15 ms·

Impact of fasting and calorie restriction on cancer cells

124 points by panabee 6y ago

iRomain 6y ago
TLDR; > Comparing the research between CR and fasting, fasting seems to provide more dramatic results and protection of healthy cells, without the risk of weight loss or immune suppression. Both CR and fasting are the subject of ongoing research, and definitive conclusions await the results of those studies. As mentioned above, it may not be appropriate for everyone, particularly those who are underweight or very ill, and should never be attempted without the supervision of qualified practitioners. > For general cancer prevention, it may be beneficial to add intermittent or short-term fasts in combination with a plant-based cancer prevention diet, as described in detail in the Dietary Approaches section of this website.
PIKAL 6y ago
https://youtu.be/06e-PwhmSq8 https://youtu.be/06e-PwhmSq8
DoreenMichele 6y ago
As mentioned above, it may not be appropriate for everyone, particularly those who are underweight or very ill I have an incurable, serious condition. In recent years, I'm fairly regularly too broke to eat adequately. As a consequence, I fast or semi-fast part of most months. I've slowly gotten healthier. Fasting or semi-fasting is not the only reason by any stretch of the imagination. Anecdotally, it's gotten easier as I've gotten healthier. I read once (or heard from someone) that if you cut calories by 80 percent -- a figure not shown in their chart defining their terms -- it triggers the "starvation" response. Your body thinks you are starving, much as if you weren't eating at all. I have found that semi-fasting -- eating maybe 20 percent of normal calories -- has fasting-like benefits for my condition while being much, much easier to endure as someone with a real serious and incurable medical condition. This is absolutely not medical advice of any sort for anyone. I am not a doctor. I'm a person with a chronic illness running my mouth on the internet.
- ganafagol 6y ago
  And maybe you would have gotten even better without this forced fasting. Now you may consider me heartless for this response, and that would be sad because I really feel for you man. But this is why anecdotical evidence, especially first-hand from people affected, does not hold much ground in the scientific method. In other words, my comment provides neither less nor more evidence than your comment does.
  - feralimal 6y ago
    I couldn't disagree more. With science so utterly serving corporate interests, the only information that has a possibility of being true, IMO, is anecdotal evidence. This person is applying the scientific method personally, and cautiously. And he is sharing his experience with you. Whereas science only pays lip service to the scientific method. Its only there to make money. If you are interested in what I'm saying, you want to look into how science is as I say, take a look at the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Most_Published_Research_Findings_Are_False https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Most_Published_Research_Fi...
    - jiggunjer 6y ago
      There are so many flaws in your reasoning I don't even know where to begin. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
    - angrais 6y ago
      This is quite disheartening to read. We do know that the OP did NOT apply the scientific method - just look at the estimated timeframes. Estimates are not science. Likewise, N=1 and sharing experience is not "science", particularly for public health issues. I'm not going to waste my own time arguing why you're wrong, but a TDLR is you are and frankly it's a shame to read. As an aside, you're correct in that reporting of research methods could be improved and there are issues of replication, but this is for many reasons. One of the less reported issues is money - that's not how research funding works. You're claiming science is flawed, then link to wiki - is that a joke? Are you a researcher?
dragosmocrii 6y ago
In today's world, with food available so easily, I find it admirable of people who can eat with modesty. If you think about it, humans were not always able to sleep with a full belly, sometimes they had to starve a little while trying to find food. And I think it's acceptable to those who do a lot of intensive physical work to eat more. But for someone like me, who spends most of the time sitting on a chair, doing the extraneous work of typing and clicking, less caloric food is probably fine. However, I think that quality food that's beneficial for the brain is essential for intellectual workers like me, but not sugary foods - that's energetic cheating
- achow 6y ago
  True. Was in Google for a brief while; the pull of free and great food wore off very quickly when I had a realization that I actually should be eating 30-40% of what I consume any given day. And to rustle up something for that 15-20% is no big deal (rest 15-20% one can easily figure out from healthy/ok restaurants without it making any noticeable dent in your pocket or health).
  - ganafagol 6y ago
    Or bike to work. Or go for a run, a swim, play soccer or volleyball with some friends, or pick up any other hobby that's more physical than sitting at a desk.
    - inglor_cz 6y ago
      Outrunning bad diet is, well, not impossible, but pretty hard. I would say that the sweet spot is to be physically active and at the same time careful about eating.
      - JimBlackwood 6y ago
        Restricting eating is just very hard. It’s very hard to not eat when you’re hungry. I would say, be physically active and have a diet filled with foods that have high fiber, high protein and have a low calorie density. I have a very active lifestyle and used to count my calories everyday and had to restrict the amount I ate. Since a few years ago I’ve been switching my foods to high fiber or low fat versions and increasing the amount of vegetables in my meals. It’s honestly been such a positive change. I end up full every meal, don’t snack, I don’t have to cut anything out of my diet and I don’t remember the last time I had to count my calories.
01100011 6y ago
