Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: logi_cal869

There is absolutely nothing to admit to. These are studies in respectable, formal journals.

You are some guy on the Internet without a clue.


13 posted on 06/23/2018 9:25:22 PM PDT by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: ConservativeMind

I’ve found much garbage research published in respectable medical journals. Even bad statistics.

Dr’s are eternal optimists and want to help patients get well. So when a new treatment modality comes along it is a panacea until reality hits and a new panacea comes along.


17 posted on 06/23/2018 9:32:15 PM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: ConservativeMind
You are some guy on the Internet without a clue.

Not an argument.

What you are quoting is the same failure of understanding reflected in many "scholarly journal" articles.

The "acidic" evidence is based on a failure to understand the Warburg Effect. People have mistakingly run with the discovery of the anaerobic respiration of all cancers. That was the effect of cancer according to Warburg and not the cause.

Warburg's most important discovery was the energy substrate of cancer. All cancer utilizes glucose as an energy source. The utilization of glucose results in anaerobic respiration and not normal aerobic. This is the "acidification" result and not the cause.

Please check out a couple of articles:

Metastatic cancer gorges on fructose in the liver

A sucrose-enriched diet promotes tumorigenesis in mammary gland in part through the 12-lipoxygenase pathway

There are other issues with sucrose and fructose in particular. Fructose has been found to turn off mRNA expression of key proteins, particularly cysteamine deoxygenase. This is a serious disruption of a key metabolic pathway. What do you think that does long term? Why do we differentiate cancers when the same weak energy substrate is the same for all of them? Shouldn't we be looking at the cells surrounding the cancer and the changes that occurred to feed the cancer?

Cancer is a metabolic disorder. Period. You feed the cancer and ultimately you will get cancer. There is no argument there unless you are a grant chaser.

P.S. For the idiot Freeper who may respond empowered by Dr. Google, learn the difference between endogenous and exogenous.

Finally, there are essential proteins, fats, vitamins and minerals. There is no such thing as an essential carbohydrate! ESPECIALLY SUCROSE!
52 posted on 06/23/2018 10:59:31 PM PDT by PA Engineer (Liberate America from the Occupation Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson