Active Surveillance rolling the dice? From Gleason 6-7 to Gleason 6, & my PSA going down.

Hi Jaybee !

Despite the setbacks in your life, it's sweet how you've always bounced back. Re getting a higher PSA than you expected with the current test, I'm thinking about how the PSA test itself is coming in for criticism in Canada. And I've not been following what the Canadian's said.

You wrote last night,

"So it is back to the drawing board. Didn't buy any more yogurt! lol I had a dramatic drop in PSA two months ago, but I was almost starving myself then, and lost an awful lot of weight. So I added the yogurt, which seemed great, as I love yogurt, especially with blueberries or raspberries. I bought some cage-free organic, high Omega-3 brown eggs today, need something to bridge the gap, until I figure out what else I can eat. lol I'll have a nice breakfast, anyway!"

You seem pretty cheerful despite the disappointment. Cheerful is always good!!

You also wrote,

"This is the really hard, maybe impossible thing about a dietary approach, that there are so many different factors that comprise a person's complete diet, including how the food is grown, harvested, transported, stored, cooked, how fresh it is, even what kind of seeds they used. Only 2 months since my last PSA, but what was I doing right then, that changed? Yogurt? Hard to say."

* * *

So many factors always, who can say that this caused that? Given the experience of your friend's dad (or granddad) about he moved to a farm with a flock of sheep and goats (?) and he began drinking a lot of goat's and sheep's milk (boy am I a big city guy, "What's the difference between a sheep and a goat? Two names for the same animal?"), and he lived another 15 years after getting the inoperable brain cancer not much time to live diagnosis, maybe a message in that for you, me, for all of us -- add goat's milk and sheep's milk to our diets? Probably cannot hurt.

As an example about how all of the current knowledge about prostate cancer treatments is in flux, different people saying different things, the same people saying different things at different times, I'm on some sort of Johns Hopkins emailing list, I get these bulletins all the time, and the newest one, this morning, plugs an 85 page "white paper" authored by eminent Hopkins' doctor, H. Ballentine Carter. The email included this mention of diet and food, "Foods that may reduce your risk of prostate cancer" . . .
________

"Each question is taken from the pages of The 2014 Johns Hopkins Prostate Disorders White Paper. In it, you'll also learn what you can do to help protect yourself from prostate cancer:

Exercise helps, especially in older men. Learn how men 65 and older were able to reduce their risk of advanced prostate cancer by nearly 70 percent.
Foods that may reduce your risk of prostate cancer.
How excess weight can increase your risk of prostate cancer."
_______

I noticed that "Foods that may reduce your risk of prostate cancer" includes the qualifier "may" so that leaves some ambiguity. The phrase, "may reduce your risk of prostate cancer," leaves unanswered and unaddressed whether these foods that "may reduce your risk of prostate cancer" might go so far as to eradicate any prostate cancer the person has already got. Reducing a man's prostate cancer is good, insofar as it goes. The more important question to me is, "Can food/diet actually reduce a man's prostate cancer to zero, 100 percent remission?" Less "risk of prostate cancer" is of course good, but no prostate cancer should be everybody's goal (IMHO). Not getting it if you don't have it. Or getting rid of it 100% if you've got it already.

I got my answer to that exact question ("Can diet/lifestyle eliminate/eradicate prostate cancer completely?") last Wednesday when I asked it of H. Ballentine Carter, who I had an appointment with. Dr. Carter responded that diet will never completely 100 percent eradicate cancer. I appreciated his honest and frank answer . . . and I'm counting on, in my case, his being mistaken about that.

The internet is full of anecdotal, personal testimony, reports of men who claim to have beaten, eradicated their own prostate cancer through diet and food -- and maybe we might include the "Rick Simpson Phoenix Tears" route as another diet and food approach. Just because establishment prostate medicine says diet and food will never completely eradicate prostate cancer, that it's just not going to happen, I feel that shouldn't discourage me from aiming to reduce the size of my prostate encapsulated cancerous tumor down to almost nothing or to nothing.

Until the English track star Roger Bannister back in the early 1950s ran the first scientifically measured, official, sub-4 minute mile, nobody had ever done it before. Or if they had done it, they didn't get any press about it. Once Roger Bannister demonstrated it was possible to run a sub-4 minute mile, other men said to themselves, "If he can do it, I can do it, now that I know that it's possible to do it." Same thing with eradicating prostate cancer 100 percent with food/diet. Sure, maybe you, Jaybee, or maybe me, or maybe some other people, maybe lots of other people, will or already have beaten prostate cancer with diet/food. Google the phrase "natural cures for cancer" which I just did and Google search provided this helpful info, "about 5,830,000 results."

Am I to believe not a single one of about six million results might be on to something useful? Seems mathematically unlikely to me.

Speaking of "unlikely," I'm taking a keen interest this moment at what The Gerson Method of curing cancer is all about. Somehow it felt appropriate last night, Halloween, that I drive over to a Costco and plunk down my $29.99 for my very own Mr. Coffee coffee maker. You know where I"m going with this. Right! The single item on today's To Do List for me is, get the remaining supplies I need -- I bought the light roast organic coffee yesterday, still need the bulb or bag -- and before I go to bed tonite, I'm going to . . . hmmm, get my head examined? . . . not that, no. I already know I'm bonkers. Which is the true test of a sane person -- they are certain they are crazy! Strange times we live in!!

