features? It holds itself in check for so many, especially after local treatment, that it’s thoroughly unreliable speculation that diet has anything to do with it."
London, I have 60 PSA readings over a 9 year period. The PSA's track the diet. On the diet, PSAs are good. Off the diet, PSAs are bad. There are no exceptions. Tests are repeatable. The is no speculation involved here. Even my doctor, who is quite interested in this exercise, says there is no other explanation - - the diet is controlling the cancer growth, and over the last three years, the diet has reversed the cancer growth.
That’s a little harsh, isn’t it? If he believes that diet has helped lower and/or keep his psa low, then that something I’m glad he’s sharing with people. You may not believe diet helps and maybe that it gives people a misdirection in terms of treatments, but that’s a personal choice for both him and people reading the post looking for treatments IMO.
Surely a success story should be both encouraged and shared.
I don’t believe that, sorry.
It’s what a lot of men want to hear. Of course diet affects our ability to live well and even slow the growth of cancer, if it remains after treatment.
However, saying diet is responsible for ‘reversing the cancer growth’ is entirely speculative, and gives the impression that it’s something to pursue to those susceptible to the suggestion.
Which anyone is free to do. But they should think about who they’re comparing themselves to first.
The risk is clear: there is a never-ending clamor for substituting alternative treatments, including diet, for medical ones. It may work for some, but it’s the wrong choice for far too many.
I think you'll find that this is true for all studies. It's not just for diet for prostate cancer. It's all hypothetical. There are no human studies where someone has been locked in a room all their life and adjusted a single variable. It's not ethical. Most papers are based on surveys, testing animals that have a different biology than humans or are in a dish in a lab, have conflicts of interest. This is why you shouldn't use the term 'risk'. It's never a proven cause and effect. So by saying 'diet is responsible for ‘reversing the cancer growth’ is entirely speculative', one can equally say 'diet is NOT responsible for ‘reversing the cancer growth’ is entirely speculative'. It works both ways. Neither is proven. To suggest otherwise is more like an opinion.
Yes sir it’s absolutely my opinion. But the part of the opinion I was trying to get across is that many have died pursuing alternatives in place of modern medicine.
Whatever works for someone is always a beautiful thing. I personally prefer to augment rather than replace conventional treatment. I’m not claiming the original poster is doing otherwise. With a 3+3 in remission for 9 years there’s likely been no conventional treatment needed anyway.
What is clear is this, the most obvious aspect of Pca: that which is confined to the prostate and that which has escaped it are essentially 2 totally different diseases.
Not what you're looking for?
You may also like...
Foods and prostate cancer
that are recommended to eat or avoid for prostate cancer? Also thoughts on importance of exercise....
surgery 2014 PSA rise halted low fat/ sugar diet
I’ve incorporated diet and it’s helped. More plant based and Lower fat and less sugar. I feel...
Lemon juice appears to improve the glycemic impact of starch rich foods
research shows that \\"lemon juice keeps blood sugar stable\\" and thought this might be useful...
Prevention of prostate cancer
preventing PC. I have completely eliminated sugar from my diet for the past 5 years, has this...
ADT or not for favourable intermediate risk with SBRT
1 episode since so low burden, bisoprolol seems to keep it under wraps so very low burden.
No...
Merry Christmas, you have prostate cancer
Physical, Mental, and Diet to slow PC progression.
Surgery coming up but I want SBRT
