7 ms·
I am very sorry for your loss. my (armchair) analysis on cancer treatment - i) chemotherapy, in vacuum, most likely does considerably more harm than good, ii)
by SherlockeHolmes 10y ago
I am very sorry for your loss.
my (armchair) analysis on cancer treatment - i) chemotherapy, in vacuum, most likely does considerably more harm than good, ii) sugar feeds cancer cells, iii) essential to feed body nutrients from a variety of sources (all must be plant based and non-processed), iv) it is likely a prudent investment to engage in holistic treatments such as being immersed in positivity and fulfilled environment and ingesting plant products with powerful healing properties known to locals across the world.
Having said all this, it is difficult to say no to conventional treatment and to MDs working at prestigious hospitals when the life of your loved one is at stake.
I have multiple cancer patients in my extended family, and this is in a family that lives on a south Asian diet (with all kinds of spices and turmeric, lots of vegetables). the cancer epidemic is extremely scary, and makes me feel vulnerable with my life - regardless of how knowledgeable I try to be on the subject.
My belief is that we must approach cancer as we have approached infectious diseases such as measles and whooping cough. We must identify carcinogens in our environment (this may be physical and spiritual), and take serious steps to remove them from our social construct.
- NotSammyHagar 10y agoI am sure you mean well, but you need to be better informed about biology. Table sugar is not the greatest thing in the world for our bodies, but your body needs certain kinds of sugars to function. Glucose is how your brain is powered. Sadly there is no evidence that restricting sugar would retard cancerous growth. Yes, there are toxins in our environment. Going past that to things that affect cancer is a huge step. Just like we don't worry anymore about a black cat crossing our path, we should use science to inform our ideas about medical treatment.
- SherlockeHolmes 10y agothank you for the reply. I am aware that saccharides are essential in our bodies in order to produce adenosine tri-phosphates (ATPs) which are units of energy used by our cells to perform everything from translation and commutation of genetic information, regeneration through mitosis, nervous actions carried out through active ion gates. I am also aware of multiple peer reviewed research papers (one from UCSF comes to mind, but I cannot be bothered to search it) that have shown direct links between cancerous cell growth and glucose (a monosaccharide). p.s. the reference to a black cat crossing was intriguing from the perspective of a psychoanalyst studying the HN mind.
- mrob 10y agoThe brain does need some glucose to function, but the bulk of its energy need can be met by ketones. After adapting to this energy source the need for glucose is low enough that it can be met entirely by gluconeogenesis (making glucose from proteins and fats). Humans can survive on a zero carbohydrate diet with no cognitive impairment.
- dualogy 10y ago> making glucose from proteins and fats plus recycling of pyruvate/lactate/some-such
- yourapostasy 10y ago> ...your body needs certain kinds of sugars to function... I would really like to see the citations that "body needs certain kinds of sugars to function" connotes that we must perforce consume sugar in some form (which I interpret "not the greatest thing in the world for our bodies" implies while we might not have to eat table sugar, we need to at least eat carbs that can be readily converted to glucose), at least in modest amounts. People who start out as epileptic children put on strict ketogenic diets able to carry out successful lifestyles for decades without any other restrictions are prima facie empirical evidence that we most assuredly can synthesize what little sugars our bodies do require beyond very small amounts of daily net carbohydrates (20g per day or less, equivalent to 5 teaspoons table sugar), and do not have to include sugars in our diets.
- alrs 10y agoGluconeogenesis is the process by which the body synthesizes glucose from protein. So long as fats and proteins are available, human beings have no need for any sugars in our diets whatsoever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
- keto_retards 10y agoOr, you could just eat glucose. You guys are complete morons. Why would you use a starvation pathway to force protein to create glucose so you can use glucose, when you can just eat some fucking fruit. I can't wait until you twats pass away.
- chillwaves 10y agoYou do not need to eat sugar to have glucose. You do not need to eat carbs at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluconeogenesis
- dang 10y agoWe detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11698213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11698213 and marked it off-topic.