Treating Advanced Prostate Cancer with Diet: Part 2

Treating Advanced Prostate Cancer with Diet: Part 2
4.66 (93.17%) 82 votes

What happens when metastatic prostate cancer patients were taught to increase intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruit, and beans, and to decrease meat, dairy, and junk?

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Dr. Ornish and colleagues were able to show an apparent reversal in the progression of early stage localized prostate cancer with a plant-based diet and lifestyle program, and researchers at the University of Massachusetts and elsewhere showed a similar diet may help slow the progression of even advanced prostate cancer over a period of four months. How about six months? Researchers at UC San Diego found more cancer patients in the same situation, and put them through the same protocol. These were patients who were already treated for “invasive prostate cancer…by [either] radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy,” yet had “rising PSA” levels, suggesting the treatment didn’t work, and the cancer was on the move.

In those with a cancer recurrence, PSA levels typically “rise exponentially…, reflecting the gradual, inexorable growth of the cancer in the body.” “[T]he rate of [this] PSA rise is the single best predictor of…the…development of overt metastatic disease, as well as of overall survival.” The next step would be what’s called “hormonal therapy,” which is chemical or surgical castration, which has a list of side effects, including loss of libido, and sexual function, and strength, and vitality. Therefore, we try to hold off on that for as long as possible. So, if we’re just waiting, might as well give diet a try.

So, “[t]hey were taught to increase intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruit, and [beans], and to decrease meat, dairy, and refined [carbs].” Of all possible lifestyle interventions, why a whole food, plant-based diet? Well, if you look around the world, there are huge differences in prostate cancer rates, with “We’re #1, USA, USA” rates up to a hundred times higher than some places in Asia, for example. And, it’s not just genetic; within one generation of coming to the U.S., cancer rates shoot up, and the grandkids end up with the same top-of-the-pile rates. A whole range of “lifestyle factors” have been looked at, but diet appears to have the greatest influence. Specifically, “[c]onsumption of meat and dairy…appears to increase risk, and consumption of plant…foods appears to decrease risk.” Hence, the plant-based diet.

“A possible mechanism…is arachidonic acid,” an inflammatory compound which we make from omega-6 rich oils, like corn oil, sunflower, safflower, and cottonseed oil, and also comes “preformed in…animal-based foods”—particularly from chicken in the American diet, and also eggs. And, in a petri dish, at least, arachidonic acid appears to stimulate prostate cancer cell growth as much 200%. But, ask men to remove processed and animal foods from their diet for six months, and what happens?

This is the before. This is how fast their PSA levels were rising before starting the study. In the absence of treatment, levels of PSA tend to increase exponentially, but eating healthier, this happened: nine of the ten patients showed an apparent slowing of cancer growth, and four of the nine an apparent reversal in cancer growth. The average “doubling time”—an estimate of how long it takes for their cancer to double in size—slowed from doubling every year, to closer to every ten years.

There’s been other studies using various diets and nutritional interventions, like vitamin supplements, but none have worked as well as this one. And, their compliance wasn’t even all that great. They did good about boosting their whole grain consumption, especially in those first three months, but then backslid a bit. They did eat more vegetables, including a serving of greens, and an extra serving of fruit—at least early on—and at least ate one whole serving of legumes a day, when they started. So, they “did observe some [dietary] recidivism by” the end of the study. The patients started out stronger, but then started to slide back into old habits.

So, the researchers checked to see if maybe they were better able to beat off the disease during that early period, and indeed, at the end of three months, on average, there was PSA reversal. So, “[c]hanges in the rate of [PSA] rise” were like “opposite” that of whole food plant intake, “raising the provocative possibility that PSA may have [been like tracking those changes,] suggesting that [the] adoption of a plant-based diet may have therapeutic potential in the management of [recurrent prostate cancer].”

Their “findings suggest” that without further surgery, radiation, or chemo, “disease progression” can be slowed, or even reversed, despite the “prevailing scientific consensus…that cancer progression is largely irreversible.” They’re “not refut[ing] the benefits of standard therapies,” and not “guarantee[ing] that a plant-based diet and stress reduction will always induce remission. But [the results] do contribute to [this] growing [medical] literature that…in at least some circumstances, cancer may be partly reversible.” Just by modifying “dietary and lifestyle factors”, men “may be able to prevent disease spread”—all without getting their testicles chopped off.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Sally Plank via Flickr. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Dr. Ornish and colleagues were able to show an apparent reversal in the progression of early stage localized prostate cancer with a plant-based diet and lifestyle program, and researchers at the University of Massachusetts and elsewhere showed a similar diet may help slow the progression of even advanced prostate cancer over a period of four months. How about six months? Researchers at UC San Diego found more cancer patients in the same situation, and put them through the same protocol. These were patients who were already treated for “invasive prostate cancer…by [either] radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy,” yet had “rising PSA” levels, suggesting the treatment didn’t work, and the cancer was on the move.

In those with a cancer recurrence, PSA levels typically “rise exponentially…, reflecting the gradual, inexorable growth of the cancer in the body.” “[T]he rate of [this] PSA rise is the single best predictor of…the…development of overt metastatic disease, as well as of overall survival.” The next step would be what’s called “hormonal therapy,” which is chemical or surgical castration, which has a list of side effects, including loss of libido, and sexual function, and strength, and vitality. Therefore, we try to hold off on that for as long as possible. So, if we’re just waiting, might as well give diet a try.

So, “[t]hey were taught to increase intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruit, and [beans], and to decrease meat, dairy, and refined [carbs].” Of all possible lifestyle interventions, why a whole food, plant-based diet? Well, if you look around the world, there are huge differences in prostate cancer rates, with “We’re #1, USA, USA” rates up to a hundred times higher than some places in Asia, for example. And, it’s not just genetic; within one generation of coming to the U.S., cancer rates shoot up, and the grandkids end up with the same top-of-the-pile rates. A whole range of “lifestyle factors” have been looked at, but diet appears to have the greatest influence. Specifically, “[c]onsumption of meat and dairy…appears to increase risk, and consumption of plant…foods appears to decrease risk.” Hence, the plant-based diet.

“A possible mechanism…is arachidonic acid,” an inflammatory compound which we make from omega-6 rich oils, like corn oil, sunflower, safflower, and cottonseed oil, and also comes “preformed in…animal-based foods”—particularly from chicken in the American diet, and also eggs. And, in a petri dish, at least, arachidonic acid appears to stimulate prostate cancer cell growth as much 200%. But, ask men to remove processed and animal foods from their diet for six months, and what happens?

This is the before. This is how fast their PSA levels were rising before starting the study. In the absence of treatment, levels of PSA tend to increase exponentially, but eating healthier, this happened: nine of the ten patients showed an apparent slowing of cancer growth, and four of the nine an apparent reversal in cancer growth. The average “doubling time”—an estimate of how long it takes for their cancer to double in size—slowed from doubling every year, to closer to every ten years.

There’s been other studies using various diets and nutritional interventions, like vitamin supplements, but none have worked as well as this one. And, their compliance wasn’t even all that great. They did good about boosting their whole grain consumption, especially in those first three months, but then backslid a bit. They did eat more vegetables, including a serving of greens, and an extra serving of fruit—at least early on—and at least ate one whole serving of legumes a day, when they started. So, they “did observe some [dietary] recidivism by” the end of the study. The patients started out stronger, but then started to slide back into old habits.

So, the researchers checked to see if maybe they were better able to beat off the disease during that early period, and indeed, at the end of three months, on average, there was PSA reversal. So, “[c]hanges in the rate of [PSA] rise” were like “opposite” that of whole food plant intake, “raising the provocative possibility that PSA may have [been like tracking those changes,] suggesting that [the] adoption of a plant-based diet may have therapeutic potential in the management of [recurrent prostate cancer].”

Their “findings suggest” that without further surgery, radiation, or chemo, “disease progression” can be slowed, or even reversed, despite the “prevailing scientific consensus…that cancer progression is largely irreversible.” They’re “not refut[ing] the benefits of standard therapies,” and not “guarantee[ing] that a plant-based diet and stress reduction will always induce remission. But [the results] do contribute to [this] growing [medical] literature that…in at least some circumstances, cancer may be partly reversible.” Just by modifying “dietary and lifestyle factors”, men “may be able to prevent disease spread”—all without getting their testicles chopped off.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Sally Plank via Flickr. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video

Doctor's Note

Healthy diets work only if you eat them, though. Check out the earlier study in my last video, Treating Advanced Prostate Cancer with Diet: Part 1.

Why is it so hard to get men to change their diet even in the face of cancer? Watch my video, Changing a Man’s Diet After a Prostate Cancer Diagnosis.

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

174 responses to “Treating Advanced Prostate Cancer with Diet: Part 2

Commenting Etiquette

The intention of the comment section under each video and blog post is to allow all members to share their stories, questions, and feedback with others in a welcoming, engaging, and respectful environment. Off-topic comments are permitted, in hopes more experienced users may be able to point them to more relevant videos that may answer their questions. Vigorous debate of science is welcome so long as participants can disagree respectfully. Advertising products or services is not permitted.

To make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist, misogynist, homophobic, vulgar, or otherwise inappropriate. Please help us to foster a community of mutual respect. Enforcement of these rules is done to the best of our ability on a case-by-case basis.

  1. I noticed that the research papers in the references were all dated before 2007. Does anyone know if there has been any more research relating diet to Prostate Cancer since 2006? With the positive results from these early studies, one would think there would be many more following. Is the Vegetable Growers Lobby faltering or what ;-)




    14
    1. Well, on average, it takes 7 pounds of vegetable protein to produce 1 pound of animal protein. So it’s not really in the best interest of plant farmers to disseminate this information. And not in the interest of the health care establishment either.




      12
          1. Thanks arnold but it doesnt do anything for me on a tablet or phone.

            The tech dept of this site can utilize .htaccess or iThemes Security for WordPress to eliminate the problem too. I wish they would get on it.




            5
      1. What ? If you are selling Vege and or Fruit at a ratio of 7:1 that is good thing. If a buying is wanting to benefit from all the good stuff and I has to buy more of that to get the calories and goodness he needs then he will be buying more, giving the farmer more. For the seller that is a good thing and for the buyer that is also a win as he’s getting better and saving on crap food to buy quality food. And it’s not all about the “Protein” its about selling the 1000s of flavinoids, phytonutrients, vitamins and minerals etc. etc. as built in package of every power-packed vege or fruit in get into you.




        10
        1. I think you misunderstood – Blair was saying it is better for plant farmers to sell 7 pounds of plant protein to cows, than (let’s say) 1,5 pounds of the same to humans.




          5
    2. Here are some new researches. CLA or Conjugated Linoleic Acid, present in abundance in grass fed beef, dairy and fat, free range chicken eggs, reduces the occurrence of prostate cancer.

