Is Cancer a Metabolic Disease? Is Gene Theory Disproven? [12 Studies]
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 сер 2024
- JOIN THE PHYSIONIC INSIDERS [PREMIUM CONTENT]
Join the Physionic Insiders [Standard Tier]: bit.ly/PhysionicInsiders2
Join the Physionic Insiders [Pro Tier]: bit.ly/PhysionicInsidersPro
Standard Tier: Access to the Premium Video Library, Full Study Analyses (+ Summaries), Insider Podcast, , Research Reviews, and More
Pro Tier: All benefits of the Standard Tier + Live Sessions with Me, Consulting Lite, and More
HEALTH AUTONOMY [COURSE]
Learn to Analyze & Apply Studies for Yourself: bit.ly/healthautonomy
JOIN THE COMMUNITY
Join my Community [It’s Free!]: bit.ly/PhysionicCommunity2
EMAIL LIST
One Weekly Email of Value: bit.ly/2AXIzK6
HIRE ME FOR CONSULTING:
Consulting: bit.ly/3dmUl2H
DONATIONS FOR A SCIENCE BASED CAUSE
Patreon: bit.ly/PhysionicPatreon
OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA
Instagram: bit.ly/2OBFe7i
Created with Biorender
[1] doi:10.3390/metabo11090572
[2] doi.org/10.3390/ijms23031155
[3] doi: 10.1182/blood.2019003776
[4] doi.org/10.1242/jcs.01000
[5] doi:10.1186/s12943-022-01670-1
[6] doi:10.3390/ijms22189667
[7] doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a019505
[8] doi:10.1042/BCJ20210084
[9] doi:10.1186/1471-2164-7-15
[10] doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0061747
[11] doi:10.1038/s41598-022-05243-6
[12] doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2018.08.006
*******CRITIQUES, RULES, AND NOTES*******
Critiques of my work are welcome! Please be aware of the following notes & rules before submitting critique:
Be mindful that this content is not all encompassing on the subject at hand and is self-limited for brevity to reach a wider audience. Also be aware that I receive hundreds of UA-cam comments per day, so the only way your critique can be considered is if you follow the steps outlined below. Finally, UA-cam auto-deletes links, so I do not see most comments with links attached.
RULES:
If your comment is rude, you will be banned without warning.
If your comment is not about the studies/topics at hand (i.e. extending to other outcomes not discussed) or offers critique with no scientific basis, your comment will be ignored.
If you can follow these rules, I will try to address your critique and if there is merit, I will add an AMENDMENT to the content in question and pin it so everyone can see it.
Please use the following link to submit your critique: bit.ly/PhysionicCritique
Disclaimer: None of the information provided by this brand is a replacement for your physician's advice. This brand is information for the sake of knowledge and the options of choice it provides, not in any way a personalized prescription. Please consult your physician before making any health related changes.
*Substrate Level Phosphorylation and Glutamine [Read Below]*
*Substrate Level Phosphorylation*
I realized too late that I probably should have spent more time on discussing Substrate Level Phosphorylation (SLP), which is just the generation of ATP - typically related to glycolysis (what I mentioned in the video), but has also been proposed, by Dr. Seyfried to occur within the mitochondrion. This second part is something I wish I had mentioned, so I'm mentioning it here. His argument (as I understand it from podcasts and his writing) is that SLP can occur in lieu of OXPHOS (mentioned in the video). Essentially, instead of using the oxidative phosphorylation proteins (OXPHOS) for ATP generation (which is how mitochondria generate most of their energy), the cell has completely destroyed structural integrity of the mitochondrion and therefor can't use OXPHOS (he shows this in microscopy images of mitochondria that look like 'ghost' mitochondria); as a result, the cell, still within the mitochondria, but without the aid of the oxidative phosphorylation proteins, generates ATP through this SLP mechanism. So, mitochondria are defective, but still capable of producing energy, just not through their normal means. I probably should have taken a bit of time to explain that in the video, but time and the complexity of the topic make it difficult. That said, I may make a follow up video going into this with more depth.
However, I'd caution that I have seen with my own eyes (through my own laboratory experiments) that adding an oxidative phosphorylation inhibitor to cancer cells leads to their cell death in a high fat environment, which would evidence that cancer cells (at least the ones I use) are highly dependent on oxidative phosphorylation in a high fat environment (devoid of sugar) - this is in complete opposition to Dr. Seyfried's hypothesis.
*Glutamine*
People will often turn to glutamine as an argument for its use as an energy generator. This is true and something I hope to discuss in the future, as well. Glutamine can undergo glutaminolysis, which allows the amino acid to be used in the mitochondrion through the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA cycle) and is capable of generating another energy molecule (GTP) that can then be further converted to ATP (our main energy source). It's a backwards and inefficient way of generating energy, but it is feasible. However, even Dr. Seyfried mentions that this cannot be abolished by diet alone and requires pharmaceutical intervention to effectively inhibit. Again, something I will incorporate into a follow up video.
This is an overwhelmingly complex issue - if you feel you have a strong grasp on it, I encourage you to reconsider. I may be in the general field, but I have much to learn from cancer biologists and hope to do so as time goes on, which I will then distill for you. Thank you!
