I'm pretty new to the metabolic theory of cancer, but I summarise below what I think the main point of the article is: There is debate between two schools of t

I'm pretty new to the metabolic theory of cancer, but I summarise below what I think the main point of the article is: There is debate between two schools of thought. On one side, Vander Heiden suggests that tumours must be attacked not only in the mitochondrial level (where the ketogenic diet has been suggested as part of a metabolic-based treatment) but also in the cell replication that we traditionally associate cancer with - where chemotherapy helps. He also blames genetic factors, i.e. we can still "inherit" a high cancer risk. On the other side, Thomas Seyfried argues it's all ultimately mitochondrial and can be controlled via diet. The keto diet, and others, lowers the glucose intake of the body and helps to shut off the fuel supply for tumours. Since he argues cancer is ultimately a metabolic problem, shutting off the glucose supply is a possible cure. Very interesting stuff.