Calorie restriction might be a way to prevent cancer, but involuntary calorie restriction is something many cancer patients have to deal with and it certainly does not cure cancer. My grandma managed to live quite a while with advanced pancreatic cancer which caused severe caloric restriction, but in the end the cancer won.
- quattrofan 6y ago
  And the article does comment on this
- bbarnett 6y ago
  I had the same issue with my father, and I've often wondered ; was this a response by the body, which knew that eating was "feeding the enemy"? My father literally could not eat. Tried, but simply could not. I found this utterly bizarre, and yet, it is mirrored by so many others with cancer. It is not a lack of appetite, for I can eat when bored yet not actively hungry. It is instead, not just a negation of appetite, but an active repulsion of food intake. And something I've not heard of for other diseases.
yegle 6y ago
Is it possible to design double blind test on the effectiveness of fasting? Or how do we rule out the possibility of placebo effect?
- ganafagol 6y ago
  That would mean you would need to make the study participants be unable to tell whether they are in the treatment group or in the control group. So either you design food that looks, smells and tastes like normal food but had only 10% of the calories. But that's what the diet industry is trying already and they are not really succeeding. Or you make everybody think they are fasting but give the control group all the nuitrition via IV while the treatment group only gets water with a bit of salt. Or a mix of these two. But then this will only give you actual calorie intake as parameter you are investigating. That's quite different from actual fasting though, i.e., empty intestines could play a role, no matter calorie intake. Or the type of food you are ingesting, i.e., when fasting you don't ingest "bad" food, but maybe you'd get the same effet by just avoiding the "bad" food. In other words, this is really hard. But then, why does it matter? If it works, why do you care if it's placebo effect or not? As long as you can't (believably) fake it, you could not exploit just the placebo effect anyway. In other words, the harder a double blind study is, the less useful is the knowledge about whether something is placebo effect or not. Those two effects are different consequences of the same phenomenon.
  - yegle 6y ago
    If it's really just placebo effect, I can't help but linking it to various cults who claim they can cure this and that, and their claims might be right due to placebo effect.
  - dotancohen 6y ago
    > That would mean you would need to make the study > participants be unable to tell whether they are > in the treatment group or in the control group. Not necessarily. The eaters / non-eaters know what they are doing. But the scientist recording their progress (weight, height, other factors) would not know if this subject had eaten or not eaten. Then, another scientist, also not knowing, would compile the gathered data into conclusions about the subjects. This is how animals are studied.
tyingq 6y ago
It certainly has limitations, as stomach and esophageal cancers, which painfully force calorie reduction, remain amongst the lower 5-year survival rate cancers.
- panabee 6y ago
  do other cancers force CR as well, particularly others that cripple key parts of the digestive system? thanks for sharing?
  - tyingq 6y ago
    Well, anything along the digestive tract from the mouth to the colon for sure.
    - panabee 6y ago
      sorry meant to ask if other digestive track cancers also show lower survival rates. was trying to do too many things at once last night. :)
- refurb 6y ago
  Not to mention the role that cachexia can play in cancer mortality. Seems like caloric restriction in that case would be harmful, not helpful.
MoreenDichele 6y ago
The person you're replying to is a hypochondriac and a pompous windbag who constantly pollutes HN comment sections with her ignorant hot takes on everything. She's one of those people who considers all HN's comment sections to be her personal blog. She has somehow accumulated nearly 30k karma on this site whining about mysterious health problems for attention and never a single time revealing what the supposed problems actually are. Don't bother trying to reason with her, she isn't here to pursue any sort of truth. She's just here for attention and to admire the sound of her own voice. Obviously she should be shadowbanned at this point, but instead I will be. Again.
- hengheng 6y ago
  Regardless of the veracity of anyone's claims in this thread, this could be a textbook example on how to run a viral sales scheme via social media. Seems quite polished by the looks of it.
  - jodrellblank 6y ago
    Regarding the veracity of claims, the “disease she never reveals” is cystic fibrosis and is “revealed” twice in the last week alone: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=Doreenmichele%20cystic%20fibrosis&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
  - DoreenMichele 6y ago
    this could be a textbook example on how to run a viral sales scheme via social media. Seems quite polished by the looks of it. That strikes me as morbidly funny. Among other reasons, there's this quote from my above comment: In recent years, I'm fairly regularly too broke to eat adequately.
aphextron 6y ago
I love how all of this research always comes to the same conclusion: Eat less, and mostly vegetables.
- jagannathtech 6y ago
  eat nutrient dense food within a small time period, sometimes not at all, and definitely not immediately before going to sleep
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

124 points by panabee 6y ago

TLDR; > Comparing the research between CR and fasting, fasting seems to provide more dramatic results and protection of healthy cells, without the risk of weight loss or immune suppression. Both CR and fasting are the subject of ongoing research, and definitive conclusions await the results of those studies. As mentioned above, it may not be appropriate for everyone, particularly those who are underweight or very ill, and should never be attempted without the supervision of qualified practitioners. > For general cancer prevention, it may be beneficial to add intermittent or short-term fasts in combination with a plant-based cancer prevention diet, as described in detail in the Dietary Approaches section of this website.

