Nutrition & Prostate Cancer Virtual Presentation - Mon July 31, 8pm EDT

Ok , here is a dumb question , of the many things in our diet that are bad for us and good for PC - sugar comes out as one of the top contenders.

If we are monitoring sugar in our blood with regular tests and keep it on the lowest our body can function with - say 85 ( 80-100 is normal range - how would it matter what we eat from sugar intake point of view.

If PC needs more sugar than other cells would it anyhow take it from our blood and leave the rest of the cells depleted or would less sugar in the blood reduce its growth or in some cases make PC morph into more resistant cancer.

The presentation and slide deck are now available; please go to either of these URL's:
https://www.ancan.org/prostate-cancer
https://www.ancan.org/recorded-calls

Onward & upwards, rd

Ardeee
So there will not be a transcript? Something earlier implied to me there might be, much better for me if there is, but no complaints. Many thanks for your great volunteer work.

ardeee,

Please do not solicit funding for another site in posts here.

HW also has bills to pay.

ddyss asks:

" . . . of the many things in our diet that are bad for us and good for
PC - sugar comes out as one of the top contenders. If we are monitoring sugar
in our blood with regular tests and keep it on the lowest our body can function
with - say 85 ( 80-100 is normal range - how would it matter what we eat from
sugar intake point of view. If PC needs more sugar than other cells, would it
anyhow take it from our blood and leave the rest of the cells depleted or would
less sugar in the blood reduce its growth or in some cases make PC morph into
more resistant cancer."

This is actually a great question that very few people appreciate. The liver and
pancreas are going to maintain glucose levels. Trying to control blood glucose is
not going to make an impact on cancer progression. The keys that unlock the
door for glucose entry to all cells lies in "insulin" and "insulin growth factor" receptors.

Cancer cells have many more insulin receptors (and IGFs) than benign cells. PCa cells
have many times as many insulin receptors than normal prostate cells.
Consumption of "fast" carbs (high glycemic Index foods) will cause an insulin
response, with cancer cells getting more than their share. A lot of fast carbs,
especially on an empty stomach, will cause an insulin spike. Normal cells
will be saturated , and the "surplus" insulin and insulin growth factor will go to
cancer cells. It is the "spikes" that do the most damage. That is why "juicing" fruit
does not work. That is why starting the day with OJ and/or coffee with sugar does
not work. This is why exercise does work. Exercise increases insulin sensitivity,
so the body needs less insulin in responding to food.

It's actually much more complex than above, e.g. insulin and IGFs are important for health,
but "spikes" go to cancer and they impact proliferation, cell division (mitosis) cell death
(apoptosis), all in a negative way.


ddyss says . . ."or in some cases make PC morph into more resistant cancer."

Another interesting point. I believe that using extreme "drugs" will likely result in a resistant
PCa mutation. I have no desire, at this point, to try to wipeout my PCa. I'm fine with coexistence.
So, for me it's food, supplements only if I have to, and drugs only if nothing else works.

I fully understand that others "have" to go to drugs quickly. I consider myself fortunate that
my PCa is responding to diet and exercise.

Cashless

Cashless, if you pursue this, and speak to DR (?) Burnham, it would be great if you could report back to us if you learn anything new.

Cigafred, the slides that you can download are very useful, and very specific.

Ardee, just curious, does Greta do phone consults with non USCF patients? (For compensation, of course)

not sure I agree .... this is a discussion I have been having with Bill.

ddyss said...
Cashless
the depth of your understanding is unbelievable - thanks for sharing - now the tough part on how to get the discipline to follow through.

Ardee
Thanks for starting the thread , would live to connect with you on the topic , I'll be reaching out to you via email

I actually would love to understand the different viewpoints on this one... wish it didn't go to email.

Also, I understand the evidence that implicates insulin-like growth factor signaling in the growth and survival of cancer cells. What I think would -really- help is a instruction book that we can follow along... yes, it's hard to move to a new diet from a habit standpoint, but it's monumentally harder if you don't know where the pitfalls are...

If I went strictly VEGAN, and removed intake off all artificial sugar, and reduced volume of natural sugar without food --- would that fall into your diet regiment Cashless?

-Zzarth

I would like to seek opinions on insulin production vs PROSTATE cancer.

It has been pointed out at this forum in the past that PC is different from most cancers regarding the "cancers love sugar" concept. It is said this is why certain scans for PC have to be different than other scans that use sugar, which will cause the cancer cells to "light up" as they hog the sugar in the scan. But PC cells won't do that so the scan has to be different. I'm not stopping to look any of this up, and I am just throwing a very generalized memory of what I have heard before out there, counting on correction if I am wrong. So is the above description more or less correct? IOW, PC cancer is different from other cancers when it comes to being a hog for sugar? Right or wrong?

But assuming the above is correct, that leads to my real question: what about insulin? I have read many a claim over the last 20 years that insulin(and/or insulin like growth factor) is a major factor in stimulating the growth of cancer cells. In fact, I have seen a few studies indicating it might be one of the MOST important factor, with higher insulin levels showing 8 times more cancer growth. ( I do not remember if these were test tube/in vitro, animal or human tests and don't have time to research it right now). So, the question is: even if sugar is not a big factor in PCa, is insulin still a major factor in growth of PCa cells?

