Spices Part II

more but this time it is Ginger;

An American study published in the British Journal of Nutrition reported: “Here, we show that whole ginger extract (GE) exerts significant growth-inhibitory and death-inductory effects in a spectrum of prostate cancer cells.”

The animal study conducted in 2011 at the Department of Biology, Georgia State University wanted to explore ginger’s use for prostate cancer based on the established anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-tumor properties of ginger.

The results were impressive, cutting tumors in half after eight weeks. They concluded that humans taking 100 grams (about 3.5 ounces) of fresh ginger daily may see the same benefits.

They discovered ginger extract interrupts cancer cell progression, impairs reproduction, and induces cancer cell apoptosis (self destruction). They also discovered that ginger is non-toxic to other non-cancerous cells, even rapidly dividing cells such as gut and bone marrow tissues.

Gunfighter , the JJ schtick was tounge in cheek.

Paul

of all the the supplements to choose from you got a winner with POM capsules - I've done some research and found these, I added the sources as well:

It's unfortunate that the pomegranate isn't a diet staple of the typical American man because an increasing amount of research suggests that pomegranate juice may help fight prostate cancer. The deep-red, sweet drink is rich in phytochemicals; in laboratory studies, phytochemicals have been shown to inhibit cancer growth and spread [source: Harvard Men's Health Watch, National Cancer Institute].


According to the National Cancer Institute's Web site, UCLA researchers currently are studying pomegranate juice as a way to slow or reverse PSA levels in men who've already been treated for prostate cancer and are trying to prevent its return. A phase II trial already has found that daily consumption of pomegranate juice resulted in a significant lengthening of the PSA doubling time, a measure that is a predictor of cancer progression and mortality. The scientists are now conducting a large-scale, Phase III study to verify their early findings [source: National Cancer Institute].

A daily glass of the crimson stuff may also be good for other things besides your prostate. The Harvard Men's Health Watch newsletter reported in 2007 that both animal and human studies suggest that pomegranate juice may help fight cardiovascular disease by preventing LDL -- the "bad cholesterol" -- from damaging your blood vessels, and by slowing the development of plaques in mice with atherosclerosis. Clinical studies also suggest that it may improve cardiac blood flow. But research also suggests that it may interfere with certain medications, so be sure to talk about that with your doctor [source: Harvard Men's Health Watch].

LupronJim - glad you brought sugar up - the nutrition doctor up here who lectures included references to the Healing Spices book also said cancer feeds on sugar. But as I mentioned I've been reading lots on cancer and this is what I found - the sources are added. These are not the corner plumbing repair and cancer cure shops, these are reputable sources.

Myth: People with cancer shouldn't eat sugar, since it can cause cancer to grow faster.

Fact: 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.

This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn't true. (source: Mayo Clinic )


Will eating sugar make my cancer worse?

No. Although research has shown that cancer cells consume more sugar (glucose) than normal cells, no studies have shown that eating sugar will make your cancer worse or that, if you stop eating sugar, your cancer will shrink or disappear. However, a high-sugar diet may contribute to excess weight gain, and obesity is associated with an increased risk of developing several types of cancer. For more information, see the NCI fact sheet onObesity and Cancer Risk. ( source: National Cancer Institute )



Sugar and cancer

Over the past few years, there have been reports, e-mails and websites that say eating sugar feeds cancer or that sugar makes cancer grow faster. All cells in your body consume sugar as they grow and divide, but eating sugar does not make cancer cells grow faster.

Sugar is found naturally in fruit, vegetables, milk and honey. It is also added to other foods like soft drinks, juice drinks, desserts and condiments to make them sweeter.
Every cell in your body requires sugar (glucose) for energy. Your body can also store sugar to use as energy later. Your body needs this sugar to function normally. Because we consume thousands of dietary components every day, it is difficult to understand the links between diet and cancer.

What we do know is that Canadians eat a lot of sugar every day. Eating lots of foods that have sugar added means you are more likely to put on weight. Research shows that being overweight or obese increases your risk of cancer. Being obese may cause changes in hormone levels. Changes to sex hormones or insulin might increase the risk of developing breast, colon or uterine cancer. A healthy body weight will be different for everyone, so check with your doctor about what a healthy body weight is for you. (source; Canadian Cancer Society )

Ed

Ed,

The overblown stories of sugar causing cancer or of curing cancer by avoiding sugar are dangerous because they may tempt the uninformed, the desperate and those easily influenced to forgo sensible treatments in the mistaken belief that they can cure their advanced cancers by cutting back on their Twinkie consumption. In order to offset these over-the-top claims the medical powers-that-be issue simple, clear denials of the unsubstantiated claims. The problem is that those rebuttals, in order to speak clearly and simply, tend to ignore the evidence that suggests that the answers to such questions are not as simple as either side of the debate may claim.

