Posted on 08/03/2019 3:55:13 AM PDT by Windflier
Hospitals feed cancer patients sugar and high carbohydrate diets for a simple reason: they are abysmally ignorant of the role of nutrition in health and disease — hence their burgeoning growth, packed rooms, and ‘return customers.’
Even though the science itself shows – at least since the mid-20’s with Otto Warburg’s cancer hypothesis — that tumors prefer to utilize sugar fermentation to produce energy rather than the much more efficient oxygen-based phosphorylation* – hospitals have actually invited corporations like McDonald’s to move into their facilities to ‘enhance’ their patient’s gustatory experience, presumably to provide comfort and take the edge off of the painful surgery, radiation and chemo treatments erroneously proffered to them as the only reasonable ‘standard of care.’
But the times are changing, with new research requiring these medical institutions to reform their dietary strategies, at least if they wish to claim that their interventions are in fact ‘evidence-based,’ as they so often claim.
Study Reveals Sugar Doesn’t Just Feed But Causes Cancer
A groundbreaking study, uncovered by one of our volunteer researchers at Greenmedinfo, is the first of its kind to identify sugar, not only as fuel source for an already existing cancer, but as a primary driver in oncogenesis – i.e. the initiation of cancerous characteristics (phenotype) within previously healthy cells.
Published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation and titled, Increased sugar uptake promotes oncogenesis via EPAC/RAP1 and O-GlcNAc pathways, researchers addressed a common perception (or misperception) in the cancer research community regarding sugar’s relationship to cancer: namely, “increased glycolysis [sugar based metabolism] is frequently viewed as a consequence of oncogenic events that drive malignant cell growth and survival.”
Contrary to this conventional view, the new study “provide[s] evidence that increased glycolytic activation itself can be an oncogenic event.” That is to say, the activation of sugar-based metabolism in a cell – driven by both the presence of increased quantities of glucose and the increase glucose receptors on the cell membrane surface (i.e. “overexpression of a glucose transporter”) – drives cancer initiation.
Moreover, the study found that “Conversely, forced reduction of glucose uptake by breast cancer cells led to phenotypic reversion.” In other words, interfering with sugar availability and uptake to the cell causes the cancer cell to REGRESS towards its pre-cancer structure-function (phenotype).
What Are The Implications of This Research to the Diet?
What this new research indicates is that sugar – of which Americans consume an astounding 160 lbs annually (imagine: 31 five-pound bags for each of us!) – is one of the primary causes of metabolic cell changes in the body consistent with the initiation and promotion of cancer. And, the research indicates that removing it from the diet, and depriving the cells of it, could REVERSE cancer. Why is this so surprising? It’s because Americans have been lead like lambs to the slaughter to think of “prevention” as “early detection,” focusing not on identifying and removing the well known nutritional and environmental causes of cancer, rather, to spend their time, energy, and money on cause-marketing campaigns focused on “finding a cure” — as if one didn’t already exist right in front of our noses, or more aptly, on the end of our forks.
BipolarBob - if you reply to Windflier as to how your wife dealt with her cancer please ping me as well. Thank you.
Thanks. I've heard about the Budwig protocol, but I haven't yet read up on it. Sounds doable for me. I just don't know if the protocol is actually effective at reducing cancers.
Can you put stuff in a blender? (Is that a stupid question? It probably is, I'm sorry.)
In my circle it’s the opposite. The husbands enjoy generous amounts of desserts at every gathering and even their drinks of choice are sugary. The men never order red wine or whiskey with club soda. It’s always something with coke whereas all the wives are careful about their sugar intake. I dislike candy, even chocolate, but my husband loves it.
Thinking about family gatherings, church and fire department potlucks it’s the same-the men generally eat more sugar than the women.
Well... you guys are just weird. LOL!
Lol :)
Was just thinking of the last time we got together with friends for a potluck. The men used dinner plates for their desserts
Yes, we've tried blending all sorts of different foods, but beside the obvious trouble I have eating solid foods, cancer also ruins your appetite in at least two ways.