Yup, I'm going to give myself a coffee enema. I realized yesterday all my focus has been on diet and food and nutrition. What am I doing on the detox front? Yes, diet and food and lifestyle choices all have, to one degree or another, a Detox angle, but what about cleaning out my colon? What's in there? Pizza I ate 10 years ago? That sloppy joe I ate at Coney Island lifetimes ago? The benefits of a coffee enema according to what I was reading (on the internet) include cleansing toxins out of my liver and gall bladder and emptying my colon of feces. Caffeine, theobromine and theophyline which are in coffee all apparently relax smooth muscles, stimulate the bowels, and cause bile ducts and blood vessels to open. All good stuff, right?!

Big picture wise, what my reading and research the last week or so has zeroed in on is the whole point of my dietary and food choices, and getting the lots of exercise I'm getting, mainly out walking a total of 2-3 hours/day, is to strengthen my immune system. My theory being ultimately that it's my strengthened immune system that is going to knock out that pesky little cancerous tumor in my prostate. Knock out cancer wherever else it might be lurking in my body. What good is having my prostate out or getting radiation if my cancer is just going to pop up someplace else? Do I want to play Whack-a-Mole?

To me, and this is just my own personal gut (about to get itself cleaned out) or intuition talking. I want a global, full-body approach to beating my prostate cancer. I'm not so focused on keeping the cancer inside my prostate capsule -- my guess is some cancer cells have likely already breached the prostate wall, i.e., preineural invasion [spelling?] was found by Dr. Jonathan Epstein of Hopkins reviewing the original biopsy slides. What I'm focused on is cranking up my immune system. And one small but important piece of accomplishing that is . . . coffee enemas!

Somehow sounds like part of a stand up routine. Which I'm working on. I'm serious. A guy walks out on stage someplace, 175 people in the joint, and pretty soon the whole crowd is laughing about . . . prostate cancer! Attitude is everything. I've done stand up in front of 30 people. What's a few more? Every successful comic says the same thing. "Get used to rejection. Some people don't agree with you? Who cares?!! If stand up is what you want to do, Do It!"

Keep keeping on, keep being positive, Jaybee. I love how you said in your email, it was something about eating a breakfast of free-range chicken produced eggs. "I'll have a nice breakfast, anyway!" That's the spirit. Cancer Smantzer. Life? Death? Nothing to get worked up about. Let's take away the power I used to give over to cancer and return it to myself. I'm stronger than cancer. Goes back to "I create my reality with my thoughts." If I'm in fear of cancer, if I'm deep down terrified of it, then there's no need to play the 4th quarter, I've already given up, lost the game. Staying positive and laughing through the process with it's setbacks and it's achievements, small and big. That's the ticket! In the end we're all gonna die anyway. What's the big deal about when?

And I want to live another 10-15 years cause I'm having such a good time with this prostate cancer business. A blessing in disguise. I needed a good smack on the shoulder from Existence. Everything is good. Everything. A dear friend used to say, "Life/Existence is FOR you. Everything is always perfect. You are always getting what you need to grow and expand. We are here to have experiences."

Bill
______________________________________________
70 years in this body I've only just recently
properly appreciated -- better late than never!
Prostate biopsy procedure late July 2014
Diagnosed Prostate Cancer early August 2014
Prostate nodule 7/2014, 6 /2014, 4/2014
MRI of prostate scheduled for 12/5/14

PSA history:
1/08 4.6
4/08 6.4
7/08 3.5
12/09 2.5
2/11 4.4
4/12 3.2
4/14 5.4
8/14 5.1
9/3/14 4.9
10/13/14 5.7

CT & bone scan 8/12/2014 negative

1st Pathology Report (8/1/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
4 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 69%, 75%, 100%, 100%
2 cores Gleason 7 (3+4), 66%, 88%

1st Second Opinion Pathology Report (8/26/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 77%, 77%, 78%, 78%, 95%, 95%

2nd Second Opinion (or 3rd overall) Pathology Report (9/12/2014, Johns Hopkins) on 7/28/2014 biopsy.
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3),
A. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 80%
B. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90% ("perineural invasion identified in this case")
C. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90%

Hi Dreamerboy !

You wrote,

"Bill - I found your Truth about cancer videos on You Tube."

I've got some videos on You Tube, but nothing remotely to do with cancer among them. A case of mistaken identity. They weren't any videos by me.

"I also ordered the book, "Radical Remission, Surviving Cancer Against All Odds" By Kelly Turner from the library."

I don't know the book but sounds good to me. You also write,

"I personally think that modern science doesn't dedicate enough resources towards studying those who seem to beat cancer despite the odds.

I'm sure everyone here on HW agrees with that.

"IMO, such cases should be the subject of a major study.

Totally agree.

"That all being said, I believe that conventional medicine has its place and perhaps I'm looking for complementary rather than alternative therapies."

I may well end up on an operating table at Johns Hopkins having my cancerous prostate removed in an "open" procedure. The situation is fluid -- Dr. Ballentine Carter, my new doc, has ordered up a prostate MRI at Johns Hopkins for me which is scheduled for early December. Along with some genetic testing of tissue from the original biopsy. I'm open to whatever develops. I just completed and mailed in the application to take part in Johns Hopkins' Active Surveillance program, technically called at JH, "ProActive Surveillance for Prostate Cancer." Along with a questionnaire on foods eaten and one on lifestyle, the key doc was titled, "Research Participant Informed Consent and Privacy Authorization Form; Protocol Title: Active Surveillance of Prostate Cancer."

For me, I'm not sure what "box" my enthusiasm for natural therapies belong in -- complementary or alternative -- I'm just keen to have no unpleasant side effects whatsoever. I don't want the treatment to be worse than the disease too. As a man of 70 years, everything works fine, I'm literally bursting with energy from my strict diet -- herbs tumeric and capsicum, tons of garlic and onions, no meat, no poultry, no fish, no dairy, no eggs, no fruit -- and I'm not keen to have erectile dysfunction or urinary problems as a result of surgery. And I know this is an individual, personal decision.