Thanks again! Please keep up this topic - people's lives may depend upon it. (no pressure)
I’ve seen another video on YT citing an article that showed what occurs with the mithocondria in a high food high carb energy environment. They tend to divide and became smaller and in fasting states it becomes enlongated and more efficient, i think it was here no? Maybe it is a way to make them sick and start cancerous behaviour. And that is a metabolic path for shure… when we say chimpanzees don’t have cancer like us, we must considere the food snd environmental conditions like you mentioned and i have no doubt they are the main modern driver for that.
I believe that most cancers (not all) are susceptible to low carb and fasting, but not for type of fuel reasons alone, but for immune reasons that fasting can improove. Shurely a metabolic unhealthy body will have a difficult time fighting cancer…
So as you mentioned, some cancers thrive in high-fat environments. Is there general knowledge of which cancers typically thrive off glucose and which ones thrive off fatty acids?
I am happy you added this addendum since Seyfried does incorporate glutamine as another source of energy that drives cancer cells. Your video left me wondering why this aspect wasn't covered.
I feel like the biggest problems with all discussions of cancer is this idea that "cancer" is a single disease, as opposed to a vast collection of "ways your body's cells can break down and start growing out of control." So its totally possible for both of these things to be exclusively true for a given form of cancer.
hey, just became a subscriber. love your videos as i find them so informative! love your hair too by the way. lol. so, here's my story. my twin brother and i were diagnosed with prostate cancer during the summer of 2016 and we were both told that it was very aggressive and would probable only live for 2-3 years, assuming we had a prostatectomy, radiation, and hormone therapy. we were told we would be offered chemotherapy in the final stages. we weren't surprised by the prognosis because our father and two older brothers died of the same cancer within 2 years of being diagnosed. my brother decided to have all of the above treatments (radiation, chemo, prostatectomy, hormone therapy) and died two and half years from the day he was diagnosed. i decided to just do the prostatectomy which unfortunately was unsuccessful in eradicating the cancer. But here i am 7 years later and still alive...but unfortunately not cancer free. the only things i did differently from my brother was, refuse the standard treatments, except for the prostatectomy, and cut out carbs and sugar and started juicing which i lost 40 lbs. have kept the weight off for over 7 years later by juicing on a regular basis. still don't eat carbs and sugar. and to this very day i still wonder from time to time if i have outlived my twin brother simply because i cut out the sugar and carbs and started juicing (raw vegetables) which was something i couldn't convince my brother to do. OR, am i still alive because i didn't accept the other treatments after i had my prostatectomy. all i know is, the cancer still hasn't spread to any other areas of my body and when i see my oncologists on a yearly basis he just keeps saying, i don't know why you're still alive... but whatever you're doing, keep on doing it because it's obviously working so, see ya next year!
First off, I'm really sorry to hear about your brother, Robert. Secondly, there's certainly something to be said for you still being alive after so many years, but also kudos on your weight loss and overall health improvement - you rock. I hope for the best for you - I hope you're able to eventually defeat it completely.
Dr. Seyfried also mentioned certain cancer cells can consume glutamine as fuel. You might want to talk to Dr Seyfried about taking DOM to block out glutamine absorption.
Firstly happy for you buddy. Secondly I would recommend you look into IP6 (Inositol Hexaphosphate) which according to my research wonderful drug against cancer. Basically it strave cancer cell by cut off iron supply to cancer cell. Again this is not medical advice. But it's my humble request check this out. This might do you good buddy. ❤
Fantastic story, Keep it up and all power to your elbow….!!
It is criminal that ur doctor isn’t interested in learning from you and what you are doing so he could pass it on with his treatment
I would love to see a discussion between you and Dr Seyfried. There is no better place for Seyfried to discuss his hypothesis than your channel, because you are openminded to listen and also highly qualified to challenge his ideas. PLEASE DO IT
I want that to! I do believe more in seyfrieds theory because when we eat more like ketogenic or whatever it stemmed to help! And also I believe more in him but would love to hear more
And also look at all the dogs that get cancer now! Is it only genes because of to much breeding? I don’t think it’s all dogs so what do you think?
Yes but all of those impact the mitochondria hahahahhahaha no sleep stress, toxins bla bla and so on 🤣
Maybe it’s both mutation and mitochondrial
Totally agree there but a lot of cancer benefits from fasting
I've come across several anecdotal stories of people who have seemingly cured their cancer using prolonged fasting as the primary weapon along with carb restriction. Probably we don't hear about those people for whom this approach didn't work because they died. It would be nice to know which cancers may respond favorably to this approach and which might be made worse.
I think it depends on tumor genetics.
This is just speculation, but given how energy intensive cancer is, the fasting may have deprived the cancer of energy while the host (patients cells) were more able to cope. Chemotherapy of starvation if you will.
@@andreaslind6338 I know women with breast cancer that fast before and after chemo. They claim it keeps them feeling better than if they eat. I never had chemo so I can’t confirm it personally.
@@mpoharper that seems to track...what I meant with the chemo comment was that chemotherapy is poison. That is why it works...you kill lots of cells, but hopefully the cancer dies before the patient does.
