(no title)
zblevins | 1 year ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504425/
Edit: I am not a doctor. My wife is a physician and I spoke to her before posting this.
zblevins | 1 year ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9504425/
Edit: I am not a doctor. My wife is a physician and I spoke to her before posting this.
jawilson2|1 year ago
droideqa|1 year ago
[0]: https://epilepsysociety.org.uk/about-epilepsy/treatment/keto...
Dansvidania|1 year ago
A relative went keto pretty hard after a bad diagnosis and they are still going strong. As far as I understand it, cancer cells can only function on glucose.
layla5alive|1 year ago
circlefavshape|1 year ago
olieidel|1 year ago
As a side note, I recommend the book "Being Mortal" from Atul Gawande. The TLDR here is that our healthcare systems tend to overtreat patients, especially those with cancer who actually have a rather bleak prognosis, because it's easier for a physician to simply order all treatments and tell the patient "all good here, good luck" instead of taking the time to sit down and have a (long) conversation about the bleak prognosis and which options are actually still worth it. By "worth it" I mean that there are trade-offs to each treatment option, and it takes some very careful weighing whether each one provides a net benefit for your friend's individual situation. E.g. surgery might extend survival by X months, but might also create, worst case, new disabilities. So now you're faced with the very difficult decision of whether to potentially live for a shorter time with less disabilities, or for a longer time with more. There's no perfect answer, but having this sort of discussion is a good step which many patients unfortunately never take. I think this is a failure in our healthcare systems and maybe in the education of physicians.
Now, if I personally had a Glioblastoma, on top of the standard of care (surgery probably makes sense etc.), I think the ketogenic diet would currently be my best shot. Yeah, sure.. it's mostly only case reports so essentially anecdotal evidence, but it does look promising.
Good luck for your friend!
[1] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=tinu7tYAAAAJ&hl=en
d--b|1 year ago
mixmastamyk|1 year ago
myphone8356|1 year ago
Sugar is the food cancer cells crave. Not a miracle cure but restricting sugars may help reduce the growth of the tumor.
adamredwoods|1 year ago
stickfigure|1 year ago
eaurouge|1 year ago
> Emerging evidence suggests that fasting could play a key role in cancer treatment by fostering conditions that limit cancer cells' adaptability, survival, and growth. Fasting could increase the effectiveness of cancer treatments and limit adverse events. Yet, we lack an integrated mechanistic model for how these two complicated systems interact, limiting our ability to understand, prevent, and treat cancer using fasting. Here, we review recent findings at the interface of oncology and fasting metabolism, with an emphasis on human clinical studies of intermittent fasting. We recommend combining prolonged periodic fasting with a standard conventional therapeutic approach to promote cancer-free survival, treatment efficacy and reduce side effects in cancer patients.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35848874/
zmgsabst|1 year ago
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8749320/