PIKAL 6y ago

https://youtu.be/06e-PwhmSq8 https://youtu.be/06e-PwhmSq8

DoreenMichele 6y ago

As mentioned above, it may not be appropriate for everyone, particularly those who are underweight or very ill I have an incurable, serious condition. In recent years, I'm fairly regularly too broke to eat adequately. As a consequence, I fast or semi-fast part of most months. I've slowly gotten healthier. Fasting or semi-fasting is not the only reason by any stretch of the imagination. Anecdotally, it's gotten easier as I've gotten healthier. I read once (or heard from someone) that if you cut calories by 80 percent -- a figure not shown in their chart defining their terms -- it triggers the "starvation" response. Your body thinks you are starving, much as if you weren't eating at all. I have found that semi-fasting -- eating maybe 20 percent of normal calories -- has fasting-like benefits for my condition while being much, much easier to endure as someone with a real serious and incurable medical condition. This is absolutely not medical advice of any sort for anyone. I am not a doctor. I'm a person with a chronic illness running my mouth on the internet.

ganafagol 6y ago
And maybe you would have gotten even better without this forced fasting. Now you may consider me heartless for this response, and that would be sad because I really feel for you man. But this is why anecdotical evidence, especially first-hand from people affected, does not hold much ground in the scientific method. In other words, my comment provides neither less nor more evidence than your comment does.
- feralimal 6y ago
  I couldn't disagree more. With science so utterly serving corporate interests, the only information that has a possibility of being true, IMO, is anecdotal evidence. This person is applying the scientific method personally, and cautiously. And he is sharing his experience with you. Whereas science only pays lip service to the scientific method. Its only there to make money. If you are interested in what I'm saying, you want to look into how science is as I say, take a look at the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Most_Published_Research_Findings_Are_False https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Most_Published_Research_Fi...
  - jiggunjer 6y ago
    There are so many flaws in your reasoning I don't even know where to begin. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
  - angrais 6y ago
    This is quite disheartening to read. We do know that the OP did NOT apply the scientific method - just look at the estimated timeframes. Estimates are not science. Likewise, N=1 and sharing experience is not "science", particularly for public health issues. I'm not going to waste my own time arguing why you're wrong, but a TDLR is you are and frankly it's a shame to read. As an aside, you're correct in that reporting of research methods could be improved and there are issues of replication, but this is for many reasons. One of the less reported issues is money - that's not how research funding works. You're claiming science is flawed, then link to wiki - is that a joke? Are you a researcher?

dragosmocrii 6y ago

In today's world, with food available so easily, I find it admirable of people who can eat with modesty. If you think about it, humans were not always able to sleep with a full belly, sometimes they had to starve a little while trying to find food. And I think it's acceptable to those who do a lot of intensive physical work to eat more. But for someone like me, who spends most of the time sitting on a chair, doing the extraneous work of typing and clicking, less caloric food is probably fine. However, I think that quality food that's beneficial for the brain is essential for intellectual workers like me, but not sugary foods - that's energetic cheating

achow 6y ago
True. Was in Google for a brief while; the pull of free and great food wore off very quickly when I had a realization that I actually should be eating 30-40% of what I consume any given day. And to rustle up something for that 15-20% is no big deal (rest 15-20% one can easily figure out from healthy/ok restaurants without it making any noticeable dent in your pocket or health).
- ganafagol 6y ago
  Or bike to work. Or go for a run, a swim, play soccer or volleyball with some friends, or pick up any other hobby that's more physical than sitting at a desk.
  - inglor_cz 6y ago
    Outrunning bad diet is, well, not impossible, but pretty hard. I would say that the sweet spot is to be physically active and at the same time careful about eating.
    - JimBlackwood 6y ago
      Restricting eating is just very hard. It’s very hard to not eat when you’re hungry. I would say, be physically active and have a diet filled with foods that have high fiber, high protein and have a low calorie density. I have a very active lifestyle and used to count my calories everyday and had to restrict the amount I ate. Since a few years ago I’ve been switching my foods to high fiber or low fat versions and increasing the amount of vegetables in my meals. It’s honestly been such a positive change. I end up full every meal, don’t snack, I don’t have to cut anything out of my diet and I don’t remember the last time I had to count my calories.

