Sugar and prostate cancer

Thanks for the study link, I will add it to my library.

Several months ago, during one of my quarterly visits with medical oncologist, I asked if there was a correlation between sugar and prostate cancer. The PA, who has been seeing me since I started HT three years ago, said no. There is a relationship between some cancers and sugar, but not PCa. Me being the bread pudding addict that I am, the news made my day.
Now I find there is a link. Yikes! Who are we to believe? Guess I will go with Cyclone, "every thing in moderation."
As a side note: I was back and forth between the hospital and rehab for the past 3 1/2 months (never got to go home) and found the food to be worse than terrible. So I ate the dessert. Can't wait till next PSA.

In an effort to present differing opinions, the following was recently posted by TA (a former contributor to this site) as it pertains to the Prostate Cancer Foundation article (link posted above).

"Yet, drugs that block insulinlike growth factor have been proven ineffectual for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer feeds on fats more than sugars until the final stages, but cancer cells are ravenous for energy and will feed on anything available. You can't starve them by starving yourself of any nutrient. That article is just plain silly."

So the "sugar feeds cancer" controversy continues...

That's unfortunate. I could maybe understand trying something that drastic as a last resort if it didn't adversely affect my remaining time. Personally, I'm just trying to maintain a low to moderate glycemic diet and a BMI under 25. Add some regular exercise and I hope to be good to go.

I've always looked at extremes with skepticism. All things in moderation.

Fun factoid here: the Axumin - F - 18 PET scan we stage 4 guys get works because prostate (and other) cancers cheerfully hog as much available protein as they can get from your blood stream. That's why we have to restrict our physical activity for 48 hours prior to the scan - to minimize our muscles' protein requirements. This is to give the cancer an advantage in grabbing the Axumin synthetic protein component from your bloodstream and ingesting the radioisotope fluorine - 18 attached to it. The rapid decay of the F - 18 while you are in the tube is what makes the picture for the radiologist.

Cancer cells are regular human cells that have gone rogue. They require the same nutrients that your other cells do. On a practical level, it would only seem logical to consume a healthy diet without focusing on 1 single item as having a magical power to prevent or slow cancer.

Once again - this time with feeling - if there was an effective diet that would control/kill cancer, it would not be a secret and we would all be on it. It would be the headlines on every news source out there and none of us would need to be here any more because we would all be cured.

I understand the need to try and gain a feeling of control over something that you do not have control over. It is very frightening to have a terminal disease that you can not personally control or stop. Some of us really need to buy the snake oil even though we know it is snake oil, because we really need that feeling of control. However....there are known intercessions (treatments) that have been proven effective and we have access to - like surgery, radiation and chemo - that can often slow or stop this cancer. We should continue to avail ourselves of these proven treatments instead of chasing the newest social media trending 'cure' or idly speculating on pie-in-the-sky stuff that might maybe somehow 'cure' cancer.

EDIT: Standard disclaimer: I consume a low carbohydrate (very low sugar - no refined hydrocarbons) diet as part of an ongoing personal healthy living program. I would advise others to carefully consider following a healthy diet as well as a basic part of a healthy lifestyle.

e.noont said...
In an effort to present differing opinions, the following was recently posted by TA (a former contributor to this site) as it pertains to the Prostate Cancer Foundation article (link posted above).

"Yet, drugs that block insulinlike growth factor have been proven ineffectual for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer feeds on fats more than sugars until the final stages, but cancer cells are ravenous for energy and will feed on anything available. You can't starve them by starving yourself of any nutrient. That article is just plain silly."

So the "sugar feeds cancer" controversy continues...

He and I used to battle over that one and several other things. For me his point about the failure of a drug- even a drug designed to block insulin like growth factor- to be effective against PC - was irrelevant. It is a drug, and who knows how well it works, or even if it causes harm itself, you won't ever really know for many years of usage. And who knows for certain whether "blocking" insulin like growth factor will have the same effect as having lower blood insulin?

But what we do have are decades of studies on type 2 diabetics(T2D) -who are virtually defined by high levels of blood insulin and insulin resistance regardless of what their blood sugars are measuring. And these studies show that T2Ds do significantly worse in all health measures, including ALL cancers, PC included.

