Here come the soda tax/sugar banners...
Sugar causes cancer?
Must be a month with an R in it.
Otherwise the reports are out that sugar DOESN’T cause cancer.
Very interesting. Perhaps a tighter than normal, and slightly lower than normal sugar band would help the surrounding milieu less favorable to rapid cancer cell growth, which could plausibly make other therapies more effective.
Maybe just controlling sugar spikes through low-glycemic diet would do the trick.
Obviously, the above is speculative, and research would be required for an informed opinion.
I wish I could believe that eliminating sugar from the diet would kill cancer. I have my nearly 11 year old Labrador on essentially a zero carb raw food diet. His two external mast cell tumors appear to be stalled and not growing but so far there’s little sign of them regressing. He seems as happy and as lively as ever, battling for 18 months (only the last three on the low carb diet). So maybe it’s doing him good but the cancer isn’t regressing.
Dr. Atkins said this back in 1972 when his first book was published based on studies conducted by UK researcher Dr. John Yudkin.
[[Breakthrough Finding: How Sugar Fuels Cancer Growth]]
Ranchers have known this for a very long time and so has FDA
yet they still allow it to be added to everything .
Don’t ever low fat anything , they replace the fat with sugars that you don’t enjoy anyway . It’s way healthier to eat a chocolate bar than it is to eat low fat anything and it usually close to the same sugar anyway.
Your bodies cells don’t eat sugar but cancer cells do .
Drug companies obviously love the junk that sold as “healthy” food in this country (Grocery store yogurt , cereal bars etc are among the WORST things anyone can eat and they dare call them healthy foods )
next week... sugar cures cancer..
*sigh*
I get so tired of these “studies”
Bookmark
Stevia’s expensive, but u don’t need much. It’s sweet as hell.
Unlike other sugar substitutes, Stevia doesn’t cause an insulin spike.
I don’t know so much if you can cook with it and have it come out tasting properly.
Cancer tumors burn calories faster than normal cells, it makes sense that it would go for the low hanging fruit first.
I’ve avoided sugar for years because of what I’ve read regarding sugar’s effect on the immune system.
Understanding the Warburg Effect: The Metabolic Requirements of Cell Proliferation (2009)
Abstract: In contrast to normal differentiated cells, which rely primarily on mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation to generate the energy needed for cellular processes, most cancer cells instead rely on aerobic glycolysis, a phenomenon termed “the Warburg effect.” Aerobic glycolysis is an inefficient way to generate adenosine 5′-triphosphate (ATP), however, and the advantage it confers to cancer cells has been unclear. Here we propose that the metabolism of cancer cells, and indeed all proliferating cells, is adapted to facilitate the uptake and incorporation of nutrients into the biomass (e.g., nucleotides, amino acids, and lipids) needed to produce a new cell. Supporting this idea are recent studies showing that (i) several signaling pathways implicated in cell proliferation also regulate metabolic pathways that incorporate nutrients into biomass; and that (ii) certain cancer-associated mutations enable cancer cells to acquire and metabolize nutrients in a manner conducive to proliferation rather than efficient ATP production. A better understanding of the mechanistic links between cellular metabolism and growth control may ultimately lead to better treatments for human cancer.
Abstract: Unlike normal differentiated cells, cancer cells primarily rely on glycolysis to generate energy needed for cellular processes even in normoxia conditions. This phenomenon is called aerobic glycolysis or "the Warburg effect." Aerobic glycolysis is inefficient to generate ATP, but the advantages it confers to cancer cells remain to be fully explained. Several oncogenic signaling pathways, interplaying with enzymes and kinases involved in glucose metabolism, participate in the switch from oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) to aerobic glycolysis. Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are a family of functional RNA molecules that are not further translated into proteins, which exert regulatatory roles in gene transcription and translation. ncRNAs, especially miRNAs and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), may also have great effect on glucose metabolism by targeting not only glycolysis enzymes directly but also oncogenic signaling pathways indirectly. A better understanding of the Warburg effect and the regulatory role of ncRNAs in cancer glucose metabolism may contribute to the treatment of cancers.
Glucose Addiction in Cancer Therapy: Advances and Drawbacks.
Abstract: While normal differentiated cells primarily use mitochondrial respiration to generate the required energy for cellular processes, most cancer cells rely on glycolysis, even in sufficient oxygen conditions. This phenomenon is known as the "Warburg effect" or aerobic glycolysis and the metabolic reprogramming of cancer cells towards this altered energy metabolism is currently recognized as one of the "hallmarks of cancer". Aerobic glycolysis underlies the rapid growth of tumor cells, with high rates of glucose consumption and lactic acid production, leading to cellular acidosis. Metabolic reprogramming renders cancer cells dependent on specific metabolic enzymes or pathways that could be exploited in cancer therapy. The development of treatments that target tumor glucose metabolism is receiving renewed attention, with several drugs targeting metabolic pathways currently in clinical trials. The search for suitable targets, however, is limited by the high plasticity of the metabolic network that can induce compensatory routes. Deregulated glucose metabolism is a prominent feature associated with resistance to classical chemotherapy or oncogene-targeted therapies, strengthening the clinical potential of combining these therapies with glycolysis inhibitors. The aim of this review is to compare the advances of different therapeutic strategies targeting the glucose "addiction" of tumor cells, highlighting their potential as effective weapons against cancer. We further discuss recent evidence for the involvement of glucose metabolism as a compensatory response to the use of drugs that target different signaling pathways, where the combination with glycolysis inhibitors could prove extraordinarily useful.
The Warburg Effect was originally defined in 1931. You can read the original article here. BTW, he won the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine (back when a Nobel actually meant something) for his work.
I knew for a long time, that cancer has about 8 x’s the metabolic rate, as normal cells. So it loves and needs sugar.
So I was shocked to see bowls of sugar candy, at the oncologist’s office. Supposedly because the chemo patient s have sores in their mouths.
There was a study decades ago with similar findings. Nothing new. I’ve always wondered if the fasting (due to nausea) that occurs under Chemo is what really affacts cancer.
ping