Posted on 07/18/2013 3:37:50 PM PDT by neverdem
Do you have a sweet tooth? If so, your dietary habits could be significantly adding to your risk of developing cancer. New research published in the journal Nature Medicine has confirmed that processed sugar is one of the primary driving forces behind the growth and spread of cancer tumors, so much so that the future of cancer screening could rely on scanning the body for sugar accumulation.
Scientists from University College London (UCL) in the U.K. made this discovery after experimenting with a new cancer detection method that involves utilizing a unique form of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). After sensitizing an MRI scanner to look specifically for glucose in the body, it was revealed that cancer tumors, which feed off sugar, light up brightly as they contain high amounts of sugar.
"The new technique, called 'glucose chemical exchange saturation transfer' (glucoCEST), is based on the fact that tumors consume much more glucose (a type of sugar) than normal, healthy tissues in order to sustain their growth," explains a recent UCL announcement, noting that tumors appear as "bright images" on MRI scans of mice.
Traditionally, cancer screenings have involved the use of low-dose radiation injections to identify the presence of tumors, which makes sense as radiation is another known cause of cancer. The things that trigger and promote cancer development and spread, in other words, can also be used by doctors to detect it inside the body. And now sugar can officially be added to this list.
"The method uses an injection of normal sugar and could offer a cheap, safe alternative to existing methods for detecting tumors, which require the injection of radioactive material," says Dr. Simon Walker-Samuel, lead researcher of the study from the UCL Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging (CABI).
Interestingly, it was also noted by the study's senior author that the amount of sugar in "half a standard sized chocolate bar" is all it takes to effectively identify the presence of tumors using the glucoCEST method. This is astounding, as it suggests that even relatively low amounts of sugar have the potential to promote cancer proliferation.
The UCL study is hardly the only one to have identified a connection between processed sugar consumption and diseases like cancer. Other research, including that being currently being conducted by Dr. Robert H. Lustig, M.D., a Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), confirms that the bulk of chronic illnesses prevalent today are caused by sugar consumption.
You can watch a presentation from Dr. Lustig entitled Sugar: The Bitter Truth here: http://youtube.com
As far as cancer is concerned, hormones produced by the body in response to sugar consumption also feed cancer cells. This means that every time you down a soda or eat a piece of cake, your body produces certain chemicals that tell cancer cells to not only start taking up sugar, but also to grow in size and spread.
"What we're beginning to learn is that insulin can cause adverse effects in various tissues, and a particular concern is cancer," says Dr. Lewis Cantley, head of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) at Harvard University, as quoted during an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes.
"If you happen to have a tumor that has insulin receptors on it, then it will get stimulated to take up the glucose that's in the bloodstream," he adds. "So rather than going to the fat or to the muscle, the glucose now goes into the tumor, and the tumor uses it to grow."
Sources for this article include:
http://www.mdtmag.com
http://cancerdefeated.com
http://youtube.com
Republished from NaturalNews
Written by Jonathan Benson
What about unrefined sugar?
Sugar in its natural form is typically surrounded by water and fiber (like fruits or sugar cane). This slows absorption and consumption which reduces sugar spikes.
You body can’t tell the difference once absorbed. The difference is how much gets absorbed and how fast.
And fat slows down the absorption rate for both carbs and sugar. This fat-free craze is very unhealthy. Limited fats is good. Fat free is retarded.
“How does the cancer know the difference between processed and unprocessed sugar”?
I used to date a brainless tumor and she knew everything.
So what? How does the cancer know the difference between pure, immediately absorbed sugar and "impure", slowly absorbed?
There needs to be a ban on it. This is unconscionable. We need another Occupy Wall Street to raise awareness.
If you smoke it is good to limit dairy which produces mucus in the lungs that cigarette smoke has an easier time sticking to and giving you problems down the road. The Japanese and Chinese can be heavy smokers and get less lung cancer. Traditionally zero dairy was in their diets. Today they eat small amounts
The author of the article is a moron. The study is about sugar processed by the body, not commercially processed (refined) sugar. Without glucose, you’ll die pretty quick.
Unfortunately it all breaks down to glucose in the blood. The good news is that if your body Ph is high, things cannot use the glucose, but you can.
Cancer is a very interesting issue, worth intensive study should you or someone you know come down with it. From my reading there are many cures for cancer, just no politically correct ones. Different cancers, different cures.
BWAhahahaha.
Very interesting tip! thanks.
/sigh
The sugars we eat are (pretty much) SUCROSE, LACTOSE and FRUCTOSE. All are ‘natural’ and ALL have the same chemical formula whether “processed” or “natural.”
the sugar our bodies REQUIRE is GLUCOSE. An oh by the way, we naturally produce glucose and (gasp) fructose as our bodies naturally metabolize glycogen, glucose (blood sugar) for food energy.
BTW, ALL cells respond to GLUCOSE.
I find this to be suspect overall.
That’s racist!
It is the glucose level. slowly adsorbed sugar does not "sugar spike" your glucose levels like refined sugar does. The "cancer" thrives on glucose, the more glucose the faster it grows. However sugar interferes with the immune function of the body. So if you sugar spike yourself, you not only boost the invading organism but shut down your immune response. Its a double whammy.
If you want to make it a triple hit, get your sugar in a soda pop full of phosphoric acid. The Ph drop in your blood will cause cancer and fungus to go wildly into reproductive mode. The way I heard it explained is that an oxygen breather that dies turns quit acid when they stop breathing. This triggers the latent fungus's to switch into decompose the body mode. It is quite natural, however drinking phosphoric acid is not so natural. It greatly depresses body Ph.
If you have cancer, I would heed this warning. Otherwise, cut back.
That may be so, unless this comes into play.
EXACTLY!
Thanks for amplifying.
I guess I can stop running around yelling, “The sky is falling!”
I get so tired of folks telling me something is better for me because it is “all-natural” and “organic”.
So are belladonna, botulism, cobra venom and poison ivy.
According to my Centrum Silver, I get 50 mcg = 42% chromium every day.
Guess I need to eat more broccoli and get another 11 mcg in 1/2 C.
1 tbsp. of dried basil = 2 mcg and 1 tsp. of dried garlic = 3 mcg.
I think sugar is a stress/depressed override for me. I don’t use sugar in anything
but I have a danish, and semi-sweet chocolate now and then.
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.