Similarly fasting will kill you, I was soecukating that the reason that these patients recovered was that they effectively starved the cancer before they themselves starved.
Be well, and good luck if one of your family are facing this.
Decrease the Histamine and 5-HT , increase Dopamine so that the genome will be expressed in need moderately.
In another language, decrease the chemical and emotional and enviroumental stress to decrease denovo sugar and ketone unusable but accumulated inside mitochondria.
From a layperson but former RN who just wants to know the analytical, theoretical, evidence-based, and metaphysical truth, you are doing an outstanding job of pulling all the info threads together to present a deeply intricate picture that furthers our ability to help and understand ourselves. Great video!
Very interesting! The Epigenetics of cancer is fascinating to me and I would like to learn more about it. I have watched a few interviews with Dr Seyfried. His therapy includes not only restricting carbs, but also uses a pulsed regimen restricting the amino acid glutamine that cancer cells also use as a fuel source. He didn't describe the mechanism for this therapy in the interviews I saw. I don't recall him mentioning types of cancer cells that use fat though...
He doesn't claim that his treatment protocol cures cancer. He said that limiting the fuel to the cancer cells starves them so they aren't able to easily multiply and spread throughout the body. (Perhaps enabling the innate immune cells to keep up with killing the malignant cells?)
On a personal note, I used to attend inter-departmental Oncology meetings with Hematology-Oncology, Radiology, Pathology and Medical staff. A particular patient's cancer and treatment would be discussed. The Chief of Oncology would present a list of proposed treatment regimens including various chemo drugs, radiation therapy, surgery options, as well as no treatment. The approximate survival time was also included. The Chief sometimes admitted that the treatments didn't offer much longevity benefit.
He didn't talk about the quality of time left. Do you want to spend this time feeling sick from the poison, being shuttled back and forth to the medical center, and incurring huge medical debt? There is a lot of consider. I suspect I would try non-toxic methods and go with grace.
Thanks for helping delineate this complex topic. Seyfried stimulated my research on cancer a few years ago and the conclusion I came to was that it's not super important to label it either SMT or metabolic, but in terms of actually treating it, there is a clear metabolic element that is neglected. And when the metastatic survival rates are so incredibly low at 5 and 10 years, there should be a different approach.
I'm probably being ignorant here but isn't the point of a low carb diet usually to minimise body fat, which might counter the point made in this video about fat?
It seems to me that we may need to shift our paradigm from thinking of all cancer as one entity to viewing cancer as a collection of separate diseases. Much like we think about bacterial infections as individual diseases caused by specific bacteria. To me, where we mess up is lumping all cancer into one. If we did that with bacterial infections, we never would have developed the vast array of antibiotics that we currently have, and we would still be scratching our heads as to why penicillin works on ear infections but seems to do nothing to MRSA.
UA-cam is full of shills pushing "this is the Truth, the one Truth, nothing but the Truth", and it can be very hard to figure anything out. So I really appreciate your videos, which take a nuanced view and don't try to tell people "I'm right everything else is wrong". Thank you for that hard work!
Thank you.
Clear as mud, as expected. Such a complex issue, every answer produces 100 more questions. Thanks for providing a little bit of clarity with your well-expressed arguments.
Hi! I’m seizing the opportunity of cancer. Putting the music louder (as it is Stage 4); balancing body, mind and spirit; and among others, learning a lot, particularly thanks to people like you (thanks!).
Question: how can one find out if a cancer is primarily fuelled by glucose, glutamine, carbs or by fat?
Jane McLelland explains something similar to you, but for regular people like me it seems difficult knowledge to come by but clearly highly important. Particularly in a world of fragmented oncology where most doctors still only know about “eat whatever you want, don’t fast and get as high chemo as you can”.
You forget to discuss using glutamine as fuel by Cancer cells and abt fermentation process. Which is the most important aspect to complete the metabolic theory of Dr Thomas Seyfried.
This is your best work yet. Nice job. I also loved your wishes that other things could have been covered in the video. Maybe a part 2 is in order. I am also very interested in the "press-pulse" approach Seyfried recommends for dealing with Glutamine. Maybe part 3.
Thanks
I vote for part 3 discussing this as well!
There are a lot of different type of cancer. Some cancers use fat as fuel but the vast majority of cancer is dependent on glucose fermentation, you can differenciate them with a PET scan which shows the higher rate of glucose utilisation of cancer cells.
Subscribed!
I am looking forward to your next video on this topic.
Absolutely love this channel and it's content. I find your explanations very clear and helpful. Your area of research is nothing short of fascinating. Thank you for putting time into this work.
Brilliant work - as usual. Thank you!💗💗
I appreciate your videos. I especially appreciate learning which studies to read and download. Thank you!
I wouldn't say the gene theory, more aptly somatic mutation theory, has been disproven, but that it is simply incorrect or incomplete, with a major part missing being the metabolic components and how that applies to treatment.
I appreciate the analysis. This is a very complicated topic, and while I believe Seyfried is onto something, I also admit more research is needed in this area.
What I'm really interested in is ALL the root causes and mechanisms.
Looking forward to your follow-up.
Thank you for sharing your knowledge with everyone. I find your videos fascinating and have been going through your back catalogue, slowly... very slowly but I love learning new things on health. Always informative and often amusing, keep up the good work.