Because, if so, the more sugar (net carb) input, the higher the blood insulin, assuming the person's pancreas is capable of producing large amounts of insulin. In fact, one definition of the insulin resistance that goes hand in hand with type 2 diabetes is that the pancreas is still producing lot's of insulin, but the blood sugar still runs high, because the cells have become resistant to the constant bombardment of all this insulin. Many pre-diabetics are in an insulin resistant state, with high blood insulin but blood sugars that are not all that high.

If very little net carbs are being consumed, then insulin production tends to plummet. Insulin is still produced in fair quantities in response to protein, but so is glucagon, which is sort of an anti-insulin, countering many of the negative effects. But insulin production in response to fat is virtually zero. Hence, when I last checked, any of the lower carb, higher fat diet approaches will lead to significantly lower blood insulin measurements, and obviously a ketgenic diet will result in very low insulin- even if fasting blood sugar is not much altered. But will these lower blood insulin levels be a benefit in the fight against PCa, as some are claiming clearly helps with other cancers? Like the 20 year survivor of brain cancer mentioned earlier? I have no doubt there are many health benefits to keeping blood insulin levels low, but does it actually help fight against PCa?
(type 2 diabetes=T2D)
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3826507/

Somebody said...
In studies that have evaluated well-formulated very-low-carbohydrate diets and documented high rates of compliance in individuals with T2D, results have been nothing short of remarkable. Bistrian et al.32 reported withdrawal of insulin and major weight loss in a matter of weeks in T2D individuals who were fed a very-low-calorie and -carbohydrate diet. Gumbiner et al.33 fed obese T2D individuals two types of hypocaloric (650 kcal) diets for 3 weeks, they were matched for protein but one was much lower in carbohydrate content (24 vs 94 g/day). As expected, the lower-carbohydrate diet resulted in significantly greater levels of circulating ketones (∼3 mmol/l), which was strongly associated with a lower hepatic glucose output. Interestingly, there was a strong inverse correlation between circulating ketones and hepatic glucose output, suggesting that higher levels of ketones are associated with more favourable effects on glycaemic control in diabetics. More recently, Boden et al.34 performed an in-patient study in obese T2D individuals who were fed a low-carbohydrate (<20 g/day) diet for 2 weeks. Plasma glucose fell from 7.5 to 6.3 mmol/l, haemoglobin A1c decreased from 7.3 to 6.8% and there were dramatic improvements (75%) in insulin sensitivity.....................Although significant reductions in fat mass often results when individuals restrict carbohydrate, the improvements in glycaemic control, haemoglobin A1c and lipid markers, as well as reduced use or withdrawal of insulin and other medications in many cases, occurs before significant weight loss occurs. Moreover, in isocaloric experiments individuals with insulin resistance showed dramatically improved markers of metabolic syndrome than diets lower in fat.27 It is interesting in this respect that a recent extremely large epidemiological study reported that diabetes risk is directly correlated, in an apparently causative manner, with sugar intake alone, independently of weight or sedentary lifestyle.38

In summary, individuals with metabolic syndrome, insulin resistance and T2D (all diseases of carbohydrate intolerance) are likely to see symptomatic as well as objective improvements in biomarkers of disease risk if they follow a well-formulated very-low-carbohydrate diet. Glucose control improves not only because there is less glucose coming in, but also because systemic insulin sensitivity improves as well.

Pratoman said...
This is all very interesting, confusing, and frustrating, at the same time.
Considering the above, I've also read I don't recall where, but in multiple places, that SATURATED fat is not a good thing for PCa patients.
So no carbs, no fat, no nuttin'!
I'm almost tempted to just say f*88 it, I'm gonna just eat what I want. (but I know better). Seems like it's just a matter of pick your poison.

Ive got a problem with fasting BG. It is always between 105-115. After 12 hour or more fasts. In fact the last two days, I've really tamped down, zero added sugar, zero fruit, zero food intake after 8pm.
And this morning upon awakening, my BG was 112.
I've had my HBa1c tested multiple times and it's always been under 5, so I'm not prediabetic. And over the course of the day BG drops. When I get home from work, a few hours after having a salad with olive oil, maybe a soup. Maybe some grilled chicken or shrimp, for lunch, BG is always between 76 and 81.

Can't figure it out. But I'm wondering if years ago, walking around goth high triglycerides in the 300's might have permanently damaged my pancreas. And I wonder how this might affect my chances of fighting off a few cancer cells that might be floating around in my body.

Billybob, Cashless, any thoughts from your reading? I haven't been able to find anything. My doc just says as long as HBa1c is so low, no worries.

Very interesting post(lament? LOL!), Prato!! I rather doubt you have damaged your pancreas, what with A1C UNDER 5 ( ! ) and blood sugars later in the day of 76-81! Though admittedly, you are not taking in much sugar at all, so it would not require much insulin from your pancrease to deal with such a small load. However, whatever your sugar ( or should I say net carb, which all ends up as blood glucose, whether sugar or bread, as you know) input actually is, it is obvious that your pancreas is handling it. I bet you have an improved blood pressure without meds and a much reduced gut since you have been eating this way, right? Plus vastly improved triglycerides(TGL) without meds, right?