Not so many men of 70 I hear opt for Radical Prostectomy -- it's stressful for most 70 year olds. I do feel any surgery to remove my prostate, even at the hands of a master like Dr. Carter, would be a big setback and challenge to my immune system. Truth be told, I somehow sense the prostate cancer is already outside my prostate capsule, which makes me feel there's no point of having prostate surgery if the cancer has already escaped to other parts of my body. Which in turn goes back to my seeking a whole body natural cure. Conventional medicine provides such unpalatable choices as surgery, radiation, chemo, hormones. To me, all of the choices are bad. Putting me "between a rock and a hard place."

Bill

______________________________________________
70 years in this body I've only just recently
properly appreciated -- better late than never!
Prostate biopsy procedure late July 2014
Diagnosed Prostate Cancer early August 2014
Prostate nodule 7/2014, 6 /2014, 4/2014
MRI of prostate scheduled at JH for 12/5/14

PSA history:
1/08 4.6
4/08 6.4
7/08 3.5
12/09 2.5
2/11 4.4
4/12 3.2
4/14 5.4
8/14 5.1
9/3/14 4.9
10/13/14 5.7

CT & bone scan 8/12/2014 negative

1st Pathology Report (8/1/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
4 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 69%, 75%, 100%, 100%
2 cores Gleason 7 (3+4), 66%, 88%

1st Second Opinion Pathology Report (8/26/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 77%, 77%, 78%, 78%, 95%, 95%

2nd Second Opinion (or 3rd overall) Pathology Report (9/12/2014, Johns Hopkins) on 7/28/2014 biopsy.
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3),
A. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 80%
B. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90% ("perineural invasion identified in this case")
C. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90%

Hi Bill,

Checked out the Gerson diet. Very different from what you and I have been doing. They seem to be OK with almost all fruits and vegetables, including legumes, and some high glycemic stuff, like potatoes, brown sugar, and some grains (OK with oats and rye, and sometimes corn and brown rice). They seem to be OK with sugar and carbohydrates in their natural forms, and mainly focus on prohibiting meat and fat consumption.

The diet I mentioned with goat's milk is from the late Gerald Green, an English herbalist, who treated many diseases, including cancer. His focus is on reducing sugar consumption to the max (no fruit), but not only sugar, all carbohydrate consumption, since it is readily converted into sugar. He seems pretty OK with lean, organic, non-processed meats, but is totally anti-dairy, if it is from cows. But OK with sheep and goat dairy. So, by and large, he is very easy on protein consumption, medium on fat consumption, and comes down really hard on any carb consumption. That is because his target is Candida albicans, the yeast fungus that grows in the intestines, and can spread throughout the system, if an overgrowth develops in your gut. Green seems to blame Candida for everything, including cancer, as he believes it ingests sugar, modifies it through a fermentation process, and that modified form is what feeds cancer cells.

In fact, it is known that some viruses cause certain types of cancer, and there are those who believe that fungi and bacteria can sometimes incite DNA mutations, turning normal cells into cancer cells. The fact that fungi digest organic materials (food) anaerobically, which is the same process cancer cells use, makes fungi suspect in the minds of some, who believe that this process is started in normally aerobic healthy cells, by some sort of transfer of DNA code between the fungi and the rogue cells, which then turn anaerobic/cancerous.

Livestrong.com has good discussions on gluconeogenesis and ketosis, the processes by which protein and fat are used by the body to produce energy, when there are not enough carbohydrates available. Protein is changed to sugar mainly in the liver, when necessary, which may explain why Green's diet focuses mainly on carbohydrate prohibition, since Candida is primarily present in the intestines. It is really unclear to me whether Green is on to something with the connection between Candida and cancer (as well as other diseases), or whether his diet may be a good anti-cancer diet simply because it restricts the intake of sugar and all other carbs, which, of course, is what cancer feeds on, same as Candida.

The Green diet: http://geraldgreenherbaltreatments.wordpress.com/dietary-advice/

Livestrong info on gluconeogenesis and ketosis, which are what happens when a low-carb diet fails to produce enough glucose for bodily functions, and energy is produced from protein and/or fat:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/273899-do-fat-protein-turn-into-glucose/
http://www.livestrong.com/article/554481-when-does-the-body-start-to-use-muscle-tissue-for-energy/

A good discussion of Candida overgrowth disease is here:
http://www.janethull.com/newsletter/1208/a_love_story_candida_loves_sugar.php

I did check out the whole Rick Simpson thing extensively. Interesting. Will have to cover that another time.

Good to see you staying positive, Bill.

JB

Post Edited (Jaybee_007) : 11/1/2014 10:05:16 PM (GMT-6)

Hi Bill, I am also on AS, diagnosed in Aug 2012.
There is an interesting thread at inspire (USTOO) regarding Focal Laser Ablation. It is a a very long thread with over 1900 posts. I think it is worth a look if you ever consider treatment. It gets really interesting as two doctors that practice FLA are currently participating in the discussion. One is Dr. Sperling in NY, and the other is Dr. Walser from TX. you can even start your reading from the last post, I would start the first page then go back to the last post. Very interesting read and worthwhile if you have the patience.

Google focal laser ablation patient inspire.com to get to the page.

Mp

Akai, the focal laser ablation sounds very impressive to me. Wonder what the price tag is? A bit pricey, I would imagine, but then I don't really know. No hospital stay time, however, as you walk in, get it, walk out same day. so only paying for "labor," equipment and technician costs, I would imagine. I think this is the kind of treatment a lot of guys would prefer to have.