01100011 6y ago

Calorie restriction might be a way to prevent cancer, but involuntary calorie restriction is something many cancer patients have to deal with and it certainly does not cure cancer. My grandma managed to live quite a while with advanced pancreatic cancer which caused severe caloric restriction, but in the end the cancer won.

quattrofan 6y ago
And the article does comment on this
bbarnett 6y ago
I had the same issue with my father, and I've often wondered ; was this a response by the body, which knew that eating was "feeding the enemy"? My father literally could not eat. Tried, but simply could not. I found this utterly bizarre, and yet, it is mirrored by so many others with cancer. It is not a lack of appetite, for I can eat when bored yet not actively hungry. It is instead, not just a negation of appetite, but an active repulsion of food intake. And something I've not heard of for other diseases.

yegle 6y ago

Is it possible to design double blind test on the effectiveness of fasting? Or how do we rule out the possibility of placebo effect?

ganafagol 6y ago
That would mean you would need to make the study participants be unable to tell whether they are in the treatment group or in the control group. So either you design food that looks, smells and tastes like normal food but had only 10% of the calories. But that's what the diet industry is trying already and they are not really succeeding. Or you make everybody think they are fasting but give the control group all the nuitrition via IV while the treatment group only gets water with a bit of salt. Or a mix of these two. But then this will only give you actual calorie intake as parameter you are investigating. That's quite different from actual fasting though, i.e., empty intestines could play a role, no matter calorie intake. Or the type of food you are ingesting, i.e., when fasting you don't ingest "bad" food, but maybe you'd get the same effet by just avoiding the "bad" food. In other words, this is really hard. But then, why does it matter? If it works, why do you care if it's placebo effect or not? As long as you can't (believably) fake it, you could not exploit just the placebo effect anyway. In other words, the harder a double blind study is, the less useful is the knowledge about whether something is placebo effect or not. Those two effects are different consequences of the same phenomenon.
- yegle 6y ago
  If it's really just placebo effect, I can't help but linking it to various cults who claim they can cure this and that, and their claims might be right due to placebo effect.
- dotancohen 6y ago
  > That would mean you would need to make the study > participants be unable to tell whether they are > in the treatment group or in the control group. Not necessarily. The eaters / non-eaters know what they are doing. But the scientist recording their progress (weight, height, other factors) would not know if this subject had eaten or not eaten. Then, another scientist, also not knowing, would compile the gathered data into conclusions about the subjects. This is how animals are studied.

tyingq 6y ago

It certainly has limitations, as stomach and esophageal cancers, which painfully force calorie reduction, remain amongst the lower 5-year survival rate cancers.

panabee 6y ago
do other cancers force CR as well, particularly others that cripple key parts of the digestive system? thanks for sharing?
- tyingq 6y ago
  Well, anything along the digestive tract from the mouth to the colon for sure.
  - panabee 6y ago
    sorry meant to ask if other digestive track cancers also show lower survival rates. was trying to do too many things at once last night. :)
refurb 6y ago
Not to mention the role that cachexia can play in cancer mortality. Seems like caloric restriction in that case would be harmful, not helpful.

MoreenDichele 6y ago

The person you're replying to is a hypochondriac and a pompous windbag who constantly pollutes HN comment sections with her ignorant hot takes on everything. She's one of those people who considers all HN's comment sections to be her personal blog. She has somehow accumulated nearly 30k karma on this site whining about mysterious health problems for attention and never a single time revealing what the supposed problems actually are. Don't bother trying to reason with her, she isn't here to pursue any sort of truth. She's just here for attention and to admire the sound of her own voice. Obviously she should be shadowbanned at this point, but instead I will be. Again.

hengheng 6y ago
Regardless of the veracity of anyone's claims in this thread, this could be a textbook example on how to run a viral sales scheme via social media. Seems quite polished by the looks of it.
- jodrellblank 6y ago
  Regarding the veracity of claims, the “disease she never reveals” is cystic fibrosis and is “revealed” twice in the last week alone: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=Doreenmichele%20cystic%20fibrosis&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
- DoreenMichele 6y ago
  this could be a textbook example on how to run a viral sales scheme via social media. Seems quite polished by the looks of it. That strikes me as morbidly funny. Among other reasons, there's this quote from my above comment: In recent years, I'm fairly regularly too broke to eat adequately.

aphextron 6y ago

I love how all of this research always comes to the same conclusion: Eat less, and mostly vegetables.

jagannathtech 6y ago
eat nutrient dense food within a small time period, sometimes not at all, and definitely not immediately before going to sleep

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]