I think your doctor is right about no worries as long as A1C <5(or even <5.5!). Plus I bet if anyone measured your fasting or post postprandial insulin, that is nice and low also. Hence my question from above: does that help us in the fight against PCa, neutral, or possibly even harmful? It is theorize to help other cancers, but I have no clue about PCa. But as for your fasting blood sugars which are running just a smidgen high, that is a bit of a mystery. The A1C tells the real story, but why are your FBSs not running below 100? I do not know! It may be related to what has been stated by Cashless(and others?): maybe we can not easily lower our FBS below some normal range with diets, because the body will make it's own sugar(at some minimal levels) from the liver and protein, if we do not consume the sugar. Of course, the advantage to that is, it presumably will not produce more that it thinks it needs. Whereas we are easily capable of overloading the body with the amount of sugar(whether cookie or pasta) that WE think we need. ;) So, is it possible that your body thinks that it need a FBS of not 90 but rather 110? So it scrounges around to make glucose by whatever means necessary during those hours of the day? I do not know! But I do NOT think it is a failing pancreas, not with A1C <5(which of course is indicating your average blood glucose over some period of time, as opposed to a 1 time fasting measurement).

I have read several times over the years that a good way to eyeball insulin resistance and pre T2D or actual T2B is to observe the gut. The classic older male possibly even overall skinny man, not fat at all except for the big old beer belly, spare tire, bowling ball, pregnant looking man. That along with other signs of insulin resistance, like ever increasing BP, and high TGL and others. But you can eyeball it by observing the gut. Particularly on an otherwise lean man, though of course obesity does not get you out of trouble, though it may hide the pregnant gut in an additional ocean of fat, so not so obvious. Let us know how you are doing in those areas, compared to previously.

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 9/4/2017 9:52:13 AM (GMT-6)

(EDIT: I think I am going to throw this into it's own thread)
One thing that threw me off on that whole "lower sugar = lower PCa" concept was a seemingly slightly lower amount of PCa detection among men with diabetes, and especially an even lower level if they had been diabetic for longer periods! Since type 2 diabetics(T2D) are insulin resistant, thus run higher insulin levels, and tend to have higher blood sugar(glucose), this did not bode well for my attempts to have lower FBS, A1C and especially blood insulin levels. Which when I tried to accomplish the above, always seemed to lead to myriad other supposedly health boosting consequences, like lower BP, smaller waist line, no reflux, and improved blood chemistry in all areas except a very slight worsening of LDL. But BIG improvements in HDL and Triglycerides so a net positive. Plus, even the lower A1Cs and blood sugars were considered a helth plus relative to T2D and overall health, maybe everything but my problem: PCa!

But this is an interesting study. What if the reason that men who had been diagnosed with T2D for longer periods have LESS PCa is not because high insulin and such is NOT a negative for PCa like it is other cancers but because diabetics(T2D) have been treated for T2D with diets or meds that tend to decrease their insulin resistance, which leads to less insulin(and blood sugar)? ( and think of the use of Metformin for PCa, a drug that reduces insulin resistance I believe) And thus the longer you have been trying to control your blood sugar and insulin levels, the lower your PCa risk relative to men who are only pre-diabetic, thus running around with high sugar and insulin, oblivious to that fact? Hmmm, I don't know once again. But look at this interesting little study which I am using to generate hypothesis! ;)
/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3773007/

Somebody said...
Abstract
Purpose

Prior studies conducted primarily among white men, find a reduced risk of prostate cancer associated with time since developing diabetes. While biologic explanations are plausible, the association may in part arise from more frequent prostate cancer screening among those with a diabetes diagnosis. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the association between diabetes and prostate cancer screening.
Methods

We examined differences in prostate cancer screening (prostate-specific antigen and/or digital rectal examination) testing practices after a diabetes diagnosis among lower-income persons living in the southeastern United States and enrolled in the Southern Community Cohort Study between 2002 and 2009. Baseline in-person interviews collected information on history of diabetes and prostate cancer screening from 18,809 black and 6,404 white men aged 40-79 years.
Results

After adjustment for confounding, diabetic black (odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.25) and white (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.51) men were more likely to undergo recent prostate cancer screening compared to non-diabetic men of the same race. The increased risk for prostate cancer screening, however, occurred primarily within the first 12 months after diabetes diagnosis.
Conclusions

Our results suggest that a diabetes diagnosis modestly increases the likelihood of having a prostate cancer screening test for both black and white men. The prevalence of screening was higher nearer to the time of diabetes diagnosis, which may contribute to an early increase in prostate cancer detection followed by lower prostate cancer detection after an extended time.
Keywords: Race, prostate cancer screening, diabetes, cohort study

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 9/4/2017 8:12:52 PM (GMT-6)

Pratoman,

All your blood glucose questions will be answered here:

https://community.diabetes.org/discuss/viewcategory/3

Nick