      Now if you eat processed foods and get cancer, don’t blame it on meat eating because you eat the wrong kind.

      http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/33/10/4395.full

      https://academic.oup.com/carcin/article/25/7/1185/2390736/Conjugated-linoleic-acids-CLAs-decrease-prostate

      http://www.cavemandoctor.com/2012/01/23/can-eating-fat-stop-cancer-in-its-tracks-what-is-cla-and-why-do-we-care/




      0
      1. Jerry Lewis: That’s called reductionist reasoning. Your argument does not address the issue at hand, which is: Is beef inherently healthy for human consumption? What will reverse prostate cancer? An analogy for those who want to understand the point: A Snicker’s candy bar has peanuts in it and peanuts are good for us. That doesn’t mean that Snickers bars are good for us. Why? Because food is a package deal. There’s more harm in Snickers than there is good stuff. The same applies to beef, whether that beef is grass fed or not. Grass fed beef is like Snickers while factory farmed beef is like a Milky Way (essentially a Snickers bar without the few peanuts). How do we know? Because of the science. Here’s just *some* of the evidence when it comes to say grass fed beef:

        >>> Tom Goff notes that In Uruguay for example where all beef comes from grass fed animals, the more beef eaten, the higher the rates of cancer. http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/09/08/eat-protect-kidney-cancer/#comment-2884319823
        >>> The difference in palmitic acid concentrations between grass fed and grain fed beef is not significant Table (SFA): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2846864/table/T1/
        >>> Healthy Longevity pointed out some information from Plant Postive who noted that the nomadic Sinkiang in northern China who consumed diets rich in organic grass-fed animal foods experienced a 7 fold greater incidence of coronary artery disease than the Chinese living in Zhoushan Archipelago who consumed a diet much richer in plant based foods. These findings resemble even earlier observations from the 1920’s of the nomadic plainsmen in Dzungaria in northwest China and across the border in Kyrgyzstan who consumed enormous amounts of organic grass-fed animal foods and experienced severe vascular disease at young ages. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioadYLEho8M
        >>>Darryl once wrote: “any of the constituents of animal foods of most concern are also present in organic, grass-fed, free-range, lovingly stroked animals too. Organic dairy milk will have high levels of leucine and microRNA-21 (http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1475-2891-12-103.pdf ), for example. Its intrinsic to milk’s biological purpose.
        .
        What it comes down to is that “grass fed”/natural/fresh/organic/wild might be marginally (and I mean marginally) better, but that doesn’t make it healthy! It’s marginally better in the sense that a Snickers candy bar with peanuts is marginally better than a Milky Way candy bar that doesn’t have peanuts. Neither is really healthy for you.
        .
        To expand on the last bullet point from above: Many of the reasons beef products are unhealthy would apply to the grass fed product as much as a factory farmed one. While an organic or wild or grass fed product may have less say saturated fat, they still have plenty of saturated fat–enough to matter. All of these animal products are still going to have saturated fat, cholesterol, animal protein, TMAO, contaminants, etc. All of these products are going to be lacking in fiber and vital phytonutrients, including precious few anitoxidants. http://nutritionfacts.org/videos/antioxidant-power-of-plant-foods-versus-animal-foods/
        .
        b00mer, a well respected poster on this site, once wrote the following very helpful words to put the issue into perspective: “……A grass fed cow will consume even more food than a grain fed cow due to the lower caloric density. Their food may not be genetically modified, but they are still part of the food chain, their food still contains environmental pollutants, and they are still concentrating them in their tissues.
        ……How people can think that the nutritional profile of an animal completely changes with its diet is beyond me. If I eat mostly kale, or mostly corn, sure an analysis of my tissues may lead to some detectable differences, but it’s still going to be human flesh. I still produce hormones, I still have dioxin, pcbs, flame retardants in my tissues, I still have saturated fat in my tissues, arachidonic acid, etc.”

        ——————-
        I know it is not good to feed the trolls. I wrote this post for other people who want to know how to respond when someone tries to claim that grass fed beef (or “organic” or “wild”) makes a significant difference in how it impacts our health.




        42
          1. Wade: :-) So cool you have kept it. Of course, I was quoting a lot of other people. (Not really something to give me credit for.) I think when we have a helpful answer to a common question that a lot of people have, why not copy and paste. ;-)




            8
        1. The actual CLA research cited isn’t really about diets at all. It’s about the potential of isolated CLA as a cancer-fighting medicine. Until prostate cancer and other cancers are eradicated, we’ll continue to have a need for such medicines, and isolated CLA may be less destructive than some others. But the evidence falls far short of supporting the consumption of meat and dairy as a way to dose with that medicine.




          5
      2. Mission Complete Jerry! You’ve successfully motivated Thea, who is a paragon of decorum, to imply that you are a “troll.” Congratulations!

        BTW:
        All beef is grass fed. It is what they eat before the overwhelming majority are shipped to CAFO’s. I believe the phrase you are looking for is “grass finished.”
        AND while “free range chicken” conjures up idyllic pastoral images of chickens frolicking in the sun scratching for seeds, grubs and insects, that is purely a marketing inspired mythology. The reality is that they are crammed into over crowed fecal and disease infested sheds, and do not see the light of day until they are shipped to slaughter. http://www.upc-online.org/freerange.html

        Not that there is much evidence from your postings that you overly concerned with such trivialities.




        16
          1. No need to apologize to me Thea. I fully agree with your assessment regarding who our misguided visitor is and how he should be treated. I’ve had to restrain myself from labeling him a troll myself, but since it is so blatantly obvious, it seemed superfluous to do so.




            7
      1. Darryl, Thank you for the information and links. I’m just now reading your post (9/5/2017). It’s hard to navigate the comments section now with the trolls and all.




        2
    3. WFPB-Hal
      Here is a link to the some of the research that Ornish’s group has done. Please take a look at it and yes,it is post-2006.
      https://www.ornish.com/proven-program/the-research/
      But here is the thing. . . .it takes a very long time to put together a study and see it through to the end. One of the biggest holdups is getting funding for this type of research. Individuals apply for years and sometimes decades to try to get funding for their research. Some projects never get funded. The National Institutes of Health is one of the largest public funding organizations in our country – in fact the world – and this organization is poised on the brink of having its funding revoked/cut by the current political administration. So given how very long it takes to get “natural health” funded (as opposed to the pharmaceuticals that Universities do the research on and then Pharmaceutical companies buy up and sell back to us for thousands of dollars more!!!) a 2008 research paper is considered fairly recent. Unfortunately.
      If you want more research of this ilk let me encourage you to write your representatives in Congress and make sure they have your interests represented and followed through upon. They are ONLY going to do what THE PEOPLE care about and tell them to do. So speak up!!!! Be pro-active and push for the interests that are important to you and your family. If you don’t, then one can’t complain about the lack of legitimate research. Simple as that.




      5
      1. Rachel, Thank you for the information and links. I’m just now reading your post (9/5/2017). It’s hard to navigate the comments section now with the trolls and all.




        1
      1. Hello Bjorn,
        Thank you for your question. I am a family physician with a private practice in lifestyle medicine, and am a volunteer moderator for this website. I also have a master’s degree in epidemiology. This is an interesting study. I just looked at it in detail, and scrutinized the tables of data. I do not think their conclusion is warranted.

        Here is their conclusion: “When the 10-year average supplement dose was evaluated, there was an almost two-fold increase in lung cancer risk among men in the highest categories of vitamin B6 (> 20 mg/d; hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.25 to 2.65) and B12 (> 55µg/d; hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.32 to 2.97) compared with nonusers.”

        I see several problems with this conclusion:
        1) If B12 consumption is associated with lung cancer, then the more B12 you consume, the higher your risk of lung cancer should be. This is called a “dose-response” relationship. But here are the data for men (Note: there was no significant association for women), using their figures for 10-year average daily consumption of B12. First, their categories of consumption, with the number of cancer cases in each category in parentheses:

        Non-user (n=179), 0.1-5 mcg/day (n=78), 5-25 mcg/d (n=138), 25-55 mcg/d (n=23), >55 mcg/d (n=28).

        The relative risk of cancer in these groups, when adjusted for a bunch of different variables, including smoking:
        Non-users RR=1.00 (by definition); 0.1-5 mcg/d: 0.93, 5-25: 0.94; 25-55: 1.04; >55: 1.98 (confidence interval 1.32-2.97).

        There is not much of a dose-response relationship here.

        2) The number of cancer cases in each group is very small (23, and 28 for two of the B-12 consumption groups). This means that any association they find is somewhat suspect — even if it is “statistically signifiant” — i.e. the confidence interval doesn’t include 1.00.

        3) There is clearly confounding, by smoking status. By their own admission, “the risk was even higher among men who were smoking at baseline.” But what they don’t say, until you delve into the tables, is that, due to the small number of never-smoker lung cancer cases (n=20), this group was excluded from the analysis! Note, that they DID analyze (see immediately above) two groups of size 23, and 28. Is that because there is actually NO relationship between B12 intake and risk of lung cancer among non-smokers?**

        4) If there really is a relationship between B-12 intake and lung cancer, why does this only occur in men, but not women? It doesn’t make sense biologically. They try to give a rationale for this sex difference in their discussion, but I don’t buy it.

        So, my conclusion is that if you are a male smoker, there may be some reason to worry about taking B-12 supplements, but given the very small numbers in this study, and the lack of a consistent dose-response relationship, this is a long ways from being proven.

        Dr.Jon
        PhysicianAssistedWellness.com
        Volunteer moderator for NutritionFacts.org

        ** NOTE: Researchers love to have significant results, and manipulating the data to make results look more significant has been documented to occur.




        3
    4. Hey Hal, thanks for writing! It’s not the vegetable lobby’s fault; it’s just hard to get research grant money for the effects of a multipurpose intervention (one that doesn’t focus on the ‘one-cause, one-cure’ hypothesis). There have been many more studies on diet and prostate cancer; however, we still need to see ones that compare whole foods, plant-based diets with omnivorous diets in men with diagnosed cancer at the same stage that are carefully controlled for weight, age, etc. in order to show proof these diets have a strong therapeutic effect.




      0
  2. You’d think that the last 7 words would be enough to motivate some guys. But many will ask their doctor “Does what I eat have anything to do with this?”. The answer will often be some jibber-jabber like “There’s no research that shows what you eat has much to do with your condition”. And so it goes on.




    21
    1. There are a number of men who post on this forum who have made the choice of eating a plant based diet, so it’s not entirely due to male-ness.

      But I agree if general practitioners were made aware of research such as quoted above, maybe they would recommend such a dietetic change, even if they chose not to do so themselves.

      A doctor making this suggestion plus a follow-up by a dietician or nurse could put many on the road to recovery and good health.




      9
  3. Eggs appear to be a double threat for prostate cancer, in that they are high in both arachidonic acid and choline.

    I remember reading Barry Sears’s “Zone” books years (decades, in fact) ago, in which he claimed that arachidonic acid is bad news. His claim was based not on its ability to stimulate cancer growth but rather its tendency to tip the body’s prostaglandin balance toward inflammation, with implications for heart disease. Now we can see that it’s more pervasive than that.