The research will never be funded because it doesn’t generate enough revenue. The whole healthcare system is rooted in an incomplete theory, which won’t change because the money isn’t there.
Thank you so much for sharing your work and effort. (as always).
"And why wouldn't they coexist?" Exactly what I was thinking. Both the somatic and metabolic models seem to have truth to them. The hard part is applying it to each cancer! I am guessing we will update both models as time goes on. Like you said, not all cancers are the same, they are very diverse.
Great analysis. Continue to provide us with them.
You win my subscription with this video. I have been watching this topic for many years. Thanks so much!
Wonderful video! I absolutely loved following your logic and how you came to your conclusions - its the process thats important. I wish more scientific rebuttal videos were this well done. You did not set up a straw man, you addressed the real points and were honest about your conclusions. Other scientists could learn a thing or two from you about how to actually do science, process findings, and communicate those findings.
Thank you for a great presentation. Looking forward to further analysis.
I believe I have a case of a 'diffuse astrocytoma'. Going ketogenic has made a huge difference experientially, as well as fasting and/or restricting protein (like a fasting mimicking diet), but I don't know how to verify whether this is affecting the cancerous cells directly, or just reducing my symptoms for the moment. I picture my cancer-affected cells as misbehaving teenagers; they can be just fine when they are not misbehaving, but if the environment is suitable, they can cause a lot of mayhem... And even if I were willing to sacrifice them, I wouldn't want to take out great swaths of healthy cells as collateral damage. So I want to figure out how to get autophagy and such to work effectively!
Exactly my approach as well. HPV+ throat cancer for almost 4 yrs now. Still avoiding rads chemo. 🤞🤞🤞
The work of Dr Valter Longo springs to mind…
@@thetinmansheartso what have you done this far? My husband has OSCC, under his tongue and in one lymph node.
Great video and great channel. The details are complex and make stop, focus, and take notes. What I appreciate most is the nuance and willingness to include opposing views.
True scientists care more about contributing to the corpus of research than in their theories being proven correct. As for cancer, it’s often an issue of life or death and it’d be nice if more researchers put aside their egos for the sake of saving lives.
I agree that different cancers may have more metabolic attributes than others. Dr. Don Layman is one who explained benefits fasting for certain cancers, especially before and after chemotherapy. The Moss Report also speaks a bit on the issue. I’ve had several friends and friends of friends get (different types of) cancer the past few years and one unsettling reality is that many times they put blind trust in a doctor who gives opposing prescriptive advice to another friend’s doctor, but neither friend will listen to anything else, even to save their life. Instead of trying to get as much information as possible, they close themselves off to any other source of knowledge.
Anecdotally, one friend who refused outside advice (including potentially fasting) miraculously made a complete recovery upon doing 2 months/10 cycles of 3 day fasts (3 days eating followed by 3 days of fasting) after his doctor gave up on chemotherapy and tried a 🏈hail mary in desperation. Maybe it was fasting or maybe God had more work for him to keep doing instead of retiring him from this world.
What about using evidenced based findings to see if there's any validity to the theory? Use IF, a ketogenic diet and DON and see what happens in a randomized control study.
Which cancers prefer to use fat? I'm interested in reading about this.
Excellent - as usual. Great insight. I always learn a new word with each of your videos.
Keep going because you really make difficult topics understandable and I so appreciate that you cite the actual study.
Very interesting and informative. Thank you!
Very interesting balanced analysis and good information to consider. Thanks.
Thank you again for the quality work you put in to your videos! You’ve earned my subscription for sure.
Awesome, thank you!
a balanced take on a thorny and strongly sensitive question. Good work 👍
There’s nothing thorny or sensitive about it. Let’s worry about people’s feelings while thousands of people die every day because everyone thinks it’s a genetic disease. Give me a break Cancer is clearly a metabolic disease
@logicbomb8977 you should change your name to "dogmabombing" buddy. The physionic is a science channel, not a propaganda one. I am personally way more in favour of the dysfunctional-metabolism nature of cancer than the genetic one, but one should not look away from the difficulties this theory may have.
And more often than not, the origin (assuming there is only one) of these conditions is much more complex than what we can fathom.
@logicbomb8977 by the way, I am not implying at all that one currently diagnosed with cancer should not take action by employing some of the interventions put forward by Dr Seyfried such as a ketogenic diet or fasting protocols. On the contrary, I think that the evidence in favour of such, relatively harmless, approaches is 'strong enough' to take action right away.
I am just disagreeing with your very assertive claim that it is obvious that cancer is just a metabolic disease and 'end of story'. There is no 'end of story' in science.