Super Max, criteria are covered at this site:

http://prostate-cancer.med.nyu.edu/treatment/focal-laser-ablation-prostate-cancer

DB,

Your garlic toast sounds impressive. Making me hungry! However, you might want to try using an unleavened bread or zwieback (probably best), as bread turns right to sugar when digested. I love bread, and haven't really found an acceptable substitute yet.

As for spaghetti sauce, Trader Joe's has a great marinara sauce with only tomatoes, basil, and maybe garlic in it. Comes in a big green can. It's excellent, been eating it for years now. But if I want something more pure tomato, chunkier, so to speak, I'll just buy the Roma tomatoes, also at TJs (blue can). Just Roma tomatoes, you can chop them up a little, add your own fresh basil, garlic, and/or onions, and it makes a very tasty sauce, best thing short of using fresh tomatoes.

JB

Bill - Thanks for sharing all the details. I just got diagnosed. Not sure of the Gleason score yet. Why do you feel negative about radiation? Any knowledge or information about Proton therapy? How do you find out if your cells are aggressive or passive?

Fred, cancer dancer

Went to the local health food store today. In Fairfax, CA, which I think is the health food center of the entire world, the store in humungous. Naturally, they had oodles of goat milk, goat kefir, goat yogurt, and a large selection of both goat and sheep cheeses. I opted for the goat yogurt, and bought some kind of sheep cheese, a hard cheese from Italy, which I thought would be nice for dishes with a tomato sauce. Been eating Eggplant parmesan, w/o the parmesan, and dying for some cheese on it, so maybe the sheep cheese is just the ticket.

The reason Gerald Green's anticancer diet includes goat & sheep dairy products, but not cow dairy, is, IINM, that they are said to be the foods, which are highest in capryllic acid content. Which is how I found the Green diet, googled capryllic acid/cancer. Not that I am placing any confidence in Green, although there is something I like about that guy.

No, the main reason is the friend's dad, who lives on a goat farm, who was given up for dead by the MDs, has survived terminal brain cancer for 15 years, and is still alive and well (if that can be said about a man with a big tumor in his brain! lol).

This may just turn out to be a way to wean me off of yogurt, which, unfortunately had become a mainstay of my diet. And a chance to have some cheese on my parmesan-less Eggplant Parmesan!

Time will tell.

JB

BTW. I found out that a good tomato sauce tastes good on just about any kind of squash, not just eggplant, if eggplant is a squash. And no doubt will taste even better with a good hard cheese, even a sheep's cheese!

Bill...ummm....I understand that you have negative feelings about radiation therapy. I'll simply suggest that what you "feel" and the current facts may be somewhat different. Modern radiation therapy, e.g. LDR brachy, HDR brachy, SBRT, PBT, etc. are very effective means of treating prostate cancer with generally fewer SE's than surgery. The chances of these treatments causing other cancers are small.

As you work through your options for treatment you may want to seek guidance from professionals who are experienced in these fields so that you get well educated before making any final decisions.

Jim

Hi Tudpock18,

Thanks for this ...

"Bill...ummm....I understand that you have negative feelings about radiation therapy."

Yup, I sure do.

"I'll simply suggest that what you 'feel' and the current facts may be somewhat different."

Great point. An ancient dilemma. Typically my process is whenever I feel a certain way about something ... I assume that naturally, self-evidently, my feelings are always 100 percent accurate, true, the last word, end of discussion .... with any pesky facts that indicate something different than what I feel .... a minor irritation that I'll likely dismiss. That sounds generously like, "Welcome to Kindergarden!" Hopefully I'm older and wiser now.

If I adjust my thinking to consider that my feelings are both transitory and simply part of my behavior, my conditioning, a result of my particular experiences -- a learned response -- that opens a little bit of space so I can consider, objectively, whether "the current facts" may have something worthwhile for me to consider. You've done me a favor in making the distinction you've made, Tudpock18. Glad you're a moderator here and saw what I wrote,

"... what you 'feel' and the current facts may be somewhat different."

"Modern radiation therapy, e.g. LDR brachy, HDR brachy, SBRT, PBT, etc. are very effective means of treating prostate cancer with generally fewer SE's than surgery. The chances of these treatments causing other cancers are small."

I had a meeting in late August/early September with a Johns Hopkins satellite location radiation treatment doctor where he explained all about radiation options, but my head was still spinning from the fact of my having been diagnosed a few weeks earlier with prostate cancer, added to my known anti-radiation attitude, so that morning my mind wasn't working and I didn't hear or remember afterwards a single word he said! Emotions can be so powerful, and frequently not in the person's own best interests.

"As you work through your options for treatment you may want to seek guidance from professionals who are experienced in these fields so that you get well educated before making any final decisions."

Good advice. I believe it's here on HW I've read that most 70 and 70+ year old guys don't even consider prostate surgery -- pretty stressful for most 70/70+ year olds ... and the greater frequency of side effects with prostate surgery in 70/70+ year olds. [Is there a lot of evidence of that? Is that a known fact?] My original urologist back in August said he thought I was a good candidate for "seeds" and sent me to visit with that top Hopkins' satellite radiation guy -- the visit I couldn't remember a single word spoken from. Perhaps time for me to make another appointment, and see if I can be a better listener the second time around which I believe I would be.

I noticed you personally have had a very good experience with radiation treatments. So you are a good example of what radiation treatment can accomplish. Five years out you're still ... in the game of Life.

Thanks, again.