A number of the statements that you quote above are not, technically, true. The majority of the cells in the body, for instance, can get by fine with little or no glucose. The same energy pathways can be fed by fatty acids, either from dietary fat or from that released from fat stores in the body. There are a few cell types that do, in fact, require glucose but their needs can me met by the liver which has a limited ability to convert proteins to glucose.

Also more complicated than the Mayo Clinic or the Canadian Cancer Society let on is the question of whether a lack of glucose in the blood can slow the growth of tumors. The evidence from mouse xenograft research (where diet is easier to control than in human cancer patients) is making it more and more clear that it can. See ...

The Effect of Carbohydrate Restriction on Prostate Cancer Tumor Growth In a Castrate Mouse Xenograft Model

and

Carbohydrate Restriction, Prostate Cancer Growth, and the Insulin-Like Growth Factor Axis

So, depending on what your nutrition doctor said in her lectures, she might have a point.

Nothing about this stuff is ever simple. That is the only simple truth to be found.

The "kill cancer by eating no sugar" theory gripes me more than pom-mania. I had a good friend who was dying of esophageal cancer. His new (and last) med oncologist preached that he had to remove all sugar from his diet. He was near the end, already grossly underweight, weak, and sometimes had cognitive issues. He did that, and it left him desperately craving anything sweet, and not sleeping for nightmares that the sugar grains were killing him.

He died a couple of weeks later. He was already gone. The doctor did him no palliative good by the sugar tirade.

So I am already strongly biased when anyone preaches the "no sugar" line.

To clarify, I believe that eating a balanced, heart-healthy diet is a good thing.

I was making the point that used incorrectly, the specific sugar argument caused pain to a friend who did not need more of that.

Just so no one takes it wrong.

I don't believe the Mayo Clinic or other prestigious research centers are saying No to sugar - the way I read most of the quoted source positions is that sugar by itself does not "feed" cancer.

I also agree with you 142 - a balanced diet is crucial to good health, to me it is just as important as going out in the fresh air on a hike. Although you may not agree pomegranate seems to have a promising future in fighting prostate cancer -- take a look at this http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/featured/trials/ucla-0507059-02

What ever your opinion on sugar though - you have to admit we have WAY too much sugar in our diets. My daughter became intolerant to some foods a couple of years ago. We began reading the labels a lot closer - I was amazed at how much sugar is added to our foods. Do you all know that the dairy industry wants to add sugar to our milk now? Milk by the way already has a natural glucose in it. I was quite surprised at how sweet milk tasted was when I was able to eat again.

RobertC - in my readings tumeric, ginger, basil, cumin, chile and cinnamon are often mentioned as cancer fighters. Some researchers have gone so far as to say some spices kill cancer cells.
I'll have to look up and read that Anti cancer book you referenced.

RobertDisAbelard - please bear in mind the paragraphs I quoted are excerpts from the on line articles I've read. There is probably quite a bit more data to support those quoted positions. I would hope that during their research they looked at all possibilities, for example the effects of no sugar, regular sugar, or too much sugar on both healthy and cancerous cells

others have said this and I fully support it - you have to keep an open mind. Keep an open mind for this one: dark chocolate is not only good for you but has shown to be reduce the risk of some cancers.

couple of downsides to that one though - 1) even 2 years after my radiation treatments I can hardly taste chocolate now and 2) further down in that article there was a paragraph titled Evidence Against - I elected not to read that since I hope to one day regain all my taste buds and can tell my wife See its good for me and also I'll have another glass of red wine please

For total disclosure from a mod, yes, I drink pom juice in the morning (replaced the devil's OJ that fires off my incontinence), alternate days with tart cherry for my gout.

If it works, it isn't obvious, and it tastes like crap (in my opinion).

Some articles on sugar from a Harvard oncologist...

www.integrativeoncology-essentials.com/?s=sugar