First, it kills your normal appetite. Second, it changes your taste perception. Many things that I formerly loved, now taste completely different to me. Most taste awful.
I won't lie. It's a daily struggle to get sufficient calories in me.
Bad stuff feeds on sugar.
Watch Dr. Berg on YouTube, the only nutrition course you need.
The Government’s “Food Pyramid” has killed millions.
One thing to watch for with the Budwig diet, most flax oil is already rancid. If you are serious about it, it is better to fresh press your own seeds and consume the oil directly. I did Budwig for 1.5 years using store bought oil. It may have slowed down the atypical benign tumor I have but it did not kill it. If I go back to Budwig I will look into getting my own seed press.
One thing to watch for with the Budwig diet, most flax oil is already rancid. If you are serious about it, it is better to fresh press your own seeds and consume the oil directly. I did Budwig for 1.5 years using store bought oil. It may have slowed down the atypical benign tumor I have but it did not kill it. If I go back to Budwig I will look into getting my own seed press.
I’ve been eating meat & drinking water for 383 straight days.
Every aspect of my life has been greatly improved!
https://www.carnivorecast.com/podcast/brett
Wow. And sugar and carbs are the most palatable, I am sure. That is really tough.
You got that right on both counts. Really sucks that I can't have them. I wake up nearly every day dreaming about all kinds of wonderful food.
Yea, the doctors aren’t the radicals here as I doubt any person goes through all that effort to get the license, just to be involved in the killing of their patients. It started with one idiot, Ancel Keyes, who sent the country away from meat, and particularly fat. Maybe he had a political agenda, although I don’t know of it - more likely he just put 2 and 2 together and said that if you don’t want to get fat, then don’t eat fat...and given that the experts of the day simply had no information on biological processes back then, they couldn’t really argue with him.
Even so, that otherwise wouldn’t be enough to overturn hundreds, if not thousands of years of dietary recommendations - the problem was that Keyes simply bullied everyone who asked him for proof, or showed him why he was wrong - no one could stand up to him.
Then, 10 years later, around 1970, the Left figured out that Keyes was very useful in getting people away from meat, so they embedded themselves in Big Government to enforce what Keyes claimed and the rest is history (including the Obesity and Diabetes Epidemics).
Run of the mill doctors, on the other hand, simply had to go along for the ride, they had no choice. But thankfully, albeit slowly, the TRUTH is coming out. Two examples:
1. The advice to avoid ‘saturated fat’ (butter, red meat fat, and other delicious stuff) is now totally gone from government recommendations (removed very quietly, by the way)...although they still say to minimize meat and fat.
2. The American Diabetes Association, for the first time ever, has admitted that the old way to treat Type 2 Diabetes, which was to minimize carbs, might actually actually work (rather than loading people with insulin). That just came out within the past year.
So progress is slowly being made, but it’s tough - we’re talking about near-total overhaul of everything we think about eating and some areas of health care, including the following:
1) Red Meat: Was bad, now good; Fat on Red Meat: Was bad, now good. Leave the fat on...no more lean cuts, etc.
2) Carbs: Certain carbs (whole grain, etc.): Was good, now bad (along with all other carbs).
3) Go out to eat - large numbers people will DEMAND near-zero carbs (i.e., Keto) - finally, some businesses are starting to catch on, but still very few.
4) Obviously Big Medicine will feel it - ‘treating’ diabetic patients (more like giving moral support while slowly killing them at the same time) is a HUGE BUSINESS, and their customer base will shrink - the only question is how much.
Cereal companies will start feeling it as well. That stuff is poison.
For sure. But one of the biggest effects will be on the development and sale of fake meat - which is worse than even no meat. It is very highly processed and so lots of value added (i.e., $$$) to Big Carb - and they will certainly push back, and push back very hard. Going to an interesting ride.
Old-School Butchers may come back into demand as people will scrutinize the quality of the meat they buy, instead of trusting the Grocery Stores.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.