Bill
_____________________

Hi Jaybee,

Can't wait to read the study you posted about, "Nutrition and Prostate Cancer." Found at cancer.ucsf.edu/_docs/crc/nutrition_prostate.pdf. Thanks to Proscapt for originally posting it on another thread here on HW.

Bill

______________________________________________
70 years in this body I've only just recently
properly appreciated -- better late than never!
Prostate biopsy procedure late July 2014
Diagnosed Prostate Cancer early August 2014
Prostate nodule 7/2014, 6 /2014, 4/2014
MRI of prostate scheduled for 12/5/14

PSA history:
1/08 4.6
4/08 6.4
7/08 3.5
12/09 2.5
2/11 4.4
4/12 3.2
4/14 5.4
8/14 5.1
9/3/14 4.9
10/13/14 5.7

CT & bone scan 8/12/2014 negative

1st Pathology Report (8/1/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
4 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 69%, 75%, 100%, 100%
2 cores Gleason 7 (3+4), 66%, 88%

1st Second Opinion Pathology Report (8/26/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 77%, 77%, 78%, 78%, 95%, 95%

2nd Second Opinion (or 3rd overall) Pathology Report (9/12/2014, Johns Hopkins) on 7/28/2014 biopsy.
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3),
A. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 80%
B. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90% ("perineural invasion identified in this case")
C. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90%

Hi folks !

A friend sent a delightfully useful email to me this morning about the carbohydrate restriction aspect of dietary measures to slow, stop, and ideally reverse the growth of cancer. I haven't looked myself yet but will tonite at the good links my friend provided. Here's the whole note:

__________________________________
Hi Bill,

there are studies going on on carbohydrate reduction and prostate cancer:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00932672
The estimated study completion date is December 2014. But there might be preliminary results available.

(There have been studies with animals before, e.g.: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/dumc-crm052609.php )

Here are further links (on other kinds of cancer also):
http://realfoodforager.com/university-study-on-low-carb-diet-for-cancer-treatment/

In your thread some men have asked about clinical research about the effects of carbohydrate reduction on cancer.
Maybe you could post some of this there?

Here is some detail-information on the ketogenic diet the researchers in Würzburg are using:
http://krebszellen-lieben-zucker-patienten-brauchen-fett.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/booklet-ketogenic-diet-for-cancer-patients.pdf

Since several people in my family died of cancer I'm very interested in this kind of information also preventative.
So I have begun to change my diet also...

I hope you're fine"
________________________

Happy Wednesday !

I simply cannot get my head around the fact this thread has had -- what?! . . . omigod! . . . 6700 views since its inception in early September. Lesson there for me in that high views count is there's been and continues being a ton of good links and other good info provided here, maybe loosely all of it under the heading of A Dietary Approach to Cancer.

I encourage those who follow this thread but haven't posted to it yet themselves, please come join the party (I like the lighthearted vibe I think exists here) and introduce yourself.

It's all, yes, life and death stuff we are discussing but, that said, a smile and lightness about personal matters anonymously discussed here has two benefits. The reader benefits. And the person posting here benefits just from the simple act of sharing what's on your mind.

My own experience is whenever I share I am rewarded a hundred times over with blessings and kindnesses and unconditional love from . . . Existence itself (feels like). Which encourages me to share more!

Bill Positive

Hi Jaybee --

I'm a little behind in reading the links recently posted ... by me !! ... but I don't want to hold up the ongoing discussion re carbohydrate reduction, Ketogenic diet, and such. So re these two sets of links (below), and your own recent comments (worth repeating, below), hopefully it all adds up to more good clarity overall:

[This is from a friend in Europe with some history of cancer in her family. She's very interested in the subject and is following the thread. Much appreciation for her contributions! Feels like a big and growing family here. Neat!]
__________

there are studies going on on carbohydrate reduction and prostate cancer:
http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00932672
The estimated study completion date is December 2014. But there might be preliminary results available.

(There have been studies with animals before, e.g.: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-05/dumc-crm052609.php )

Here are further links (on other kinds of cancer also):
http://realfoodforager.com/university-study-on-low-carb-diet-for-cancer-treatment/

In your thread some men have asked about clinical research about the effects of carbohydrate reduction on cancer.
Maybe you could post some of this there?

Here is some detail-information on the ketogenic diet the researchers in Würzburg are using:
http://krebszellen-lieben-zucker-patienten-brauchen-fett.de/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/booklet-ketogenic-diet-for-cancer-patients.pdf
_____________________

. . . I want to post these two additional links from the same source,

_____ _____ _____ _____

It is possible to contact the german researchers on the german website (of course they understand the English language):
http://krebszellen-lieben-zucker-patienten-brauchen-fett.de/impressum
But they probably get lots of questions...

There might be answers also on the Nutrition and Metabolism Society website (english)
http://www.nmsociety.org/index.html

_____ _____ _____ _____

And here again is most of what you (Jaybee) wrote re the above links, which links I've still not read but believe writing this, and reading what you wrote (immediately below), is a good impetus to me to digest all the links and catch up with the latest posts, including my own (!!).

The visual I'm getting is a fun baseball analogy. Not sure it makes sense, but it somehow feels right. I think it's OK to do whatever it takes, whatever works, to stay open and well-educated re everything being said, even if it means sometimes playing catch with oneself. Here's my baseball analogy:

The third basement fields a hard hit ground ball in the infield. He fires the ball to first base. In an instant -- in this altered reality or dream -- he realizes no one is covering first, so he dashes to first himself, somehow beating his own throw there, and he catches the ball with his foot firmly planted on first, before the batter arrives, completing the "out." This is a play I'm going to remember!

