ok, here's a relevant paper, "Ketogenic diet in the treatment of cancer – Where do we stand? ": https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmet.2019.06.026

ok, here's a relevant paper, "Ketogenic diet in the treatment of cancer – Where do we stand? ": https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmet.2019.06.026 https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmet.2019.06.... > Major conclusions: The ketogenic diet probably creates an unfavorable metabolic environment for cancer cells and thus can be regarded as a promising adjuvant as a patient-specific multifactorial therapy. The majority of preclinical and several clinical studies argue for the use of the ketogenic diet in combination with standard therapies based on its potential to enhance the antitumor effects of classic chemo- and radiotherapy, its overall good safety and tolerability and increase in quality of life. However, to further elucidate the mechanisms of the ketogenic diet as a therapy and evaluate its application in clinical practice, more molecular studies as well as uniformly controlled clinical trials are needed I don't understand why people are so rejecting of this information. I'm not a researcher, just someone with interest in health and again, it looks to me as if there is evidence, anecdotal, experimental, and a theoretical basis. It also seems obvious that a chronically anabolic state such as what modern lifestyles and eating habits encourage, with chronically elevated insulin, prevent the body from entering the catabolic state such as what happens during fasting, in which damaged cells get recycled. In fact, fasting is also potent against cancer, and I've seen many anecdotes of such. You're not going to appreciate any mention of anecdotes though, I presume.