|
Originally printed by
The Alternative Research Foundation
It puzzles me why the simple concept "sugar feeds cancer" can be
so dramatically overlooked as part of a comprehensive cancer
treatment plan.
Of the 4 million cancer patients being treated in America
today, hardly any are offered any scientifically guided
nutrition therapy beyond being told to "just eat good foods."
Most patients I work with arrive with a complete lack of
nutritional advice.
I believe many cancer patients would have a major improvement
in their outcome if they controlled the supply of cancer's
preferred fuel, glucose.
By slowing the cancer's growth, patients allow their immune
systems and medical debulking therapies -- chemotherapy,
radiation and surgery to reduce the bulk of the tumor mass -- to
catch up to the disease.
Controlling one's blood-glucose levels through diet,
supplements, exercise, meditation and prescription drugs when
necessary can be one of the most crucial components to a cancer
recovery program. The sound bite -- sugar feeds cancer -- is
simple. The explanation is a little more complex.
The 1931 Nobel laureate in medicine, German Otto Warburg,
Ph.D., first discovered that cancer cells have a fundamentally
different energy metabolism compared to healthy cells.
The crux of his Nobel thesis was that malignant tumors
frequently exhibit an increase in anaerobic glycolysis -- a
process whereby glucose is used as a fuel by cancer cells with
lactic acid as an anaerobic byproduct -- compared to normal
tissues.
The large amount of lactic acid produced by this fermentation
of glucose from cancer cells is then transported to the liver.
This conversion of glucose to lactate generates a lower, more
acidic pH in cancerous tissues as well as overall physical
fatigue from lactic acid buildup. Thus, larger tumors tend to
exhibit a more acidic pH.
This inefficient pathway for energy metabolism yields only 2
moles of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) energy per mole of
glucose, compared to 38 moles of ATP in the complete aerobic
oxidation of glucose. By extracting only about 5 percent (2 vs.
38 moles of ATP) of the available energy in the food supply and
the body's calorie stores, the cancer is "wasting" energy, and
the patient becomes tired and undernourished. This vicious cycle
increases body wasting.
It is one reason why 40 percent of cancer patients die from
malnutrition, or cachexia. Hence, cancer therapies should
encompass regulating blood-glucose levels via diet, supplements,
non-oral solutions for cachectic patients who lose their
appetite, medication, exercise, gradual weight loss and stress
reduction. Professional guidance and patient self-discipline are
crucial at this point in the cancer process. The quest is not to
eliminate sugars or carbohydrates from the diet but rather to
control blood glucose within a narrow range to help starve the
cancer and bolster immune function.
The glycemic index is a measure of how a given food affects
blood-glucose levels, with each food assigned a numbered rating.
The lower the rating, the slower the digestion and absorption
process, which provides a healthier, more gradual infusion of
sugars into the bloodstream.
Conversely, a high rating means blood-glucose levels are
increased quickly, which stimulates the pancreas to secrete
insulin to drop blood-sugar levels. This rapid fluctuation of
blood-sugar levels is unhealthy because of the stress it places
on the body.
Sugar in the Body and Diet
Sugar is a generic term used to identify simple
carbohydrates, which includes monosaccharides such as fructose,
glucose and galactose; and disaccharides such as maltose and
sucrose (white table sugar). Think of these sugars as
different-shaped bricks in a wall. When fructose is the primary
monosaccharide brick in the wall, the glycemic index registers
as healthier, since this simple sugar is slowly absorbed in the
gut, then converted to glucose in the liver. This makes for
"time-release foods," which offer a more gradual rise and fall
in blood-glucose levels. If glucose is the primary
monosaccharide brick in the wall, the glycemic index will be
higher and less healthy for the individual. As the brick wall is
torn apart in digestion, the glucose is pumped across the
intestinal wall directly into the bloodstream, rapidly raising
blood-glucose levels. In other words, there is a "window of
efficacy" for glucose in the blood: levels too low make one feel
lethargic and can create clinical hypoglycemia; levels too high
start creating the rippling effect of diabetic health problems.
The 1997 American Diabetes Association blood-glucose
standards consider 126 mg glucose/dL blood or greater to be
diabetic; 111 to 125 mg/dL is impaired glucose tolerance and
less than 110 mg/dL is considered normal.
Meanwhile, the Paleolithic diet of our ancestors, which
consisted of lean meats, vegetables and small amounts of whole
grains, nuts, seeds and fruits, is estimated to have generated
blood glucose levels between 60 and 90 mg/dL. Obviously, today's
high-sugar diets are having unhealthy effects as far as
blood-sugar is concerned. Excess blood glucose may initiate
yeast overgrowth, blood vessel deterioration, heart disease and
other health conditions.
Understanding and using the glycemic index is an important
aspect of diet modification for cancer patients. However, there
is also evidence that sugars may feed cancer more efficiently
than starches (comprised of long chains of simple sugars),
making the index slightly misleading. A study of rats fed diets
with equal calories from sugars and starches, for example, found
the animals on the high-sugar diet developed more cases of
breast cancer.