    15
    1. What about organic free range eggs? They tell me eggs are now not the culprit in cholesterol or high blood pressured?

      Who is They? and do They provide valid and clinically significant studies showing no harm from eggs?




      22
      1. You have to get rid about the misconception about cholesterol and saturated fat before we can talk about the benefits of eggs. If you insist that they are harmful then we don’t need to discuss further because eggs have plenty of it.

        But think about the word saturated to see what it means. It means that is is saturated, it’s fini and the fat cannot change further. Whereas unstable fats such as vegetable oils will become transfat when under heat, or simply become rancid with light and time.

        The cholesterol and saturated fat theories were spread out by Big Sugar and Big Vegetable Oil and Big Pharma to get people to consume more sugar, vegetable oil and take statin drug in the name of lowering cholesterol. And when people buy processed foods or vegetable oil, they look at the label to see if there is any saturated fat which is harmless, and omit to look for transfat which is very very harmful, and it is one of the causes of prostate cancer.

        When you buy eggs, make sure that it is free range and not cage free or Omega 3 because they are not healthy. Free range chicken eggs come from Happy Chicken and the eggs contain CLA which is very beneficial for your health on top of Omega 3. At Trader Joe, free range eggs only cost a little bit more than regular eggs.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4303863/

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10472840

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24570444




        1
        1. @Jerry Lewis –
          D’ya really think those articles provide much of an argument? The 2nd and 3rd do not even attempt to address whether egg-eating is health-promoting or not. Here’s part of the conclusions of each paper:

          #1) Consequently, the development of functional egg-derived foods through technological methods could be an interesting way to gain profitability for egg producers and the food industry, in addition to improving the general conditions of public health.

          I could find no convincing support for egg eating in my quick scan. In any event it’s have to be weighed against all the negative evidence. To my eye, this report looks like another poor attempt by some pro-egg-industry group to push eggs.

          #2. Results of these experiments show that eggs produced by hens fed 5.0% CLA will contain 310 to 365 mg of CLA per egg. Such eggs could provide a substantial amount of CLA source in human foods.

          So what?

          #3) Eggs represent a relatively low-carbon supply of animal protein, but their production is heavily dependent on cereals and soy, with associated high emissions from industrial nitrogen production, land-use change, and transport. Alternative sources of digestible protein for poultry diets are available, may be produced from waste processing, and would be an effective tool for reducing the industry’s GHG emissions and dependence on imported raw materials.

          Would be nice to reduce the environmental footprint of the industry, but what does that have to do with the question?

          Jerry – do you even read the articles you provide as support?




          34
          1. Of course if it is a reply that does not fit your point of view then it is not based on sciences or it is personal opinion.

            The first article in my links is about the benefits of egg.

            The second article is related to eating egg from free range chicken versus other eggs because of its CLA and Omega 3 contents.

            The third article is related to egg not having a big impact on the environment because it is nutrient dense.

            Now it is still not scientific per your biased cherry picked view. So I give up on you.




            1
        2. Jerry Lewis: The person who continues to spread nutrition myths is you. I won’t go over the data yet again as you just ignore it. For the record: I did look at the first link you provided and have to wonder if you ever look at your own links.

          I will address one point in your post: One of the jaw dropping myths you are spreading is the claim that free range chickens are treated any differently than those labeled “cage-free” and that free-range means the chicken is happy and humanely treated. That is a flat out lie for most chickens, even those labeled free-range. For anyone who hasn’t investigated this issue, here is what you need to know about ‘free-range’: http://www.humanemyth.org/mediabase/1049.htm

          This site is not about the ethical side of eating. This site is about the science of nutrition. Since you raised the issue, though, it was worth addressing at least once.




          32
          1. I’m pretty convinced Jerry must be a plant by meat/dairy/egg industry. Probably a 20 something who works in the PR agency representing some meat lobbyist. It’s obvious he doesn’t even read his own links and just spouts unsubstantiated meat/paleo industry selling points.




            22
        3. “Ultimately, the allure of trolling may be too strong for sadists, who presumably have limited opportunities to express their sadistic interests in a socially-desirable manner.”




          5
        4. Jerry,

          I seldom come away convinced by your arguments, but I hope you keep offering a point/counter-point argument to the comments section.

          By doing so you have enriched the forum with data to counter your data which is left up to us to judge the relevancy of.

          If a plant based diet cannot stand up to scrutiny,..




          3
          1. Lonie, thank you for your unbiased viewpoint. Like you said, if vegans cannot stand up to scrutiny then they are not worth of anything except for hype and buzzword.

            And the field of nutrition is far more complex than the simple WFPB approach that I see many people in this forum have adopted without questioning because some guru has said so and so.

            And hopefully someday I can convince you to look at a different angle but if I fails then so be it, but at least you will come out more convinced of your PF stance.




            1
            1. And hopefully someday I can convince you to look at a different angle but if I fails then so be it, but at least you will come out more convinced of your PF stance.

              I’m not at odds with your premise that a Plant Based diet has some nutritional shortcomings that moderate consumption of meat or dairy can “fill in the blanks” so to speak.

              I do take a different approach to the solution in that I medicate aggressively with superfoods like Moringa Oleifera, beet juice, herbal teas, dark chocolate, peanut butter, kippered herring filets, and many, many supplements.

              As you can see there is no mention of “meals” in my incomplete list, although I do indulge in some sort of conventional fare from time to time.

              I also would like to point out what I think is a difference in philosophy between the two of us… that is, I eat for survival to the point where I can lean on science (even more than I do now) to extend, if not my total years, at least my total healthy years.

              I am assured there are many “something wonderful” things to quote Keir Dullea’s character in 2010, A Space Oddessy, happening on a daily basis that will change who we are and how we live.




              0
            1. Jerry, thanks for insisting on my reading the two links. I have saved them in a conspicuous place so I will see them when I next sit down to review my saved library.

              Mitochondria is my favorite alien thing in my body. I currently take R-Lipoic Acid for their betterment. Some research I’ve read said they can’t explain how the R-Lipoic Acid ameliorates the mitochondria, but they think it is because the RL-A picks at or tweaks them causing them to react defensively, and thus grow stronger (don’t remember if the said increases their number.)




              1
              1. Lonie, Mitochondria supplement comes from CoQ10. It is the most important supplement for anti aging, anti DNA damage of all. It also fixes a number of metabolic diseases such as high blood pressure, diabetes, arthritis, etc. and even takes care of cancer, CHD. Take it and you will see an immediate boost of energy while you exercise. But it is kind of tricky to find the right supplement and the only one I know that works is this brand which is cold at Costco (don’t buy the Costco brand but only this brand).

                https://www.costco.com/Qunol-Liquid-CoQ10-100-mg.%2C-20-Ounces.product.11678293.html




                1
                1. Jerry, currently taking Swanson’s Qgel… touted by them to be the “most powerful CoQ10 available” (says so right on the label ‘-)




                  0
      2. You can read the clinical studies yourself, but you’ll need to read the whole study, including the “materials and methods” section. Its quite simple really. All the egg studies showing that eggs don’t raise serum cholesterol have been manipulated. Serum cholesterol has a peak, so if you feed someone a pound of pork sausage, then measure their serum cholesterol which has already skyrocketed, then feed them an egg, their cholesterol won’t go up much further, if at all. That has been the study design recently funded by….(I’ll let you guess). Ok, lets do a press release “Eggs don’t raise cholesterol”…yay, public duped again. On the other hand, if you look at the older studies that take someone with normal serum cholesterol levels, measure their serum cholesterol to verify its normal, then feed them an egg…guess what? Their serum cholesterol goes way up. Serum cholesterol is associated with heart attack and stroke. Sure you want to go there? I don’t, so I don’t eat any eggs. Plain and simple.

        Cheers,
        Dr. Ben




        4
      1. The following is a comprehensive guide to improve your eyesight which includes both plant foods and animal foods including eggs. Of course, it is not surprising that it will be trashed and thumbed down 100 times within minutes since it is not written by a vegan and it includes animal foods. But anyone can stay ignorant if they want to. We live in a free country.

        http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/08/07/lutein-eye-brain-health.aspx




        0
  4. Diagnosed with low grade prostate cancer 10 yrs ago, the Dr. suggested eating a few crackers with tomato
    sauce, then proceeded to talk about surgery, radiation, etc. I fired his ass on the spot.
    Basically became my own Dr., switched to a plant based diet, meat maybe 1-3 times a year, fish rarely, no dairy, and the best
    part, NO doctor !–lol–Lost 25 lbs. without even trying, same weight in 10 yrs. Feel fine, my #’s are very good, in pretty good
    shape for 70. Don’t know for sure, good, bad indifferent, but seems to work for me.
    Best to all




    39
    1. As a 70 y.o. vegan (for the past several years, vegetarian for decades before that) and someone undiagnosed but suspected of having prostate cancer (after multiple biopsies and MRI), I found your experience very inspiring.

      I’m wondering which numbers you mean, e.g. PSA, doubling time, Gleason score…

      I recently read two books I would recommend to anyone either with prostate cancer struggling with what to do about it, or even people like me who were made to be afraid they most likely have it:

      Jay Cohen, MD (who has prostate cancer) Prostate Cancer Breakthroughs 2014
      Blum and Scholz, MD. Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers.

      Blum and Scholz have a chapter on diet (macrobiotic, Ornish, etc.), where they recognize the importance of a plant-based diet.




      16
      1. Hi David,
        The #’s are all my blood work #’s, cholesterol, crp, glucose, etc. The psa #’s are in there (i’m not a big fan) but i look
        to see the rise or fall of them. Mine go up a bit, down a bit, i usually have blood work every 12 to 18 months.
        I just get the results and monitor them myself. I do not have a Dr. but will get one if i have concerns. Funny, doctors scare me
        more than this friggin disease.-lol-
        Happy to hear you are undiagnosed, and i hope you are confident in your doctor. I will tell you, they will MRI and biopsy
        you to death. Why multiple biopsies ?? Multiple MRI’s ?? Argh %#@%$#
        Best to you




        4
    2. Mike, glad that you fix your health problem without using drug. But did you look at what you ate before you ate WFPB? Did you eat WFAB or processed foods? Otherwise it is comparing apple and orange.




      0
      1. Jerry,
        I ate a SAD diet, and could drink with the best of them. Ice cream was my favorite.
        When diagnosed i switched and the results were, well remarkable. Originally i expected it cause switching from a
        lousy diet (which i didn’t know how lousy it was) to a incredibly healthier one, my blood work, weight, the way i felt, etc.
        rose through the roof, and has been that way for 10 years.
        There are ssooo many different thoughts on life styles, for “me” it is no question which is best. Forget my opinion–
        the research “”clearly”” shows it. IGF-1, methionine, etc. not very good for a cancer patient (“credible” research shows,
        (not just some blogger) where do we get that from—meat, protein, etc.
        There are guys out there promoting paleo, ketogenics, saying they are cancer fighters. Just ask them for proof—no reply–
        Mercola kicked me off his site when i challenged his findings–I’ll stop here.
        Sorry to ramble,
        Best to you.