Now there was a pretty bad fake out a few years ago when some studies showed that T2D was - get this- protective against PC. So, if we were only concerned about death from PC and nothing else, maybe we would be better off with diabetes? But I called BS on that one right off the bat. My theory was that men tend to develop T2D way before they do PC. In fact, in our day, what used to be called Adult onset diabetes(T2D) is now showing up in teenagers and even children, possibly due to decades of low fat/ high carbohydrate diets combined with sedentary lifestyles. So we get T2D sometimes decades before PC. And what happens when folks are diagnosed with T2D? They normally undergo treatment and or lifestyle changes for their diabetes. Which if things go well will lead to lower blood sugar and the insulin that normally goes with it. Which, not surprisingly then, leads to protection from PC for that group, compared to the rest of the population who are plugging right along with their somewhat high blood sugar(but not quite diabetic) and their undiagnosed high blood insulin. We have all heard that metformin might be protective against PC. And what does metformin do? Lowers blood sugar and more importantly blood insulin. So, even if insulin like growth factor blocking drugs have not helped with PC, it appears that drugs that actually lower sugar and insulin do. And even better is reversing T2D or pre diabetes with life style changes.

Lastly, though insulin like growth factor blocking drugs may not help anything, several studies of people with high blood insulin indicate that they do worse with PC, just as they do with all other cancers. 3 to 8 times worse. Those are big numbers, bigger than most other risk factors. And that may NOT be specifically caused by the sugar rather than the insulin, but the sugar is what results in the high insulin. The only time our bodies normally produce insulin is when blood sugar must be dealt with. So is high blood sugar diet per se a problem associated with PC? I'm not certain, but it sure is a problem with a boatload of other things that want to kill or disable us, and maybe also for PC. Is high blood insulin(a result of a high sugar diet) a problem with PC? Highly likely.

halbert said...
e, well, the sugar feeds cancer meme is still there...and it has created a few hucksters who have, yes I will say it, killed patients who bought their version. I have personal experience watching it happen. Short version: about 2010, I had a co-worker who had been treated for colon cancer (surgery, a year of chemo), and been ok. At a certain point, it came back as liver cancer--and we know what that prognosis is. His wife internetted her way into the 'sugar causes cancer' story--and convinced him to go see this quack in Nevada somewhere. The treatment consisted of giving him a massive dose of insulin--to 'kill all the sugar in his body and weaken the cancer', followed by a massive dose of some chemo agent. He came back from that trip, worked about 2 more weeks, and went home to die. He looked MUCH worse after the trip than before--and his retirement fund was considerably smaller.

....................................................................................................................................................................

Halbert, I remember that story! Horrible malpractice, sounds like to me. However, you probably realize this has little to do with claims that eating less sugar/carbs will lead to lower insulin production and probably result in less diabetes and better health in many areas? I'm sure you do.

That terrifying approach you describe is the opposite of a low sugar leading to low insulin approach, it is a massive insulin approach. I have known since my early days in training ( so long ago now ) that we had to be extremely careful and accurate with insulin injections, only giving enough to keep the blood sugar from being high enough to be deadly. And not too much. Because we well knew that giving a good sized shot of insulin without an adequate amount of sugar to go with it could lead to putting a patient in a hypoglycemic coma, even leading to death. ( rock and a hard place: too high blood sugar can kill you, too much insulin can kill you) Sounds like that is what this guy in Nevada tried to do on purpose, but hoping to pull back from the edge. Your friend is probably lucky he wasn't killed on the spot. Is that "Doc" not in jail? Scary.

Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 6/30/2020 3:27:38 PM (GMT-6)

halbert said...
BB, I don't know about what has happened with that 'doc' over the last 10 years. Now, I also suggest that for someone in end stage secondary liver cancer there isn't a lot that anyone can do. Dietary changes--or anything else for that matter--probably aren't going to have much effect.

I think we all agree that doing things to lower our blood sugar to rational levels is a good thing. I've been skirting the 'just below pre-diabetic' levels for years. Also been on statins forever. And, what dietary changes I've made have had some effect....but not a lot. Not sure how much further down the low carb path I'm willing or able to go.

Agree about not much to do about end stage liver cancer. And I am far from where I KNOW and want to be as far as keeping my blood insulin on the low end. I am convinced about it being the correct approach for over all health including the fight against PCa. But I do love my carbs, and I am weak. I seem to do better these days with an intermittent fasting approach. I seem to be a little better at just not eating anything most of the day, knowing that at some point soon I can eat what I want with little damage. But even then, I need to do it more often. Especially since the more often I do it, the easier it seems to get. But again, I am pretty weak about these things. Seems like I feel sorry for myself by thinking "well, I have lost so much pleasure of life due to RP SEs, what, am I going to deny myself the food I love as well?". So I don't do near as good as I know to do, but I also am capable of doing a lot worse.

Thanks to all who responded. I continue to learn so much from this group!