The glycemic index is a useful tool in guiding the cancer
patient toward a healthier diet, but it is not infallible. By
using the glycemic index alone, one could be led to thinking a
cup of white sugar is healthier than a baked potato. This is
because the glycemic index rating of a sugary food may be lower
than that of a starchy food. To be safe, I recommend less fruit,
more vegetables, and little to no refined sugars in the diet of
cancer patients.
What the Literature Says
A mouse model of human breast cancer demonstrated that tumors
are sensitive to blood-glucose levels. Sixty-eight mice were
injected with an aggressive strain of breast cancer, then fed
diets to induce either high blood-sugar (hyperglycemia),
normoglycemia or low blood-sugar (hypoglycemia).
There was a dose-dependent response in which the lower the
blood glucose, the greater the survival rate. After 70 days, 8
of 24 hyperglycemic mice survived compared to 16 of 24
normoglycemic and 19 of 20 hypoglycemic.
This suggests that regulating sugar intake is key to slowing
breast tumor growth.
In a human study, 10 healthy people were assessed for fasting
blood-glucose levels and the phagocytic index of neutrophils,
which measures immune-cell ability to envelop and destroy
invaders such as cancer. Eating 100 g carbohydrates from
glucose, sucrose, honey and orange juice all significantly
decreased the capacity of neutrophils to engulf bacteria. Starch
did not have this effect.
A four-year study at the National Institute of Public Health
and Environmental Protection in the Netherlands compared 111
biliary tract cancer patients with 480 controls. Cancer risk
associated with the intake of sugars, independent of other
energy sources, more than doubled for the cancer patients.
Furthermore, an epidemiological study in 21 modern countries
that keep track of morbidity and mortality (Europe, North
America, Japan and others) revealed that sugar intake is a
strong risk factor that contributes to higher breast cancer
rates, particularly in older women.
Limiting sugar consumption may not be the only line of
defense. In fact, an interesting botanical extract from the
avocado plant (Persea americana) is showing promise as a new
cancer adjunct.
When a purified avocado extract called mannoheptulose was
added to a number of tumor cell lines tested in vitro by
researchers in the Department of Biochemistry at Oxford
University in Britain, they found it inhibited tumor cell
glucose uptake by 25 to 75 percent, and it inhibited the enzyme
glucokinase responsible for glycolysis. It also inhibited the
growth rate of the cultured tumor cell lines.
The same researchers gave lab animals a 1.7 mg/g body weight
dose of mannoheptulose for five days; it reduced tumors by 65 to
79 percent. Based on these studies, there is good reason to
believe that avocado extract could help cancer patients by
limiting glucose to the tumor cells.
Since cancer cells derive most of their energy from anaerobic
glycolysis, Joseph Gold, M.D., director of the Syracuse (N.Y.)
Cancer Research Institute and former U.S. Air Force research
physician, surmised that a chemical called hydrazine sulfate,
used in rocket fuel, could inhibit the excessive gluconeogenesis
(making sugar from amino acids) that occurs in cachectic cancer
patients. Gold's work demonstrated hydrazine sulfate's ability
to slow and reverse cachexia in advanced cancer patients.
In Europe, the "sugar feeds cancer" concept is so well
accepted that oncologists, or cancer doctors, use the Systemic
Cancer Multistep Therapy (SCMT) protocol. Conceived by Manfred
von Ardenne in Germany in 1965, SCMT entails injecting patients
with glucose to increase blood-glucose concentrations.
This lowers pH values in cancer tissues via lactic acid
formation. In turn, this intensifies the thermal sensitivity of
the malignant tumors and also induces rapid growth of the
cancer. Patients are then given whole-body hyperthermia (42 C
core temperature) to further stress the cancer cells, followed
by chemotherapy or radiation.
SCMT was tested on 103 patients with metastasized cancer or
recurrent primary tumors in a clinical phase-I study at the Von
Ardenne Institute of Applied Medical Research in Dresden,
Germany. Five-year survival rates in SCMT-treated patients
increased by 25 to 50 percent, and the complete rate of tumor
regression increased by 30 to 50 percent. The protocol induces
rapid growth of the cancer, then treats the tumor with toxic
therapies for a dramatic improvement in outcome.
A female patient in her 50s, with lung cancer, came to our
clinic, having been given a death sentence by her Florida
oncologist. She was cooperative and understood the connection
between nutrition and cancer. She changed her diet considerably,
leaving out 90 percent of the sugar she used to eat.
She found that wheat bread and oat cereal now had their own
wild sweetness, even without added sugar.
With appropriately restrained medical therapy -- including
high-dose radiation targeted to tumor sites and fractionated
chemotherapy, a technique that distributes the normal one large
weekly chemo dose into a 60-hour infusion lasting days -- a good
attitude and an optimal nutrition program which included Sam's
formula nine times/day, she beat her terminal lung cancer.
I saw her last month, five years later and still
disease-free, probably looking better than the doctor who told
her there was no hope.
|