        19
        1. Mercola never tells you to eat a SAD diet. If you ate what Mercola recommends then you would be in good health, i.e. grass fed beef, free range chicken, healthy fats, healthy dairy, a lot of fruits and vegetables, legumes, seed, nut, herb, mushroom, etc. In general, it is WFPB + WFAB. That’s what I eat also. Nobody ever said that if you eat animal foods for some essential nutrients then you have to avoid fruit and vegetable. It is not one excluding the other but it is both for optimal health.

          Vegans tend to twist what meat eaters eat and like to lump SAD with animal foods eating, which is not true of course. And their leaders use to make SAD eaters to represent meat eaters to justify their biased cherry picked views. And the PB diet that they promote is not bad but not at all good for optimal health.




          0
          1. Correct Jerry, didn’t say that, maybe i didn’t explain it properly. He promotes meat, dairy, ‘healthy” fats, etc. those crappy powders that
            he sells, among his other overpriced supplements. IF–IF– it was me, and i believed my supplements would really help people, (which i don’t ) i would sell them as cheap as possible so people could afford them. Like the guy who puts butter and coconut oil in coffee, which he naturally sells
            the best coffee on the planet, for a price that is probably the most expensive on the planet—do you think this guy (sorry forget his name) “really”
            knows about health ?? It’s a business, which has nothing to do about health. Did you ever see the price of the stuff he sells—holy crap !
            In the end, i believe it is to each his own, if what you do works for you, great, since i certainly have no credentials to say which is best,
            i can only go by the “”credible”” research, and what seems to work best for me.
            I take a look at Fallon, or that wheat belly guy, and see what they look like, then i look at McDougall, Greger, Ornish, Esselstyn, etc.
            i’m guessing there may be something to there teachings.
            Best to you Jerry.




            11
            1. Mike, I do believe in supplementation for some nutrients that you cannot get sufficiently through foods or your body cannot convert from foods as you age. Having saying this, I don’t buy supplements from Mercola as it is overpriced plus he does not have the reviews from users like on Amazon.com. But it is a free country and free enterprise and people can choose wherever they want to buy their supplements.

              Mercola is often accused of writing about a subject just to promote his supplements and so he must be “biased”. This is not true as he only recommends supplements that are essential and he also makes them, and I always double check multiple sources before I buy a supplement or eat a food for health reason. This does not make Mercola a crook for selling supplements and writing about it at the same time. If so then all companies that provide you “free” technologies such as Internet and Google are all crooks because they make billions of dollars.

              For people who like to trash Mercola, FYI, Mercola has referred to Greger several times when he talks about plant foods and he also promoted Greger book “How not to die” and Greger has appeared on Mercola site several times. And for people who accuse Mercola of enriching himself. I just read that Greger charges a high fee for his appearance at conferences too. Well, it is not a crime to make money or we will be all criminals.

              Now look can be deceiving. Mercola is skinny like a stick despite being a meat eater. Greger looks so old despite being only in his 40’s. Dr Weil is kind of being oversized despite being a vegetarian. McDougall looks so old and sick with hollow eyes like he just comes out from a concentration camp. I think you cannot judge a book by its cover.

              And last Mike, I am glad that WFPB works for you. But you may want to have a second look at a more broad diet and you can follow Mercola or DrAxe or Chris Kresser but none of those doctors tell you to not eat plant foods and nobody ever tells you to eat processed foods or SAD diet. And of course you can still read Greger like I do. Info is available around you as we are in the Internet age.

              http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/08/04/growing-arugula.aspx

              http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/08/02/metabolic-therapy-for-cancer.aspx




              2
              1. Hey Jerry, One more question please. The lifestyle you speak of, Mercola, etc. Do they ever profess it would be a good diet for those who have cancer ? Any proof that it helps ?
                Think we’ve been talking prevention, and healthier , curious as to those that have cancer.
                Most always talk about heart, diabetes, RA, etc. but do not mention cancer that often.
                Thanks in advance




                2
                1. Mike, first of all, there is a misunderstanding mainly on this board that Dr Mercola, Axe, Hyman, Chris Kresser, etc. advocated not eating WFPB when it is totally the opposite. Between 80% – 90% of their articles talk about plant foods and only 10-20% talk about animal foods and that’s what I eat. I basically eat exactly like a vegan or perhaps even more because I eat at least the daily dozen and more. Now the difference is that myself and followers of Mercola, Hyman, DrAxe also eat animal foods and some fats and I will explain why. So in term of eating PF to prevent and possibly cure cancer then we do it all. The following article is what Mercola published frequently:

                  http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/08/18/growing-cabbage.aspx

                  Then we eat also animal foods for the nutrients that cannot be found in plant foods or not easily absorbed with PF such as protein, amino acids, CLA, collagen, DHA/EPA, Omega 7, Vitamins, minerals, etc. If you want to get into the details of what animal foods contain what then I can explain later but I don’t want to flood this board with my links for now. And animal foods are not poisonous like the vegans like to twist the facts, if you eat from the right sources. Just remember that more than 95% of the world population are not vegans.

                  And last, you need to have protein and some calories to fight cancer. It has been researched that frail people don’t combat diseases very well.

                  Now about the ketogenic diet, researchers said that it will cure cancer. I don’t have cancer and so I cannot verify it. But basically you eat a high fat low carb diet to use fat to replace sugar for energy because sugar feeds cancer.

                  So Google search for the following terms for a start:

                  “CLA cancer NCBI”
                  “DHA cancer NCBI”
                  “Omega 7 cancer ncbi”
                  “Glycine cancer ncbi”
                  “Ketogenic cancer ncbi”




                  2
                  1. Hey Jerry, Yes, i get that. I’ve read Hyman’s books, i like all points of views. Lots i read about too much protein not so cancer friendly keep me away. I have 1 can of sardines a week, hey that’s 12 lbs. a year ! -lol– No matter what at this time, i stay away from dairy, maybe have a dozen eggs a year.
                    To be clear, i’m not a saint, i have a few glasses of wine a week, a martini here and there, and when on vacation i could cheat with the best of them. I’m a casino guy at times, when there i’ll puff on a cigar or 2. If i can’t enjoy my life what’s the sense.
                    Thanks for the links, i’ll give em a look.




                    1
                    1. Mike, I don’t eat a lot of protein but I eat enough for my health. Most of my protein sources are in fact plant based. But I eat a small amount of animal foods for quality protein, i.e. to get the necessary amino acids. For instance bone broth is loaded with glycine. Don’t listen to the pundits because bone broth does not contain more lead than your tap water, and you only consume between one to two measuring cups per day. The other sources of my protein is organ meat which is loaded with vitamins A, B12 and quality protein. I also eat wild caught salmon, and grass fed beef from time to time. To see what benefits amino acids have on cancer, read the following:

                      https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170419130352.htm

                      In short, please do not assume that health conscious meat eaters do not eat plant foods when in fact we eat more than vegans.

                      Health conscious meat eaters diet is very complicated. If you want to know more, you have to read Mercola, Hyman, DrAxe, Chris Kresser, etc. regularly. It’s all explained in their articles or people in the forums are very helpful and friendly. Unlike some uptight people. You can say that you are a vegan at their web sites and you won’t hear one single word of insult.




                      2
                  2. You can Google “ketogenic cancer ncbi”, as I just did, and you won’t find a single researcher claiming that a ketogenic diet cures cancer. Not one. They know better. You will find discussion of such as diet as an adjunct treatment, not as a primary treatment.

                    You are seriously misrepresenting the science here. If you go on a ketogenic diet and you are not a type 1 diabetic, your blood glucose levels will not drop below normal. What is normal? Well, your pancreas starts increasing insulin production over it’s normal pulse rate when BG goes above 84. So your pancreas “thinks it should be 84 or less.” As it drops toward 70, cortisol and other hormones will kick in to release stored glucose to bring it back up. Ironically, following a very low-carb diet, i.e., ketogenic, can result in higher BG levels than what many following a WFPB diet see, especially if it also very low-fat. It’s not as though ketosis makes your blood devoid of sugar. That would kill you. See https://www.paleohacks.com/ketogenic/the-high-blood-glucose-dilemma-on-low-carb-lc-diets-14400

                    If some cancer cells thrive on sugar, and the sugar they get comes from the blood, then the best diet would be the one that results in the lowest BG levels. So if WFPB can achieve lower BG levels than ketogenic diet, why would anyone consider KD as an adjunct therapy? I’m not sure I have the answer but part of it could be that some people find the KD more palatable than a very low-fat WFPB diet. If their BG on SAD is high, then KD might well be an improvement compared to that.

                    A WFPB diet is not devoid of protein, and it is simply false to claim that WFPB eaters are frail.




                    4
                    1. Lonie: I appreciate your comment and point of view. It is interesting, though, that you find that study compelling. I don’t find it compelling, and I especially would not recommend it to someone with brain cancer. I’m not an expert at reviewing studies, but here are some aspects of the paper that I consider very important: “…Animal Models…” (they only looked at a few studies on mice) and “…studies in this field are rare and inconsistence…” and “…Because of differences physiology between animals and humans, future studies in cancer patients treated with a KD are needed….”

                      On the flip side, there is good reason to doubt even the weak conclusions of that study. The authors state at the top of the study that there is interest in ketogenic diets because, “…many tumors become dependent on glucose uptake during anaerobic glycolysis.” I don’t understand that statement completely, but in layman’s terms, I understand this to be about the claim that sugars feed cancer. I’ve looked into this issue in the past and found it to be wanting in terms of guiding someone with cancer. In short, that basic understanding of cancer is incorrect.

                      The mayo clinic has this to say regarding sugar and cancer:
                      “Sugar doesn’t make cancer grow faster. All cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn’t speed their growth. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn’t slow their growth.” To learn more: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/cancer/in-depth/cancer-causes/ART-20044714?pg=2

                      The mayo clinic page does note that “…there is some evidence that consuming large amounts of sugar is associated with an increased risk of certain cancers, including esophageal cancer. It can also lead to weight gain and increase the risk of obesity and diabetes, which may increase the risk of cancer.” But this information is often twisted by people to mean that we shouldn’t eat foods that contain natural carbs/”sugars” from whole foods, such as fruit and whole grains.