@@fabienpaillusson7390 read Seyfried’s work, it’s clear. Nothing to do with dogma. His work clearly demonstrates cancer is purely a metabolic disease. They haven’t found one type of cancer that can survive when taking away it’s two primary fuels-glucose and glutamine. Every cancer cell relies on the ancient pathway of fermentation, which means they need glucose and glutamine to survive. All of the gene mutations that we study are effects of damaged energy metabolism of mitochondria. Disruption of respiration that ultimately leads to normal cells becoming cancerous through fermentation pathways. The gene mutations we observe are all downstream effects of this due to radical oxygen species produced by damaged mitochondria. Want to know what real dogma is? A multi-billion dollar industry that believes cancer is caused by genetic mutations for over 50 years and still has not made any progress in the management of cancer. 1500+ people dying a day from cancer is not progress. Targeting gene mutations for new drugs is just a money making scheme, nothing more. The answer to preventing cancer and managing isn’t complicated as the field makes it out to be. They need it to be complicated so investors can keep making money and so “researchers” maintain their jobs.
@@fabienpaillusson7390 there is an “end of story” when one theory has more sufficient evidence than the other. There’s no clear mechanism through the somatic mutation theory of cancer. Hundreds of thousands of papers written on gene mutations, none of which show a clear causal mechanism. Seyfried’s team has shown a clear mechanism that cancer is only a metabolic disease. Targeting gene mutations and developing protein inhibitor drugs are going after the effects of cancer, not the cause. Every effect of cancer is different (gene mutations). Every cause of cancer has one, single cause-damaged respiration of the mitochondria.
Thanks so much for your work.Waiting for your next one.
If possible, please make you tube about cancer and MTORr
Congratulations on a PhD completion...an admirable accomplishment. I admire your quest to share and learn about science and the nuances of dissecting research to make our lives better.
Excellent as always. Thank you!
This is the best video I seen on this topic so far!
One of you best videos. Please do a follow up as you find more clues. 💪
Thank you for your sanity in a heavily controlled area. I have lost 5 loved ones to 4th stage with heavy chemo. Doctors down played anything they could do for themselves to help chemo
Thank you so much for your wonderful work. You are truly helping so many people!!!
Thank you!
Excellent information as always.
Thank you for this video. Well done.
Love your analysis of health topics 🙏
I'm really loving your content and today sent me down another rabbit hole, this time about the meaning of the word extirpation.
Great video, Love the way you made a round trip, detailed argument about cancer being complex in nature. 👍
Thank you.
I would love to hear more of your research based on the individual types or groups of cancers.
There are not many studies, but I found this one particularly interesting: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494907/
Your videos are very good and educational. You have been doing a great job
Thank you
I think it's Dr. Christopher M Palmer who I first heard talking about cancer as a metabolic disease. Or rather the first person who wasn't primarily a social media personality or an alcoholic lecturer at my university.
He's got a laundry list of accolades and titles that made my ears prick up when I saw him interviewed and I just had to hear more from him. His work on psychiatric disorders as metabolic disease really shook up my perception of what the scientific community at large was willing to tolerate in terms of whacky theories spouted by someone with a high degree of influence over the coming generations of top level medical scientists and practitioners in America (as he does).
great work, thanks!
I’ve been following Dr Seyfrieds research on cancer and one thing that has made me scratch my head is that those that I know of that died of cancer they literally almost quit eating for months because they had zero appetite and yet their cancer continued to progress and health diminished. It seems if fasting was key then why did they continue to get worse? It is an interesting idea but I doubt the answer is this simple. I wish it was.
I think what was said was if the cancer is too far gone…fasting would make things worse. Have to work with a naturopathic doc to do it safely.
@@carolmccrea4172 Better to avoid working with quacks.
Yes, contrary to what members of the fasting cult would have us believe fasting is not a magical cure-all. It might help with some cancers when done in combination with other proven treatments, but it won't work for all cancers.
Because your entire body is made up of calories that can be utilized. Just because you're not eating doesn't mean your cells aren't.
@@apachewraithDr Seyfried says that cancer lives on glucose and glutamine. By fasting we deplete the glucose in a day, and glutamine in 14 to 21 days. That way depriving the cancer of its source of energy.
Great video. You’ve earned a new subscriber.
Reminds me the argument over germ theory versus terrain theory for illness. My opinion? Functionally? 90% terrain. Cancer’ll probably end up being 60-40 metabolic.
I know CG Jung ventured a theory that cancer is actually caused by psychological distress. He didn’t push it too hard. But he did notice some patients coming out of cancer once they had come to grips with their own turmoil. May be something to consider, too. Part of your body splitting off. Part of your psyche splitting off. Has a nice symmetry about it.
Very well spoken on such a complex topic in a short amount of time. I myself am a strong believer that when it comes to nutrition a whole food plant based diet which is high in fiber, phytonutrients, and antioxidants, a diet that is abstaining from animal derived products and ultra processed foods, is the closest we can get in order to prevent ourselves from getting most types of cancer, and maintain optimal health. The reason becomes very clear, as these foods cause significantly more oxidative stress in our bodies as these products are often stripped from their protective qualities (antioxidants, phytonutrients, and fiber) rendering them harmful to our bodies, inevitably causing metabolic damage and in the end certain types of cancer. As for animal derived products; heme-iron is highly bioavailable and can lead to oxidation, saturated fats also cause metabolic damage, also the protein has an unfavorable amino-acid profile, being very high in BCAAs causing a spike in growth promoting hormones like IGF-1 which activates mTOR; this accelerates aging as well as promoting cell proliferation, which may increase our chances of getting cancer. These are some of the pathways related to cancer and the Otto Warburg hypothesis, but honestly listing everything is just too much to dump in a youtube comment.