Sometimes I find it helpful to, in effect, play catch with myself, be extra patient with myself, keep my mind engaged and interested using whatever tricks I can muster, to helpfully remind myself of any overlooked or not previously fully grasped important details. I highly recommend it !!

Jaybee wrote,
___ ___ ___

"Some good info there. I read the article from the German researchers. It gives a pretty good explanation of the processes involved in digesting carbohydrates, why cancer loves carbs, how the body can produce energy without carbs, and what the logic for switching to a ketogenic diet is.

In my own muddling along, I have pretty much come to almost the same conclusions as the researchers, with some exceptions, based on stuff I still don't understand. In particular, since the body can produce glucose from protein, then why a high-protein diet? Doesn't the cancer get the benefit of that process, just as the healthy cells do? Maybe it is a question of some sort of priority system the body has, as to which cells get fed first. Or maybe it is just that the the sheer amount of glucose the cancer cells use is so great, that an even distribution of glucose produced from protein in the liver, leaves the cancer short of its' "normal" quota(amount it gets on a standard diet), while providing adequate glucose for the brain and muscles. I kind of suspect the latter is the case, but would like more info on that.

I found out on my own how important the need for protein is, since when I was on a low-carb, low protein diet, my muscles disappeared along with the fat, and I lost an incredible amount of weight and strength in a very short period of time. However, I am still very unclear on why a high protein diet would be good. What about a moderate protein diet. Proteins do tend to be acidic, and then there is the whole alkalinizing the body aspect of diet.

I've made a lot of mistakes along the way. Initially, I was eating a lot of certain kinds of dried fruit, fresh fruit, and carrot juice for their alkaline properties. But it didn't feel right, didn't seem logical, on account of the sugar content, and the next step was eliminating most fruit.

In an attempt to up my protein intake after the drastic weight loss, I started eating a lot of yogurt, and more chick peas, and lima beans (legumes). Now I can see why the legumes are not good, took me awhile to get my head around that one, as they always seemed so healthy, and don't have sugar. But they are dense complex carbs. The result of the increased intake of yogurt and legumes was a significant increase in PSA at my last test.

Interestingly enough, the German researches may have approved of my yogurt consumption, since they are Ok with dairy products and seem to recommend the yogurt/flaxseed approach, except they recommend normal fat yogurt, not the non-fat yogurt I used. They may be right, but for the time being I am avoiding yogurt, except for the rare treat, as I think I came to rely on it too much, eating it twice a day or more because it is so quick and easy to make, and it is tasty and satisfying. On a per 100g basis yogurt may not have a lot of carbs, but it still has 17g sugar per 8 oz serving, and to me, that seems like a lot. But only 7 g for goat yogurt!

Generally, they are pretty OK with meat, fish, chicken, and dairy. I'm not ready to go there yet. I probably will, at some point, add an occasional serving of fish. But not yet.

Currently, I have knocked out the legumes and yogurt from my diet, except for a wee tiny bit of hummus. I've also cut way back on peas and cooked carrots,which I was eating every day, too sweet. I'm eating a boatload of green veggies, one organic egg a day, and a fair bit of non-sweet squash varieties with tomato sauce and a little grated sheep cheese on them. It's proving to be a pretty satisfying diet, I feel really good. The downside is that I have to portion out a lot of my consciousness, and a fair amount of my brain's RAM and L2 cache goes to thinking about eating, food prep, grocery shopping, etc.

Incidentally, the German report goes into some detail explaining why MCTs (medium chain tryglycerides) are very important to a ketogenic anti-cancer diet, and says that they are only found in our diets in low concentrations in milk fat. However, caprylic acid is a MCT, and goat's dairy products are loaded with it. Sheep too, IINM. There's a lot of it in coconut oil, too, which I have just this week started using in place of olive oil for cooking. Still get lots of olive oil on salads, though!

I would say that right now my diet is somewhere between the Gerald Green diet and the Wurzburg (German researchers) diet. Except they are both OK with meat/fish/chicken, if it is raised right. Green is still a little too extreme on veggies for me, he says no tomatoes, no squash, no artichokes, and no mushrooms. With as strict as my diet is, at the moment, I don't see how I could do without tomatoes and low-carb varieties of squash. I love artichokes and don't get the logic on excluding them (maybe it's the dip. lol)

Random thoughts: pumpkin seeds and sunflower seeds? Love 'em, esp pumpkin seeds. They seem a little high in carbs, so in moderation. But pumpkin seeds are so high in zinc, which is good for the prostate. What do you think? And one other thing where I differ with the Wurzbergers is the dairy factor. Everything I have ever read seems to indicate dairy is bad for the prostate, although I am not sure why.. So why are the Germans OK with it? That is an area of disagreement I have with their recommendations.

For some reason I can't explain, I am feeling very positive and certain I am on the right track. Maybe it's just that I need to feel that way!"
___ ___ ___

Ditto that, Jaybee. My own advice to myself, which I cannot repeat to myself often enough, is to trust my own feelings -- it doesn't have to make sense, it doesn't have to be logical, I don't have to be able to explain it even to myself -- no matter, just trusting my own deepest feelings, that's the ticket ! Anything else and I feel somehow cut off from the "mainframe" ever present Existence itself connection deep inside. "To thine own self be true."

Polonius:
This above all: to thine own self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou canst not then be false to any man.
Farewell, my blessing season this in thee!