                      As moderator Rami once noted: “People often use this idea Your brain, and red blood cells and every other cell in your body uses glucose as its primary fuel source. Sugar from whole grains and fruits has no linkage with disease, and no studies have demonstrated such a linkage. The studies in fact show the opposite, in that these foods prevent chronic disease.”
                      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/whole-grains-may-work-as-well-as-drugs/
                      http://nutritionfacts.org/video/great-grain-robbery/

                      Moderator Joseph once wrote the following on the topic: “The concept that sugar feeds cancer cells is misleading. Processed and refined foods can be health depleting foods for cancer patients, whereas health supporting foods are food rich in fiber and antioxidant. Fruits fall into this category, often the dark berries are best and also low in fruit sugar as is.” To learn more about why the concept that sugar feeds cancer is misleading: https://www.oncologynutrition.org/erfc/healthy-nutrition-now/sugar-and-cancer/

                      I don’t think anyone promotes tables sugar as a health food. For one thing, it is devoid of the fiber which is so important as discussed on so many pages on this site. At the same time, sugar is not quite the devil that people make it out to be either. A doctor named Kempner used a white rice, fruit juice and sugar diet to reverse eye sight loss caused by diabetes at a time when no thought such a thing was possible. http://nutritionfacts.org/?fwp_search=kempner&fwp_content_type=post%2Cvideo My point is: It’s important to have some perspective on the issue of sugar.

                      All the evidence *on humans* which I’ve seen is that a diet of whole plant foods helps prevent or reverse cancer – not the other way around. People who promote a ketogenic diet (a diet super high in fat and super low in carbs) think that a diet of whole plant foods (which includes foods high in glucose/sugar) feeds cancer. There doesn’t appear to be evidence in humans to back that up.

                      ———————
                      One bit that is important for people to understand is that the *body* of scientific evidence is important – not individual studies. We reference individual studies in order to make points, but this practice only makes sense in the context of being able to understand the studies and in the context of the larger body of evidence. Jerry’s link to a review of a few inconsistent studies on mice would be very misleading to someone who is not aware of and not able to assimilate the larger body of evidence. That’s why I don’t see the study as a must-read for anyone other than the experts who can put it in context, or a lay person who would take it upon themselves and is able to review a ton of studies on the topic–not just that one weak one.




                      2
                    2. For anyone interested in learning more about the arguments around ketogenic diets, Plant Positive has a fun video: http://plantpositive.com/the-ketogenic-advantage-nusi-g/ Note that the video does not address cancer specifically. What it does do is show how silly most of the arguments supporting ketogenic diets (high fat, low carb) are.

                      Here’s a quote that I think sums it up well: “The lesson from evolution about ketosis is that it’s a state we humans are evolved to avoid.”

                      Of course, that doesn’t mean that people with certain serious diseases might not benefit over-all from a ketogenic diet. Children with epilepsy might benefit (though it’s a tough call because of the severe drawbacks of the diet). So, it’s potentially possible that a person with a brain tumor might also. I’m just not seeing the strong evidence support the hypothesis.




                      2
                    3. Lonie: I haven’t watched that TED talk, but it’s looks to be about fasting. That’s not the discussion at hand as far as I’m concerned. Jerry Lewis made the following claim: “Now about the ketogenic diet, researchers said that it will cure cancer. I don’t have cancer and so I cannot verify it. But basically you eat a high fat low carb diet to use fat to replace sugar for energy because sugar feeds cancer.” tmoody challenged Jerry Lewis on that claim, especially the claim that there are researchers saying that a ketogenic diet will cure cancer. This led Jerry to give us a link to a study which reviewed a few inconsistent studies of mice. Mice who were (if I understood correctly) put on a ketogenic diet. tmoody was correct: Those researchers did not say that a ketogenic diet will cure cancer. They just think the idea is worth looking into more. Then you claimed that that study was so compelling that everyone should read it. That’s the line of discussion I’m following and when I jumped in.

                      My understanding is that people on a ketogenic diet get their bodies to have similar reactions to being in a starvation state by eating a very high fat and low carbohydrate diet. However, eating a lot of fat and little carbohydrate is different than actually fasting, which means the absence of food. I have seen good evidence in support of periodic and long term fasting. The True North Health center has had great results with long term fasting (weeks even) for very sick patients.

                      However, the doctors at the True North Health center will be the first people to say that it isn’t about the fasting. It’s about what you eat afterwards that will make a difference in your life. In the end, we all have to eat–or die. The people at True North Health Center would tell you to eat a diet of whole plant foods for maximum health benefits. The discussion at hand is whether or not the science supports the claim that we should eat a high fat diet to treat cancer because it means not eating sugar.

                      I might take a look at that TED talk as it sounds interesting. It’s my understanding that Dr. Greger will be covering fasting in the not too distant future. Fasting is a topic of great interest to many who visit this site.




                      2
                    4. *Lonie: I haven’t watched that TED talk, but it’s looks to be about fasting.*

                      Fair enough. I haven’t read any of your links either. Haven’t even read all the way through your posts as they are too long and life is too short. ‘-)




                      2
                    5. Lonie: OK, here’s the short version: Are you claiming that eating a ketogenic diet (high fat/low carb) has been shown to have the same health impacts on humans as actually fasting (abstaining from food)? Do you have evidence to back that up? If not and if the TED talk is about fasting, then the TED talk is irrelevant to your stated belief that Jerry’s study is something we should all read and keep in mind. It seems to be a different topic. I’m not seeing any reason to think that study is worth much of anything at this point. It certainly does not support Jerry’s claims.

                      You don’t have to continue the conversation. I’m just making it short for you in case that would be helpful.




                      2
                    6. Lonie, ketogenic diet is nothing new. It has been used to cure epilepsy by *** medical institutions *** for more than half a century. Just recently there are more researches toward the treatment of cancer, diabetes and other metabolic diseases. The link I made above used lab rats but trials on humans have been made but I don’t have time to look for it but you can easily google for it.

                      It sounds very logical that you cut down the sources of sugar which we already know that it feeds cancer growth. So you have to replace sugar with healthy fat for your energy. By that, I mean that you eat some fats but not gorging on fats because the ketogenic diet calls for watching your calorie intake. So here what the vegans don’t like which is the fat part, in particular saturated fat, which is harmless but they don’t think so based on some obsolete theory from 50 years ago.

                      I myself eat some reasonable amount of fats and if you see me, I look skinny like a stick. When I eat fats, I find myself with more energy, sleep welI and stay calm and have less craving for snack and sweet stuff. I check my blood pressure twice a day and do blood test every 3 months. All of my vital signs including cholesterol, A1C are good.

                      Now what I differ with the ketogenic crowd is that I eat carb, in particular healthy carb. I don’t consider vegetables as carb and I eat as much as I can. I watch my intake of fruits, grain, seed, rice, nut, wheat, etc. because they are carb.

                      Anyway, ketogenic diet has been practiced for longer than half a century and there is nothing new.




                      0
                    7. Lonie, ketogenic diet is nothing new. It has been used to cure epilepsy by *** medical institutions *** for more than half a century. Just recently there are more researches toward the treatment of cancer, diabetes and other metabolic diseases. The link I made above used lab rats but trials on humans have been made but I don’t have time to look for it but you can easily google for it.

                      Really? I thought I had stumbled upon ground-breaking news! (sarcasm ‘-)

                      To be fair to Thea, I don’t read your links either Jerry, just the one to answer a challenge from another poster. This stuff is old science, even when done anew.

                      What’s coming is where health and longevity schools of thought no longer bifurcate.




                      1
                    8. Lonie, since you have a very curious mind, for good or bad :), I will give you more pointer to read. Google for “bone broth detox glycine fasting”. The theory is that fasting from time to time is good because it wakes up your immune system, but you will deprive yourself of nutrition during fasting. And so what you do is you fast but you consume bone broth during that time. Because bone broth will provide you with all the nutrients and at the same time, the amino acids somehow fool your body into thinking that you are completely fasting when you are not. I know that bone broth is not vegan but we are discussing nutrition here.

                      The other method is intermittent fasting, i.e. you never fast and you eat your 3 meals as usual but the period of time between your dinner and breakfast is 10-12 hours or more. That will also fool your body that you are fasting when you are not. I practice this every weekend by eating dinner early and eat breakfast late the next day because I don’t have to work. Dr Mercola practices intermittent every day by eating dinner at 4:00PM and eats nothing until 6:00AM the next day.




                      0
                    9. Thea, not sure if I am posting directly under your post so I will copy and paste the first sentence from yours to show what I’m answering.

                      Lonie: OK, here’s the short version: Are you claiming that eating a ketogenic diet (high fat/low carb) has been shown to have the same health impacts on humans as actually fasting (abstaining from food)?

                      Here’s how Longo’s study operates.

                      When you fast for the 3 1-2 to 4 day period, your body switches from burning glucose to fat. It takes about that long to burn up all the glucose. When the switch is complete, the liver converts fat into energy in the form of ketone bodies very quickly. (The glucose takes longer to convert to energy as the transformation occurs in the gut.)

                      Once the conversion is complete, the body is starved of glucose related products and things like cancer, which is glucose dependent becomes starved of fuel to grow and metastasize.

                      Something else that happens is your body begins eating old parts that are no longer operating as usual, your white blood cells for instance. After the fasting is done, you refeed and reform any and all organs that have shrunk (I was unaware about the organs until I watched the Ted X Talk Susan posted.) You essentially go back to normal feeding.

                      In the past I preferred to continue with the ketone bodies for fuel approach by including a lot of MCT oil in my diet along with Walnut oil… the Walnut oil added because I read that it works to prevent IGF-1 activity… something Longo stressed is important in preventing or stopping cancer as it is a cancer adjunct. I sincerely believe the ketone bodie approach has been a huge plus mentally.

                      I changed from a fasting approach after reading about and then joining a study where a young person’s plasma is transfused into a patient to replenish said patient with younger versions of proteins that instruct a person’s circulating stem cells to properly repair a body’s organs that are not operating as they did when young. It has been determined that this change from good proteins to bad occurs around age 35. The plasma transfused is from donors aged 16 to 25.

                      After this treatment, I made sure I got plenty of protein and other nutrients to ensure the new plasma-induced proteins had plenty of nourishment to do their job of instructing my stem cells how to do their job.

                      I still ensure I get enough of the MCT/Walnut oil fats in my diet to continue some ketone bodies production, I’m not sure I would qualify as being on a ketone diet.

                      Apologies for the long post. To quote Mark Twain, “If I had had more time, I would have written less.”

                      Lucky for you I left out a bunch of detail. ‘-)




                      1
                    10. Lonie, since you have a very curious mind, for good or bad :), I will give you more pointer to read. Google for “bone broth detox glycine fasting”

                      Jerry, thanks for the suggestion but I gave up any idea of beef bone broth (and beef as well) back during the Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (mad cow) scare.

                      I continued abstaining from red meat after learning that red meat animals contain a sugar molecule that humans do not have, and eating red meat causes our bodies to react by making anti-bodies that continually cause inflammation. I’m assuming this sugar molecule is found in the bone as well.

                      To me, holding down inflammation is key to good health.




                      0
    3. Why are you excluding fish, especially if it is the freshest. I’m a fisherman and eat what I catch, and rarely eat beef. Chicken yes and pork once in awhile in moderation. Love fruit and veges too.




      2
      1. Exactly.

        Don’t listen to those biased opinions. Meat eating does not equate non PF eating. In fact, you and I probably eat more PF than a lot of so called vegans.