I am not saying that a whole food plant based diet is "THE ANSWER" to everything when it comes to health, and I do believe that you can get away living healthfully eating animal based products and ultra processed products in moderation, because moderation is key 🙂 I just choose not to indulge animals because of my moral beliefs, as for ultra-processed foods, I would make the exception on special occasions e.g. eating out or a wedding. I have never felt better before in my life, especially when it comes to recovery after training and mental clarity. The evidence using a wfpb diet as dietary intervention on cancer (especially breast and prostate), heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, diabetes, parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, alzheimer, kidney disease, arthritis, the list goes on ; The evidence and the results.. it looks very promising, however we simply need more long-term data on this kind of lifestyle before the point can be proven.
Dean Ornish has some great results on lifestyle intervention and seems like a very powerful and promising tool when it comes to lengthening our telomeres, which is a marker used to indicate our life expectancy. This has everything to do with how to change your epigenetics in a favorable way, that is why I really like the saying or book title ; Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.
Edit: Totally forgot to ask you the question if you would be willing to review Dr. Dean Ornish, T. Colin Campbell and Walter Willett?
Thanks dude. Great post.
Love your videos Nick. This one in particular. And yea, cancer is a tough nut to crack. Would like to add some thoughts as a non-scientist but someone who has, by necessity, taken an interest in cancer. From a general perspective we have seen cancer rates increase greatly over the last 100+ years for both humans and domesticated animals with younger and younger people afflicted on the heels of adopting more and more unnatural diets and lifestyles including pharma drugs which would tend to support the notion that the causal effect of cancer is metabolic and not genetic. I have also come to consider that the net effect of this unnatural behavior has altered the micro environment around cells which in turn signal cells to alter their form of metabolism from OXPHOS to glycolysis, taking on an anaerobic disposition. I am also coming to think that initiation of cancer is a natural process when presented with the right environment rather than some unpredictable "genetic mutation". Implementing a backup plan to survive in a hostile environment. I also find it interesting that many "off label" drugs designed to kill other anaerobic organisms (blocking metabolic pathways) work to some degree with cancer cells and leave healthy cells largely unaffected. Once a healthy cell transitions to a cancer cell it seems to take on many of the properties of other infectious pathogens. As for killing cancer irrespective of type, there is some marginalized work using oxidizers like ozone and chlorine dioxide which will overwhelm the already over stressed levels of glutathione in the cancer cell and kill it while leaving healthy cells unaffected - somewhat mimicking some aspects of our own immune system which is often thwarted by cancer.
I’m pretty sure Dr. Seyfried includes glutamate in the mix.. not just fasting and low/no carb.
Enjoy your work. And now the million dollar question (for me at least) Does Melanoma react favorably to fasting or will it worsen it?
I'm a new subscriber. This video connects with what I've seen about metabolic syndrome (Dr. Robert Lustig). I'm age 21 and did gymnastics for 14 years. I've been extremely lean all my life and extremely muscular from my earliest days in gymnastics. My body fat is stable at about 6-8% given how much I train and eat. But Dr. Lustig said that thin people can also have metabolic syndrome--with all the negative effects. And maybe here--cancer. I didn't grow up eating sugar or fructose that was added to foods. My adoptive mom was into nutrition and knew sugar is bad. I've struggled to eat most of my early life to keep light for gymnastics. I realized about age 12 or 13 that I can add muscle really easily which scared me as a young gymnast. Family situation also caused me to not eat a lot. I've never had a test to see what visceral fat I have in my organs. I'm extremely lean now at almost 5' 10" tall and waist is 29" and I weigh 178 lbs. I assume I'm insulin sensitive and have no fatty liver. I got severely beat up just before my 17th birthday by guys wanting to beat up a shredded gymnast. That got me into wanting to build a lot more lean muscle mass--legs in particular. That meant eating a lot of food and eating all the time. I never got into sugary foods but did start eating a lot of pizza and pasta to fuel my heavy lifting programs. School athletes all but forced me to eat a lot. I hate eating a lot when not hungry. But the lean muscle mass came (legs in particular). For gymnast pride reasons I think I also worked to stay extremely lean. But I wonder if I could have fatty liver and not know it. And of course I now worry about cancer.
Incredibly interesting. your youtube channel is a goldmine :)
Thank you!
Thank you! I've been asking for your review of Dr. Seyfried's work for a long time. I'm glad to see this come to fruition.
I have a handful of follow-up questions and comments. Basically, the clinical results folks are seeing sound really impressive, which involves three different therapies, only one of which is a low carb diet. They shut down two other energy sources that the mitochondria membrane use to make ATP through anaerobic glycolysis.
Also, DS suggests a pathway for the gene mutation as a downstream event in response to mitochondrial damage via ROS that is released.
The greater context of this whole discussion is an industry seamingly ignoring this science-- which is a different thread of conversation.
I really do appreciate your dutiful analysis. One day, I look forward to your analysis or criticism of the works and important questions raised by Stefan Lanka, Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufman, Samantha Bailey, and others who have thoughtfully challenged another behemoth medical industry.
Maybe invite Dr S on your channel for an interview?