Laertes:
Most humbly do I take my leave, my lord.
Hamlet Act 1, scene 3, 78–82

Bill Positive

______________________________________________
70 years in this body I've only just recently
properly appreciated -- better late than never!
Prostate biopsy procedure late July 2014
Diagnosed Prostate Cancer early August 2014
Prostate nodule 7/2014, 6 /2014, 4/2014
MRI of prostate scheduled for 12/5/14

PSA history:
01/08 4.6
04/08 6.4
07/08 3.5
12/09 2.5
02/11 4.4
04/12 3.2
04/14 5.4
08/14 5.1
09/14 4.9
10/14 5.7
11/14 4.9

CT & bone scan 8/12/2014 negative

1st Pathology Report (8/1/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
4 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 69%, 75%, 100%, 100%
2 cores Gleason 7 (3+4), 66%, 88%

1st Second Opinion Pathology Report (8/26/2014) on 7/28/14 biopsy
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3), 77%, 77%, 78%, 78%, 95%, 95%

2nd Second Opinion (or 3rd overall) Pathology Report (9/12/2014, Johns Hopkins) on 7/28/2014 biopsy.
6 cores Gleason 6 (3+3),
A. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 80%
B. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90% ("perineural invasion identified in this case")
C. prostatic adenocarcinoma, 90%, 90%

Hi JB --

I've been busy with all my projects. Glad to see you are enthusiastically pursuing your own program. Interesting to me you picked "Believing" as a word that sums up, to the extent possible, what your whole approach comes down to. My own phrase is "not knowing." I don't know if "not knowing" and "believing" are opposites. I'm more comfortable than I've ever been with recognizing that maybe my limited mind doesn't have the capacity to understand some things. "Not knowing" flows directly from that recognition. I'm optimistic, positive, grateful, looking forward to the next thing, whatever it is.

Anyway, just wanted to pop on here and say hello.

I did get a minor jolt this morning when I came across a previously unnoticed "Addendum" to my health chart, which I accessed via a Johns Hopkins patient portal sort of thing. The Addendum, dated 11/12/14, two weeks ago, was an addition to Dr. Jonathan Epstein's earlier pathology report.

I haven't fully digested the medical note, but here's what it says, below. At a glance, doesn't sound good! But I can deal with bad news. Like getting the "you've got prostate cancer" news from my urologist in early August, this past summer. I'm in Thanksgiving mode right now. Feeling upbeat. Grateful for everything. And I mean everything. I know how weird it sounds but finding out I have prostate cancer is one of the best things that ever happened to me. Really woke me up. It's just stupid of me to complain. Words and actions matter. As do thoughts. Thoughts! Who knew?! Gratitude is the ticket! A sense of humor is invaluable.

Not going to let a little (more) bad news spoil my day. Here's that addendum:
__________

"JONATHAN I. EPSTEIN, M.D. JIE*

*Electronic signature (09/12/2014 @ 10:16 am) by which I attest that
the above diagnosis is based upon my personal examination of the
slides . . . etc.

ADDENDUM: (tll) 11/12/2014 @ 06:13 pm

Immunostaining of tumor on Parts A, B and C shows PTEN protein is
heterogeneously lost in sampled tumor glands and ERG protein is
expressed. See Note.

Note: Loss of the PTEN tumor suppressor protein evaluated by
immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been associated with several measures
of unfavorable prostate cancer outcomes including higher Gleason
score and pathologic stage at radical prostatectomy, higher risk of
PSA recurrence after primary treatment for localized disease and
higher risk of upgrading for Gleason score 6 needle biopsies at
radical prostatectomy when compared to tumors without PTEN loss
(1,2,3). Studies in a conservatively managed population also suggest
that tumors with PTEN loss are associated with a higher risk of
lethal prostate cancer when compared to tumors with intact PTEN (4),
however the magnitude of this increased risk may be less significant
in ERG-positive tumors, such as this one (5). Evaluation of ERG
oncoprotein overexpression measured by immunohistochemistry has been
validated as a sensitive and specific method to detect ERG gene
fusions (6). Biomarkers studied may demonstrate intra- or inter-focal
tumor heterogeneity and are limited by sampling error. References: 1)
Lotan TL et al. Clin Cancer Res. 17:6563-73,2011; 2) Chaux A et al.
Mod Path. 25:1543-9, 2012; 3) Lotan TL et al. Mod Path. 2014; 4)
Cuzick J et al. Br J Cancer. 108:2582-9, 2013; 5) Reid AH et al. Br J
Can. 102:678-84, 2010; 6) Pettersson A et al, Can Epi Bio Prev.
21:1497-509, 2012.


TAMARA LEVIN LOTAN, M.D. TLL*

*Electronic signature (11/12/2014 @ 06:13 pm)"
__________________________________________

In simple English, anybody know what this means?

Happy Thanksgiving!

Bill Positive

Getting back to diet. I have finished reading the UCSF "Nutrition and Prostate Cancer" report. An excellent review of the research studies done to date on the subject.

What really strikes me is how two such excellent pieces by two groups of distinguished medical groups can come to such divergent conclusions, and recommendations based on those conclusions.

I don't have the reports in front of me right now, unfortunately. But one, the U. of Wurzburg report recommends a high fat, high protein, ultra-low carb, diet, which includes meat and dairy, while the other recommends a low fat, vegetarian (plant-based is the term they use), no dairy diet, which is moderately low carb (no refined sugar, white flour, junk food, etc.).

The Wurzburg is a very definitely ketogenic diet, while the UCSF diet is more of a basic traditional vegetarian health food diet.

So for starters, it would appear they are entirely opposed to each other on fat consumption. How can that be? My take on that, is that they are not really so opposite as it would appear. UCSF stakes its' anti-fat position on all the terrible stuff that your really bad fats have, whereas Wurzburg focuses on the really good stuff that the good fats have, while, for the most part, also pointing out to avoid the really bad fats.