        0
  5. There is no doubt that lifestyle changes can reverse or slow down prostate cancer among other cancers and other diseases. However it is wrong to accuse animal foods for causing it. In fact, Asians do eat a lot of meat and fat and it is a myth that they don’t. However, they also eat a variety of other foods including plant foods. It’s the combination of all of those foods that make them healthy. You don’t need a lot of researches to know what they eat but just travel overseas and see from your own eyes what people eat. In fact, you can visit any Asian or ethnic restaurants in the U.S. to see what people eat. They do eat almost the same thing overseas.

    As the video mentioned, at the heart of a lot of diseases are bad fats that cause inflammation. Bad Omega 6 is one and it is not in whole and fresh animal foods as the video indicated. Bad Omega 6 is only in processed foods and in fact is in a lot of plant foods such as vegetable oil.

    Now you have to distinguish between good Omega 6 from bad Omega 6. Good Omega 6 is in CLA and is present in natural grown animal meat and it is actually beneficial.

    Now you can get a load of bad Omega 6 by eating plant foods alone such as vegetable oil and peanut, so don’t be complacent that since you eat plant foods then it’s all OK. This nutrition(-facts) site tend to oversimplify things. I feel sorry for a lot of vegans who thrive to be healthy and ethical and yet they eat the wrong foods and get as much inflammation as the people eating a SAD diet.

    http://180degreehealth.com/omega-6-content-common-foods/

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2846864/




    0
    1. Jerry Lewis, You need to read The China Study. T Colin Campbell’s very comprehensive research throughout China, done before they made westernized changes in their traditional diets, started with a map prepared by the Chinese government of the entire country showing that certain areas had a lot of cancer, often a specific type of cancer, where others had little or no cancer. The research bore out the fact that the areas with a lot of cancer ate a lot more meat and other animal protein than the areas with little or no cancer.

      Campbell had many years of laboratory proof under his belt by the time he and others did that study. He had already shown in lab rats and mice that animal protein stimulated cancer. He could turn cancer growth OFF in the rats that already had it simply by reducing their protein consumption to 5% of calories. When he fed them 20% protein diets, the cancer grew back and killed them. He had also already determined through his lab studies that plant protein didn’t stimulate cancer growth. Animal protein did.

      People in China have rapidly increased their consumption of animal protein over the last 10 or 20 years, eating a more westernized diet than was traditional. In just the last few years their diabetes rate has jumped from something like 2% to 12%, and heart disease and other western diseases are rapidly making the Chinese people as sick as we are.




      18
      1. Wrong, so wrong. You only read books that only simply look at one aspect of other culture diets. In fact, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Asians in general, Mediterranean cultures, French, Belgian, Jewish people, etc. have been eating a variety of foods for ages including meat, fats, dairy, organ meat, bones. fruits, vegetables, legumes, grain, herb, mushroom, etc. and there is nothing new and they always have healthy long life. Lately their longevity has improved tremendously due to better nutrition in term of more protein and other nutrients, and better hygiene and better prevention of infectious diseases. Life expectancy has increased and not decreased. Don’t say that they live longer but sick because it is not true.

        In the old days, our idea in the Western world about eating vegetables is to eat the lousy lettuce and cucumber and uncooked tomatoes (which is not absorbable). It is just recently that we ate more varieties of vegetables and herbs that our health improved, but then we zoomed in incorrectly on just the plant foods part of other culture diet and then we created this mythology about China and Okinawan diets that have nothing to do with what people in the rest of the world actually eat.

        Rather that keep daydreaming about imaginary diets, just book your travel overseas on your next vacation and see it from your own eyes what people actually eat.




        1
    2. @Jerry Lewis,

      >>> Asians do eat a lot of meat and fat and it is a myth that they don’t.
      Why do you group all Asians together? There are many different countries/cultures/diets. I lived in Japan for more than two years and ate lunch with a group of Japanese almost every work day, as well as socialized with them in the evenings. Compared to what Americans eat, they certainly did not “eat a lot of meat”. You really should be more precise in your claims.

      Note too that prostate cancer rates have been rising in Japan. Cf.
      https://academic.oup.com/jjco/article/35/11/690/943051/Comparison-of-Prostate-Cancer-Mortality-in-Five

      “However, ASRs [“age standardized mortality rates: DJ] in Japan have been constantly and dramatically increasing from 1960 to 2000, and the difference
      in ASRs between Japan and the other four countries have recently diminished.”

      Hmmm, wonder what that corresponds to?




      14
      1. OK so just not to argue about semantics and statistics because both you and I don’t have, the fact that you said that Asians eat meat and fat right? So if it is a poison, then does it make a poison anyway if you eat a little or a lot? Does it make any difference if you smoke one cigarette per day versus 10?

        Just go to YouTube and look up for guys and gals who eat out in various countries in the world and you will see in real life without having to travel.

        In fact, the vision of Asians munching on sweet potato is down racist and biased.




        0
  6. I don’t know whether Jerry Lewis is just a poorly informed guy who isn’t nearly as smart as he thinks he is and refuses to learn, or whether he’s an industry flack paid to visit sites like this and sow misinformation. Either way, he’s best ignored. In fact, it would be an upgrade to this website if there were a way to put posters like him on “ignore”. His posts are entirely predictable and add nothing to the discussion.




    24
    1. That’s a good idea. On another forum I visit enough downvotes completely dims out the post in question. That would be the best way to get rid of obvious trolls and meat industry flacks here. I’m all for contrarion views and devil’s advocates, but come with legitimate research and links to back up your claims.




      12
      1. Dimming the post – I guess that means lightening the font color – based on up/down vote ratio is a very interesting idea. I think shrinking the font size might be even better; that way if someone actually _wanted_ to read the post, they could by increasing the font size (Ctrl Shift + ). Also, I think it would be more, um, satisfying to see the text shrink away.




        1
  7. This is why you hear people completely cure cancer going fully plant based, no processed foods, no sugar, and lots of juicing. But don’t look for help from your Oncologist, they only offer 3 options, chemo, radiation, and surgery. There’s simply too much money at play in conventional treatments, for a patient to get an honest deal / assessment. It’s not at all a surprise, the book “Radical Remission” notes cases like this have been fully cured, but completely ignored by the industry / Oncologist.

    All the good doctors have to move out of the country so they can practice alternative medicines and give nutritional advice without losing their licence. Some options to look into if you are dealing with cancer: documentary “Healing cancer from the inside out”, web site: ChrisBeatCancer has some good information, and Hippocrates Health Institute.




    4
  8. Hi Dr G/ guys at Nutrition facts! I really do love you guys, but I always get upset by hidden dangers of things like spirrulina or licourice root!! I was just wanting to ask a question firstly is it safe for me to start taking chlorella and secondly i know the aim is to stay away from any sort of supplements but, is a whole food supplement, such as synergy, safe to take, helpful? And what if any supplements do you recommend? Thanks so much!!

    Asa




    0
  9. Why is it you never hear anyone tell cancer patients to up their meat intake? Not even the highly touted grass-fed beef? Not one of these paleo advocates can point to any study that shows that upping meat intake halts cancer progression or reverses heart disease.




    3
  10. What I find really crazy is how even people with advanced prostate cancer are unwilling to change their diets. They prefer the risk of castration to eating broccoli, apricots, and beans!! This is just crazy.




    6
    1. Real men eat meat. The realest men go out and hunt animals. Who needs balls when you can eat meat and hunt. Give me a ball-less hunter any day. Put them in high heels and hand them a double-barrel. Fun for everybody.




      4
    2. a lot of it is the doctor not telling them to change. the doctor may think the patient doesn’t want to hear it, or won’t follow any dietary approach. post heart attack dietary advice from doctors maybe limited to a “eat a heart healthy diet” on a preprinted sheet




      0
  11. Diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer at age 52 with lesion in my thoracic spine….combined conventional treatment with vegan diet…. 15 years have passed and I still have just one thoracic lesion !




    9
      1. You can’t blind or placebo-control dietary trials. People know what they’re eating.

        You can randomize patients into groups that get nutritional guidance and those that receive “normal care” which is what these studies do.




        2
      2. Daniel,

        Although you can double blind the patients and experimenters with some products, foods, especially a wfpb group are notoriously problematic.

        Obviously most folks know the differences and in the case of the studies quoted no they were not double blinded or placebo based. How would you teach a lifestyle change of diet and have any ability to make it a placebo ? I can think of some very inhumane and immoral methods but we have laws to stop that form of abuse.

        I suspect you’re asking because your doc or someone has suggested that only a double-blinded placebo study has reality. BS to that concept… see this article to start the conversation: the-trouble-double-blind-placebo-studies and then I have to ask the obvious…. without the full understanding of the methods and processes used why would you think the answer is valid in all cases. We (all of us) extrapolate some of the information from a single or just a limited set of studies, which ultimately can be VERY deceptive.

        I love the “lack” of bias when I read some of the food industry studies which result in laughter when you read the methods section. What would the outcome be if the design was so ridiculously obvious that the results are a duhhhhh…. but it’s double blinded and placebo based…..and quoted often with great branding….. so what !

        I would contend that reading the WHOLE story and using the best available tools, including the double blind, placebo based studies is in order.

        For you info: in the first one quoted:

        MATERIALS AND METHODS:
        Patient recruitment was limited to men who had chosen not to undergo any conventional treatment, which provided an unusual opportunity to have a nonintervention randomized control group to avoid the confounding effects of interventions such as radiation, surgery or androgen deprivation therapy. A total of 93 volunteers with serum PSA 4 to 10 ng/ml and cancer Gleason scores less than 7 were randomly assigned to an experimental group that was asked to make comprehensive lifestyle changes or to a usual care control group.

        The second video’s methods:

        MATERIALS AND METHODS:
        We enrolled 10 men and their partners in a 4-month group-based diet and MBSR intervention. A pre-study post-study design in which each subject served as his own control was used to compare the rate of increase in and doubling time of PSA before and after intervention.

        Dr. Alan Kadish moderator for Dr. Greger <a href




        1
    1. This is a case of taking too much vitamin B, in particular vitamin B9 or folic acid. I often see this kind of articles that try to give a bad name to supplements when they give too much to the laboratory rats and then conclude that a certain supplement causes cancer. I suspect the same thing happened to the arsenic scare in rice.

      Big pharma wants you to take drugs rather than supplements (and the cholesterol scare is to get you to take statin drug, but I divert to a different subject).

      Anyway, vitamin B12 is essential in reasonable dosage and you cannot get enough through foods given the state of our soil and in particular if you are a vegan, vitamin B9 or folate is better obtained through foods.




      0
    2. It is restricted to smokers who take high dose of vitamin B.

      “As far as the magnitude of the association, I think you could characterize our reaction as concerned; especially if you consider how common these supplements are. That said, our findings were specific to men who smoked.”
      Theodore Brasky, Ph.D.