I have one remark. I've seen several lectures on this topic from mitochondrial theory of cancer proponents and they say something more and else. Mitochondrium according to them is not solely organelle producing just ATP. It also produces molecues which stear other cellular organellae and processes, including division and proliferation. Fatty acid metabolism in cancerous cells can be easaly blocked by 4 substancnes readily available. And one more remark. It 's been very well known for 20 or so years that some cancers grow on Omega-6 fatty acids like bread on yearst.
Another great discussion
Hey Nick I think you have missed discussing also the role of substrate level fermentation using GLUTAMINE, not just glucose. I suggest you look into this angle as well.
I know I'm late but do love❤ your content.
I would additionally love❤ if you did one video
"what would I do if I had cancer...."
in addition to chemotherapy, surgery and medicine treatment.
I agree that it is both. I have mucosal melanoma which has very few mutations, but I have one mutation that suggests that I keep glucose and insulin low. That has really helped together with immunotherapy and surgery to keep it at bay. There are several other mucosal melanoma patients I know whose cancer grows dramatically fast and is less responsive to immunotherapy. No cancer type is homogeneous and it does us a disservice to ignore factors that can help such as genetics, epigenetics , tumor micro... It is hubris to think we have a handle on cancer when 1 in 2 people will get it in their lifetime. Unfortunately I see so many people cooking up their own treatments with various anti parasitic drugs and THC, etc. because they think it is a simple disease and big pharma wants to charge mega$$$. They want simple answers, where there currently are limited ones. Metabolic, immune system, genetics, epigenetics, and probably more.
Just like you said, the problem is both
:(
people want answers from people with good intentions, which makes it really easy for the wolves to hide in sheeps clothing....and lets be honest, big pharma and healthcare is simply not functioning the way it should ('should' being a definition by which anyone with genuinely positive intentions would agree with) in our society.
Makes it very easy for snake oil salesman
Most people with big C die from the treatment i.e cytoststica, radiation .. and not the cancer itself.
Big pharma DOES want big mega$$$$
It's why talk and promotion of HCQ and ivermectin were so heavily suppressed. FDA can't get emergency exemptions for the poke if there are readily available alternatives.
Make no mistake, the FDA is bought and paid for by big pharma.
So I wonder, do we know if autophagy would target cancerous cells first if the right conditions were met?
Or maybe that's part of the problem?
I did find it intriguing to learn that fasting improves chemotherapy treatment outcomes in many cases.
I also think argument number 3 for the metabolic theory of cancer is a non sequitur. Argument number 5 proves that more focus on the metabolic characteristics of cancer need to be analyzed further to see if there may be a host of factors, including nutrition, that negatively affect mitochondria particularly in cancer cells. I have long been a proponent of finding the cause of cancer over developing treatments for cancer because money spent in that direction will most definitely uncover meaningful therapeutic solutions that work effectively.
To be fair to Seyfried you should have mentioned the role of glutamine. Also Seyfried explains that disfunctional mitochondria end up causing mutations in the nucleus (so the correlations between certain mutations in the nucleus and cancer can be explained this way). Another example of correlation not being causal.
Pinned comment.
He specifically mentions there are no mutations in the mitochondrial DNA according to one of the podcasts I listened to.
I would like to see a podcast between you and Dr. Seyfried where the evidence against cancer being metabolic disease will be presented.
Great deep Video to a topic, that puzzles me since i heard about this theory.
In this fascinating mitochondria experiment, i would love to see also a "the other way around" experiment:
If you would implant healthy mitochondria into the cancer cell, would it stop being cancerous?
Great video
Always interesting information here 😚👌
Thanks, James, as always.
@Physionic - Thank YOU for the education 👍
love your vids
Quality content 👍
I try to follow along, and you do a good job for a lay person like myself. Would you consider debating the good Doctor here in a podcast?
I think you downplayed the potential effect of diet. Some of the other factors you mentioned are much less continuous as our exposure to our diet and you equated them.
I’m ensorcelled by your brilliance. Totally fascinated.
I'm learning new words, it seems... Thanks, TB.
Would you meet with Dr. Seyfried and discuss your theories and studies with him? I think we all would love it.
Of course, I'd be honored.
If Physionic talks to him, it would be interesting to better understand the basis behind his statement in his interview with 'Nutrition with Judy' at minute 26 where he states that ketone studies providing evidence of ketone usage as a fuel were not made in isolation but in the presence of other fermentable fuels. update: HomeSteadHow channel just released an interview Dr. Seyfried who explained the use of ketones in greater detail (minute 49-56). In short summary, he explains that fatty acids can uncouple the mitochondria and cause the cell to intake more glucose and glutamine and makes it appear like ketones are providing fuel.
High quality content!
Thanks
Interesting topic. Didn’t know there were two schools of cancer research at all.
Brilliant Nicholas, keep up your good work.
I agree with you that it's a bit naive to think that all cancers are the same and thus can be "treated" the same way. Still, this metabolic theory is very interesting and hopefully will help fight some tumors that heavily rely on aerobic glycolisis. Btw, discovered your content recently, love it. As a PhD student in biotechnology, I would LOVE to see more in depth analysis of scientific papers on UA-cam. I'm sincerely surprised your channel is not more popular. Keep up the good work! 😊
I think your comment took what Seyfried said out of its original context. Seyfried said there might be some out there that do not respond to matabolic therapy. He hasn't found one yet.