Obviously, there are fats and fats. You've got trans fats, saturated fats, polyunsaturated fats, monounsaturated fats, and Omega-3 fatty acids (listed in order from worst to best for you). They both condemn trans fats. Wurzburg points out why saturated fats are not best for you, and recommends getting the leanest meat, and cooking it in ways to minimize the adverse effects; sort of a "little bit is not so bad" approach, while UCSF says just don't eat meat or very, very little. Polyunssaturated fats are kind of the middle ground of fats, neither report gets too excited about them, either way. Then they both point out the virtues of monosaturated fats, why they are the better choice. Wurzburg doesn't have a lot to say on the subject of fatty acids, just more good fat! On the contrary, UCSF goes into great detail about fatty acids, which is a whole subject, in and of itself.

It turns out that there are 3 main types of fatty acids, and a 4th oft-neglected kind, which has some importance, as well. The 3 main ones are Omega 6s, the bad guys of fatty acids, Omega 3s, the good guys of fatty acids, and Omega 9s, the less common fatty acids, which, as it turns out are good-guy sidekicks of the Omega 3s. So it is like the black hat outlaws vs. the white hat marshal, and his gimpy, lovable sidekick (I'm a comin', Marshall Dillon, or Gee, whiz, Andy!). It is my tentative(leaving myself plenty of wiggle room) conclusion that the reason the two schools of thought differ on dairy and eggs is mainly because dairy is high in Omega 6s and low in Omega 3s. Wurzburg is kind of turning a blind eye to the Omega 6 factor, while it is a critical factor to UCSF. UCSF points out the strong correlation between dairy consumption and PCa. Wurzburg ignores it, bascially taking the stance that if you consume enough Omega 3s, the Omega 6s won't matter. Therefore the recommended combination of flaxseed oil (super high Om3s) with cottage cheese or yogurt.

BTW, it isn't actually so much a matter of excluding one, while including the other, but maintaining a healthy ratio. Because apparently Om3s are really badly outnumbered by Om6s. So much so that a diet high enough in Om3s to be considered excellent in that regard maintains a ratio of Om6s to Om3s of between 1:1 and 4:1. In many Omega-containing foods, the ratio is between 50:1 and 100:1. So it takes a real effort to bring that ratio down to the 1:1 to 4:1 range. There are very, very few foods that have more Om3s than Om6s. Wurzburg does point this fact out, and recommends beefing up on the Om3s and includes a chart showing the ratios in various oils. Linseed oil (which is basically European flaxseed oil) somes out the big winner at a 1:55 ratio, in favor of Om3s. There is no close second place finisher, as IIRC, no other oil has higher than a 1:4 ratio.

So, that is everything you ever wanted to know about Omega 3s/6s, right? lol And we haven't even got to Om9s yet! Om9s are found in abundance mainly in nuts and seeds, which is why nuts and seeds are very good for you. But, even there, they are probably still well outnumbered by 3s and 6s. In Omega-land, they are the minority population. And they are very good for you, according to UCSF.

Charging ahead, on to MCFAs. and MCTs. MCFA are Medium Chain Fatty Acids. And they're good for you, as, of all the fats, they convert most readily to an energy source. Which is really important if you are on the ketogenic diet, since it is a carb starvation diet. MCTs are Medium Chain Triglycerides, and come from foods high in MCFAs. They don't get the press that Omegas do, but both reports seem to agree that they are very good for you. MCFAs are present in dairy products that still have the fat in them, although not in large amounts. Therefore, Wurzburg likes them, as for energy production, to some degree, they substitute for carbs in a ketogenic diet. UCSF doesn't like dairy, however, because studies link dairy with PCa (on account of Om6s?). The happy middle ground where agreement is found is the non-dairy MCTs. Both reports state that coconut oil is the only natural food with high MCT content. However, I have it on good authority that goat's milk/dairy is very high in MCTs (as is human breast milk, BTW).

OK, what I am getting at, is that while the reports appear to be opposite in their conclusions, when you look at the details, there is a lot of agreement on the details, just a different outlook on whether to stress more what is bad for you or what is good for you. OK, that statement is a gross oversimplification, but, maybe you can see what I am getting at.

And that is just on the subject of fats! Which is a pretty important subject, IMHO, I might add. ;)

Summing up, I have read the Wurzburg report twice and the UCSF report once. I intend to read them both quite a few more times, until I can get the info better ingrained in my head, both quantitatively (remembering pertinent facts), and qualitatively (understanding the significance of their findings, analyzing it, and working on developing my own synthesis of the two approaches). That is a pretty big bite to chew off, I can only hope I am up to it. This stuff is not easy. I hope I'll live long enough to come up with some conclusions, and formulate a successful game plan based on those conclusions.

Ah-h-h, my, my, my! One can only try. As Goethe put it, "Wer immer streibend, dann kann wir erlesen!" I've always lived by those words (from "Faust"), and they've served me well. But some times I wonder, and the ancient Taoist texts I am currently studying, seem to say the opposite (Lao Tse, in particular, and those who followed him). The Taoist stuff was an eye-opener to me, as it is seems so directly the reverse of the Western approach I grew up with. Yet, I think it all fits together in some mystical way, the ying and the yang of existence. I'll keep working on that one, too! lol

And I didn't even get to tell you what happened on Sunday, when I tried to expand my diet by including seafood (very high in Omega 3s, how could I go wrong with that?). Disaster!!!!! lol I'll save that story for another day.

Take care, my friend. Don't let the ******s grind you down!

JB

Post Edited (Jaybee_007) : 11/27/2014 12:09:11 AM (GMT-7)