      He went on to explain that the “use of combustible tobacco is a far more important factor in lung cancer development in both men and women.” Vitamins B-6 and B-12 may just “hasten or increase the likelihood of lung carcinogenesis among male smokers.”




      0
      1. This same thing happened to Vitamin A a few decades ago. I personally heard people say they would avoid Vitamin A whether they smoked or not, after reading or hearing about the study.

        Pity because in non smokers, the Vitamin A is safe to take as a supplement. And recently I read that Vitamin A is of high importance to our generating stem cells in our body.

        Many trillions of stem cells may have been harmed due to the results of that study not being made clear.




        0
    3. Hi Udai,

      I am a volunteer for Dr. Greger. Thank you so much for your question.

      This study has definitely had people talking a lot lately. Since this study was done on lung cancer, the only recommendation that can be made from this study (besides more research) is that men (since no association was found in women) that smoke should take caution about how much vitamin B supplementation they get. But really, the recommendation, as it has been for 50 years now, is to quit smoking. This study does not provide any evidence that vitamin B supplementation increases the risk of lung cancer or any cancer in non-smoking individuals.

      I hope this helps clear up some of the confusion!




      3
  12. When diets are replete in arachidonic acid from animal products (especially grain-fed), rather little linoleic acid appears to undergo elongation to arachidonic acid. We know long term adherence to vegetarian diets reduces the arachidonic acid status somewhat, but I haven’t seen any study looking at arachidonate/eicosapentanoate status as a function of dietaty linoleate/α-linolenate in vegans.

    2011: Increasing dietary linoleic acid does not increase tissue arachidonic acid content in adults consuming Western-type diets: a systematic review
    2017: Consumption of red meat, but not cooking oils high in polyunsaturated fat, is associated with higher arachidonic acid status in Singapore Chinese adults
    1990: Reduced arachidonate in serum phospholipids and cholesteryl esters associated with vegetarian diets in humans




    3
  13. To the Administrators of this Site:

    If I am not mistaken, there is an agreement and understanding about “overposting” on this site. This . . .as near as I can understand, . . . . is designed to keep individuals who are not authentically interested in honest and serious dialogue, with good will toward good understanding from dominating the conversation. I have noticed that others tend to post when the Jerry Lewis dialogue is not going on. I am bringing this up because it is my feeling that Jerry Lewis has become such an inflammatory and disruptive voice on this site that others cannot chime in.
    I, for one, enjoyed the site much more when others, who had sincere questions and concerns, could post more.

    I respectfully ask the Administrators of this site to look at this caustic aspect of posting and find a way to deal with it. It might be that you put limits on how many times a person can post on a given topic each day. Or . . some other solution, . . I don’t know.

    But I am interested in viewing these videos because of the excellent information and science that this site offers up. I am also finding, however, that when there is a personality on this site that becomes verbally dominant and bullying, I find that I am less willing to watch your videos and engage in the information and science that this site affords. It’s is akin to having to dig through piles of snow to get to one’s front door. Too much effort and energy to get to the genuine and heartfelt conversations.

    NutritionFacts.org has a caustic and cancerous personality on this site. It is doing harm to those who really want to dialogue with each other to help and support each other. While we ALL realize that there will always be others who see things differently than this site, there are other sites to support these different perspectives where those who believe those ideas can find support. That is not the case here.

    I am asking NutritionFacts.Org to ban Jerry Lewis from this site so that those of us who would like to have a more supportive dialogue can go forward. I know I am not the only one wading through gobs of JL scrofola-posts to get to the conversations I prefer to have.
    Please consider this.
    Thank you.




    12
    1. Rachel,

      Thank you for your message and support. I hope the comments section or any particular user will not dissuade you from continuing to watch the videos regardless of any comments users may be making. As far as I am able to see, there is no particular rule against “overposting” or for sharing opinions and information contrary or in disagreement to the information presented on the website or by any users, as long as the Comment Etiquette I am sharing below is followed, which can be found at the top of each comment section. All users are encouraged to share their thoughts and information related to the content as they wish. With regard to this, we don’t think a ban is justified for that user.

      “The intention of the comment section under each video and blog post is to allow all members to share their stories, questions, and feedback with others in a welcoming, engaging, and respectful environment. Off-topic comments are permitted, in hopes more experienced users may be able to point them to more relevant videos that may answer their questions. Vigorous debate of science is welcome so long as participants can disagree respectfully. Advertising products or services is not permitted.

      To make NutritionFacts.org a place where people feel comfortable posting without feeling attacked, we have no tolerance for ad hominem attacks or comments that are racist, misogynist, homophobic, vulgar, or otherwise inappropriate. Please help us to foster a community of mutual respect. Enforcement of these rules is done to the best of our ability on a case-by-case basis.”




      2
  14. To the Administration again –
    For interest, I counted up the number of times that Jerry Lewis posted on this one video-discussion. Of the 80 posts, 20 were from argumentative Jerry Lewis. 25%.
    We all know and understand JL has a different perspective and a different goal for his life. We ALL get that. But the difference here is that his behavior on this site is not respectful disagreement. His behavior is bullying and the opposite of meaningful dialogue. His behavior is one that attempts to be destructive to the genuine dialogue that is of interest to those who view these videos and would like to discuss them.
    I respectfully ask the Administration to intervene.




    11
    1. Rachel: I will personally pass your posts on to the staff. I made a similar plea some time ago, having determined that the poster in question does not bring honest, healthy debate. His posts do not meet (what used to be anyway) the intended use of the forum. Based on style and grammar, my guess is that this person is “Jimmy”, a poster who we banned back when I was doing full time volunteer moderating and who kept trying to get by the ban for months afterwards.

      I have not heard back from staff and thus have concluded that the rules for creating a healthy environment and banning that type of behavior are no longer being enforced. :-( That’s one of the reasons I quit doing the full time moderating.

      Maybe they will listen to you. Your posts are well articulated, and I love how you included some statistics. I’ll pass it on.




      7
      1. Thank you Rachel and Thea for speaking up. The situation is really deteriorating the credibility and design of this site. I no longer recommend the comment section to others as a resource for encouragement, inspiration and information … just too much garbage to plough through.
        I had the same thoughts on the identity of the person Thea, even months ago. The anger behind the posting is very telling. It’s a real shame that NF has allowed the situation to go on this long and I hope that it will be resolved quickly.




        4
    2. By all means… cut off debate! I fear this person with his well-linked arguments. I am afraid he will (gulp) change my thinking as I am weak and cannot resist being challenged.




      2
      1. Lonie: Honest debate and well-linked arguments are always welcome. That’s not what we get (on either account) with Jerry. You are missing the issue.




        2
        1. Actually, I do get YOUR issue. That is, you want an orderly pro-Plant BASED argument. Sycophants or easily persuaded lesser minds and testimonials welcome… no disruption please.

          But my observations are that disruption can lead to great changes that can move us all along a linear or even exponential path to better things.

          I’ve learned many things on both sides of the argument that I can take and adapt to my life… for the betterment of it.

          All I’m sayin’ is, trust the people to figure it out.




          2
          1. Lonie: Nope, your assumption about what I want for this site is completely wrong. You don’t know me at all. I find it helpful when people come to this site with challenging questions and their own arguments for non-plant based eating. I and others have engaged such people in dialog and find that kind of challenge personally stimulating and beneficial. Even better, that kind of dialog is a great way for people who are new to the site and and trying to learn to figure out what they think about the arguments. You and I completely agree on that part.

            However, that’s not what we get with Jerry. Again, you missing what the real issues are. This has nothing to do with ‘trust’ or having trouble dealing with challenges. Since the problems are not self-evident to you by this point, nothing I say will help clarify. I hear you that you think Jerry benefits the community. From the comments I’ve seen, you are very much in the minority.

            An idea for you: If you like the kinds of comments Jerry leaves, I think you would particularly enjoy the comments that are typically found on the youtube pages where these videos can also be found. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnC2OeDVJeM Something to look into.




            2
            1. All I’m sayin’ is that disruptors can be useful and if you will read ALL of Jerry’s comments, you will find he sometimes preaches moderation (admittedly, you have to be on your toes to learn that) although he has been at fault for posting in an adversarial manner at times.

              And speaking of disruptors… Dr. Greger is nonpareil.




              1
              1. Lonie: I’ve read ALL of Jerry’s comments. I understand in great detail what the guy is saying and thinking. Again, I feel you are completely missing the mark.

                I think we will have to leave it as one of those agree to disagree things.




                0
                1. Yes, agree to disagree, especially since I have learned more from Jerry’s posts than from yours. (No offense intended… just a score-keeping matter. ‘-)




                  2
                  1. I have two questions for you:

                    1. What exactly have you learned from Jerry Lewis’ posts?
                    2. Which sources that he cited helped convince you he was right?

                    I’d honestly like to know, especially since I’ve found many of his claims vague/overblown, poorly sourced or just counter to the preponderance of evidence.

                    Please enlighten me. That way we can compare views in a more objective fashion.




                    4
                    1. Sorry, not available to do research for you. However, I will give you one link that was a rebuttal to another post, that can save lives. The link is:

                      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5450454/

                      I’m especially fond of this one as it confirms something I’ve known since becoming acquainted with PhD Valter Luongo’s research in fasting as a way to inhibit cancer and as a way to destroy and recycle immune system cell trash (i.e., white blood cells) and rebuild immunity by replacing those cells with new ones.

                      It is my studied opinion that more can be accomplished in 3 1/2 to four days of fasting than in a year of plant based eating, though together they could make one almost indestructible.




                      2
                    2. Just to be clear, I meant multiple 3 1/2 to 4 day fasts over time. I personally did those type fasts during holidays. When others would feast, I would drop the e and fast.




                      3
                    3. hi Lonie,.. yes, Dr Valter Longo is terrific.. It was Rachel who first raised awareness on this site about his work in gerontology and posted links. I have since enjoyed watching a few of his youtube presentations (there’s a ted talk too ) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xgo5-5f3Q-Q&itct=CBMQpDAYASITCOXVmp7a-tUCFUTCfgodHxkMizIHcmVsYXRlZEii8vLq5vCnsyw%3D . Here’s a link for the ted talk https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVArDzYynYc&itct=CBUQpDAYACITCOXVmp7a-tUCFUTCfgodHxkMizIHYXV0b25hdkii8vLq5vCnsyw%3D




                      3
                  2. Oh dear! looks like we finally have a Tom & Jerry duet on here with their crappy irrelevant links! Small minds always end up snuggling to each other with a plate of deadly eggs for afters.




                    3
                    1. In reply to this comment: “It is my studied opinion that more can be accomplished in 3 1/2 to four days of fasting than in a year of plant based eating, though together they could make one almost indestructible.”