@@wigglywrigglydoo Can you point to the large studies he's done on cancer treatments in humans?
I love this video. I think there is a lot to say about the other 'toxins' that are casually put into the human body via fast food (heated seed oils, soy, et al), processed foods (bleach, other cleaning agents, et al), etc. and how they relate to somatic/metabolic theories. As you mention, it's simply too complex to throw into one video. Nonetheless, very well done on this video!
Fascinating!
The metabolic disease theory does open the door to the question: Are there some ways that we can interfere with cancers beside poison, burn, and cut? Jane McLelland's book, "How to Starve Cancer", sheds some light on this topic. Despite its clickbait title, she delves into methods of attacking cancers while undergoing typical standard of care. She notes that not all cancers are the same. Also, a cancer after radiation may have one vulnerability while after chemo it might have another. She claims to have survived stage 4 ovarian cancer and breast cancer. She has a science background.
I found your video helpful as to how to think scientifically about claims in general and this one in particular. I'm adopted so don't know my birth parents medical history. My adoptive mother's mother had some sort of cancer and died from it. I don't know her so don't have any details. I've not eaten sugars all my life but do eat "real foods" that have fiber with sugar/fructose they may contain, but not even a lot of those. I definitely started eating a lot of meat when I got into hypertrophic weight training but made sure it was grass fed lean beef and chicken breasts. I heard EVO was a good oil so stuck with that (and not seed oils). So I'm confused about fat-driven cancers in this metabolic mix. But the video explained things very well.
Thanks, Anthony.
Thank you for making this video. You’ve answered some questions I’ve had and pondered about. I would be interested in hearing what you think about what I’m getting ready to say. I have cancer for the 3rd time now. Prostate cancer the first time with a reoccurrence in a lymph node 2 years later. Now I have a tumor on my kidney. It’s very small type 1 so I’m not overly worried about it but this is my question. I think my cancers started from inflammation. A standard American diet most of my life. I think I was in a state of chronic inflammation for a very long time. I’ve left that lifestyle. I eat Whole Foods now. Stay away from processed foods and heavily sugary foods. Do you think I’m correct in my thoughts or on the right path? I hope I hear back
I am trying low carb, intermittent with long fasting, I also bought gadgets to measure sugar, ketones, and blood pressure.. I was diagnosed with endometrial cancer last May and it's been a month since I started this mixed diet but mostly fasting (but nurturing on my period) I've lost 7kilograms in 3 weeks and I went to the hospital to check my muscle ratio- it's ok 😊 this week I'm on nurturing stage but still losing weight because I eat no sugar- only once a week in a form of fruit. And If I ever eat carbo- only 100grams and I pair it with 25k steps walk and brisk walk- I'm still losing .5kilograms every 3days.. I drink more or less 2-2.5 liters of water and 500ml of greentea with high quercetin. All my food is anti cancer food.. 😂😂😂 Maybe, I'm doing the extreme but I'm enjoying it. Also, 25minutes of average squats, lifts and streches..
Let's see if my doctor will option out total hysterectomy- my next hospital appointment is july 28th.. I'm a very positive person so I think it's also helping, I'll update if any of the diet will cause me harm in the future.
Super interesting - Thank you! Wondering about the type fats that are utilized by cancerous cells. Is there any difference between different types of fatty acids? Omega 3 vs Omega 6 etc. Thank you!
Bloody good question.
Mad props!!! ❤❤❤❤❤
HI Nic
Is it possible to know if prostate cancer can be affected by a low carb diet.
Thanks
This is rapidly becoming my goto health / science channel.
I remember an older youTube video I can't seem to find anymore, saying something similar:
that cancer cells are not just accidents in more recent times, but they have been within animals, even plants from the beginning almost, as an alternative way of functioning, and the mutations are just a side effect of accumulation from repeat divisions.
Love your damn content man. Thanks bro
Thanks Brandon
Thank you for all the great information and research you do for us. May God continue to bless you with much wisdom and knowledge. You are very much appreciated!
Awesome dood
Thank you for this breakdown. TP53 mutation and cancer, do you happen to have an analysis on it or a link that you approve for information?
It's that sentence " Cancer arises from a disruption of mitochondria" that I'm stuck on. Then I'm curious about the leap frog onto the " to generate ATP cellular energy, which ultimately leads cancer cells to undergo a shift to glucose metabolism"
So does the cancer cells cause the disruption of the mitochondria in order to supply themselves with energy. But the sentence says that the disruption causes the cancer.
As I understand it the mitochondria become defective first. Then either the cell dies - if it can't successfully switch to the fermentation process for energy - or becomes a cancer cell - in the case it does successfully switch metabolism to fermentation.
@@michaelchristensen2786 thank you for your explanation. I've just got to run that through my mind few times to see if it triggers any further questions. My immediate thought is that we are back to the issue of what initiates the mitochondria defect, and in thinking about the profile of defect causes in terms of the population age groups of patients , small children , mid age , elderly.