                      I have been following a plant-based diet for about a year. I have tried the fasting protocol, but had to stop. Why? Because by Day 2 of fasting my blood pressure would skyrocket to 175/100 or so. I tried this more than once, with the same result each time. On a WFPB diet, I was gradually able to resolve my hypertension and cease needing medication for it. For the record, for about 20 years before WFPB I was a paleo True Believer and followed a WFAB diet as much as possible. It may or may not have caused my hypertension but it certainly didn’t fix it. I’m not an absolutist about WFPB. Most of the Blue Zone people are not vegans and I suspect the occasional consumption of animal foods is a good way to prevent the zinc and B12 deficiencies that vegans are more at risk for, but I don’t claim to have a lot of evidence for that suspicion.

                      In addition to the hypothesis too much (whatever that means) dietary methionine may cause or aggravate prostate and other cancers, there’s the hypothesis that glycine may work to suppress it. The most abundant sources of dietary glycine are animal foods, especially gelatin, but that’s not to say there are no good plant sources. Watercress, for example, delivers a decent amount of glycine, in addition to being one all all-around hyper-nutritious food. If we find that a good way to control cancer is to work for a high glycine to methionine ratio, the best approach might be indeed be to curtail animal proteins and get liberal amounts of watercress. Spinach is another decent plant source of glycine, and I recall in another of Dr Greger’s videos that spinach is a power food against prostate and other cancers (along with garlic, orange bell peppers, and allspice, as I recall).




                      1
              2. Susan,

                THANK YOU so much for that link to the Ted X talk. So much better with the illustrations. I became acquainted with Luongo’s research after seeing the PBS documentary Eat, Fast, and Live. Searched him out on the web afterwards and I believe he is responsible for my apparently very good health to this point.

                Not to say there aren’t better options coming, because I believe there are… and not too far in the future.

                Most of the research being linked to on the boards is old school research. That is, they are just whipping the same old horses that researchers have been doing for years.

                The new researchers and ergo, new research is cutting edge. I seldom read links posted here because it is just the same ol’ same ol’. I have places to go to get the latest big thing.




                1
                1. You’re most welcome Lonie, and I’m delighted to hear you are applying some of his ideas to good effect on your health journey. I think it’s an exciting frontier in medicine, and he’s certainly passionate about his work. I have not actually bought the fasting mimicking diet products myself though I have applied similar priciples. For anyone interested, here is a short q & a about his diet ideas https://bluezones.com/2016/04/fasting-for-longevity/ I laughed at his recounting childhood memories of the green bean /other vegies/ pasta or bean salad that he complained about as a child. I have been living on something similar here because its what’s growing in the garden. Great stuff!




                  0
  15. Dear Dr. Greger and other knowledgeable people.
    What about men with metastatic prostate cancer?
    Any hope from the diet for those people?




    0
  16. Big mistake to end a fine video with the phrase “testicles chopped off”. How do you think prostate cancer sufferers will react to those words? How callous! I was going to send this video to my cousin to positively offer information on how he might extend his life with diet. But the phrase about getting his testicles chopped off was counterproductive to the goal of offering info to help people. Please edit the video to remove the disturbing ending.




    1
    1. Just copy, paste, & edit as you see fit for your cousin. Then send him a copy. Done! Sometimes guys need a little spark to get them motivated! I’m female & still enjoy Dr Greger’s sense of humor! Don’t ever change Doc!




      0
  17. Hi Lindsey,

    I am a volunteer for Dr. Greger. We genuinely appreciate your feedback, and apologize for any discomfort this video may have caused for you.

    Dr. Greger in no way intends to offend anybody with his videos. However, he does want to provide people with accurate and truthful information so that people understand the benefits of a healthy diet, but also the harsh reality of what typically happens to so many. There are some people that may find this offensive, but are many that appreciate Dr. Greger’s willingness to not beat around the bush. Unfortunately, it is extremely difficult to offer complete truths to people without offending a few along the way. Again, we apologize for the discomfort this video caused you, and hope that a few words of Dr. Greger’s message don’t prevent you from sharing this potential life saving information.

    Best wishes to you and your cousin on your journeys in health.




    0
  18. Greetings, i’m currently working on several health and natural remedy articles for my information website. my inquiry is to discover if i can site information from the book How Not To Die, and my other question is find out if i can promote the book and reference the link on my web page?

    thank you very much for all you guys do!




    0
    1. I don’t understand what you mean by “reserve”, but if you are asking about prevention or treatment, then the answer would likely be no, since HCM is a genetic disease of the heart muscle. That said, reducing the workload of the heart is part of the treatment for HCM which is accomplished with blood pressure lowering medications. A WFPB diet without added sodium can help accomplish this, therefore a WFPB diet would like support a doctor’s treatment regimen for HCM.

      Dr. Ben




      0
  19. Thank you for all of the work you do!! I was wondering about wine and sugar. I realize most are not vegan due to the filtering process. I also know that both can cause inflammation on their own. However, once filtered, is there any animal product left in the wine or sugar? Are they considered not vegan just from a humanitarian point of view? Or is there still animal product or protein left in wine or sugar making it even more inflammatory? I am a 1-month-old vegan and still finding my way. I want to be a true whole food, plant-based diet eater but think vegan is a baby step for me.
    Any help would be appreciated,
    Laura




    0
    1. I’m not sure what you’re referring to about the filtering process not being vegan, but wine is vegan as far as I know. Wine is nothing more than grape juice that has been fermented by non-animals to create ethanol and other by-products that are all vegan. Wine is anti-inflammatory, but its the juice components, not the ethanol that provide the benefits. That has been reviewed by Dr. Greger. I think this is the video: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/effects-of-avocados-and-red-wine-on-meal-induced-inflammation/

      Cheers,
      Dr. Ben




      0
  20. Greetings, i’m currently student working on several health and natural remedy articles for my information website. my inquiry is to discover if i can site information from the book How Not To Die, and my other question is find out if i can promote the book and reference the link on my web page?

    thank you very much for all you guys do!




    0
    1. Hi Josiah,

      Yes! You are able to cite and book and also link to it on your site (along with anything else from NutritionFacts.org, as long as it’s properly referenced!)




      0
  21. Hi,
    This is off topic, but i was referred to videos for my question(s) and this topic seems like the closest thing.

    I have a lipoma on my neck that is 11cm. or at least was 2 months ago. the concern is that it is close to my carotid. for the last two months, i’ve done a processed oil free diet in addition to detoxing with lemon, tumeric and apple cider vinegar. I also used a poultice of ww flour and honey for a few weeks. i’m a long time vegan as well. I did a 5 day juice fast recently. I’ve lost about 15 lbs in the last month.

    I’m hoping to avoid surgery and use holistic means if possible to shrink this. i’ve read a fair amount of reports that after surgery, lipomas come back. i’ve also received conflicting reports about losing weight affecting the size of a lipoma as well as losing weight will do nothing.

    Any input is greatly appreciated,
    Russell Fontenot




    0
    1. Russel and Jenel, it seems like both of you have done everything right with your diet. So a possible last remedy before surgery is the ketogenic diet.

      Disclaimer: I have no experience with this diet, nor personally know anyone who has tried, but I read a lot of articles about it.

      http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/03/19/metabolically-supported-therapies-cancer-treatment.aspx

      http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2006/06/27/how-to-virtually-eliminate-your-risk-of-lymphoma.aspx




      0
  22. Any research on lymphoma and diet? My husband is two rounds into treatment for diffuse B-cell non-Hodkins lymphoma, and we’re doing our best to be vegetarian, though not yet purely WFPB.




    0
  23. This Jerry Lewis asshole needs to get banned. He is clearly a troll who has no life but to disparage everything everyone on this site believes. In his sick mind he thinks that convincing us to eat meat will help us. What a deranged “paleo” freak




    3
  24. Very interesting articles on prostate ca. I’ve had the usual Lupron as well as Enzalutamide & Radium RA 223 shots, but nothing slows down the progression of the ca. All I’m hearing now is chemo, a short term fix. If diet will help, of course I’ll try. Any hope?




    0
    1. Wayne Matthews. before you go with the chemo or surgery route, you may want to try one more thing.

      So nutrition is obviously the key to prevention and possible cure of cancer and nobody denies it. But in some cases such as cancer in particular, you need extra help from supplementation. I have seen it working on my acquaintances and the prostate cacer tumor just shrinks.

      So those 2 supplements are RM-10 which is a cocktail of mushroom to boost your immune system, and Saw Palmelto. You can check on the comments and testimonials from people in the reviews section.

      https://www.amazon.com/Saw-Palmetto-Supplement-Prostate-Health/dp/B00XUZCSPC/ref=sr_1_4_s_it?s=hpc&ie=UTF8&qid=1504211624&sr=1-4&keywords=saw+palmetto

      https://www.amazon.com/Garden-Life-Organic-Fermented-Mushroom/dp/B000GWLGHI/ref=sr_ph_1_s_it?ie=UTF8&qid=1504211896&sr=sr-1&keywords=rm-10

      I am interested to know how it works out for you. I tell you, chemo is the last resort. Try this first before thinking about chemo. It will cost you less than $100 to try and there is absolutely no harm or side effects. Me and my family take RM-10 ourselves. We don’t take Saw Palmetto simply because none of us have PC, but if we do then we will take it.




      1
    2. Wayne, As one of the moderators for this site, I’m sorry to read of your struggles with prostate cancer resistant to treatment. You ask “Any hope?” referring to non-chemo treatment, I’m assuming. First, be wary of any advice to take supplements which have no evidence-based research supporting efficacy. Instead, since you have viewed the carefully-researched videos of NutritionFacts.org, I’d like you to consider there IS hope that transitioning to a plant-based whole food diet can affect your situation significantly whether you choose to undergo chemotherapy or not. If adopting this way of eating is new for you, do enlist support so you can be successful. Learn more so you can be confident you are indeed taking proactive measures to treat the cancer.
      There are no less than 12 videos on prostate cancer all linked using this Topic Summary: https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/prostate-cancer/
      Best of health as you deal with your condition.




      1
    3. I think there’s enough information out there to make a WFPB diet a reasonable option, no matter what other therapies you may have. And by all means check Dr Greger’s other videos on prostate cancer, where he mentions specific foods found to be more effective in fighting this particular form of cancer. Check the research yourself. For example, the spice allspice appears to be quite good. Garlic, spinach, and orange bell peppers are also very good. My view is that anything that might be helpful that carries zero risk is worth trying.

      In addition, have a look at this video: https://youtu.be/QrU1yrmNIqc I know there are people here who are opposed to vitamin supplementation in general, and D supplementation in particular, but I think this video is a very good example of “putting it to the test” in subjects whose prostate cancer has already led them to choose prostate removal, and the results are pretty striking. This isn’t just an observational study; it’s a controlled intervention trial.




      0
  25. In October 2016 my PSA tested 9.6. In October 2017 it tested 10.0.

    I understand the logic behind avoiding all cancer screenings but I have this information now and feel some weight of responsibility in knowing.

    Digital rectal exam indicated the prostate was enlarged appropriate with my age (63) but that there were no suspicious bumps.

    Do you feel that I would be negligent not to see a urologist who would surely want to biopsy?

    My diet is whole food plant-based. I avoid all vegetable oil as much as possible.




    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This