Pages

Showing posts with label Dr Otto Warburg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr Otto Warburg. Show all posts

Wednesday, 13 November 2019

Why An Alkaline Approach Can Successfully Treat Cancer


An alkaline diet based on vegetables and fruits creates a less-than-optimal environment for cancer proliferation, while at the same time strengthens the immune function and supports healthy cells in the body through improved nutrition.
Posted on: 
Thursday, August 8th 2013 at 2:45 pm
Written By: 
Nancy Elizabeth Shaw

Why An Alkaline Approach Can Successfully Treat Cancer
In the 1930's, an interesting natural cancer treatment was proposed as a simple, effective answer to cancer – almost any cancer.  This treatment approach is not well known because it is considered alternative or experimental - or even dangerous[i] - by the medical and scientific community and hence has been referenced primarily in obscure publications outside the mainstream press.
This treatment approach is called alkaline therapy or pH therapy, and is based in part on observations of cultures without significant incidence of cancer[ii] and in part on scientific observations of and experimentation with cellular metabolism.[iii]
The principles of pH therapy are very simple.  The metabolism of cancer cells has a very narrow pH tolerance for cellular proliferation (mitosis), which is between 6.5 and 7.5.  As such, if you can interfere with cancer cell metabolism by either lowering or raising the internal cancer cell pH, you can theoretically stop cancer progression.[iv]  
While lowering cancer cell pH (increasing acidity) is effective against cancer cell mitosis in the lab, increasing acid levels in the live body of a cancer patient puts stress on normal cells and causes a lot of pain.  So the proposed alkaline therapy for people is a "high pH therapy" and has been developed to normalize the intracellular pH of the cancer patient's body through elimination of latent acidosis, while increasing the pH of cancer cells to a range above 7.5.  According to published research, it is at that pH they revert to a normal cellular apoptosis cycle (programed cell death).[v]
Ideally, this approach begins with an alkaline diet.  There is general agreement amongst natural healers and medical professionals alike, that changing a cancer patient's diet is extremely helpful when someone is confronted with a cancer diagnosis.  In a previous article, I outlined the six steps that every cancer patient should take to provide the best chance to heal from and prevent future recurrences of cancer using alkaline diet principles.[vi]
The alkaline diet, which is primarily plant-based and avoids sugar, dairy, wheat and other high-gluten grains as well as an excess consumption of fruits, while emphasizing fresh vegetables and vegetable juices along with cruciferous vegetables and greens, changes the body's intracellular pH to come close to the ideal blood pH of 7.3/7.41  - a key metabolic accomplishment on the path to longevity whether you have cancer or not!  
An alkaline diet based on vegetables and fruits creates a less-than-optimal environment for cancer proliferation, while at the same time strengthens the immune function and supports healthy cells in the body through improved nutrition.
The second step is to use some nutritional mechanism to move the internal cancer cell pH from the optimal mitosis range of pH 6.5 to 7.5, to above 8, which shortens the life of the cancer cell.  As described by its proponents, alkaline therapy neutralizes the acid waste of the cancer which causes so much pain, interferes with the anaerobic fermentation of glucose that starts the self-feeding acidic cancer wasting cycle called cachexia and in time, can induce remission.  If this theory of alkaline therapy holds true, it should be possible to address cancer without chemotherapy, radiation or surgery and use alkaline therapy as a primary cancer treatment.
This bold statement comes from a somewhat abstruse body of research.  In the 1880's, Louis Pasteur published his work on cellular aerobic respiration and glycolysis.  In 1931, Otto Warburg won the Nobel Prize for his work on the metabolism of tumors and the respiration of cells, which was later summarized in his 1956 paper, On the Origin of Cancer Cells.  His work on cancer expanded upon Pasteur's findings and described respiratory insufficiency and a cellular metabolism of glucose fermentation as the primary trigger for cancer progression[vii].
Warburg's conclusions on cancer were much discussed in scientific circles, as they are academically elegant, but were not accepted by most members of the scientific community engaged in cancer research.  Most cancer researchers in the late 1950's believed that the anaerobic metabolism of cancer cells and their accompanying output of lactic acid was a side effect or an adjunct effect of cancer, not a cause.  Cancer research since the 1960's has focused primarily on genetic aberrations as causative for cancer, and has ignored the body of research on cancer pH and its implications for therapeutic approaches.[viii]
Warburg's work was a catalyst for yet another research effort on the nature of cancer cells, beginning in the 1930's.  A. Keith Brewer, PhD (physicist) performed experiments on the relationship between energized, oxygenated cell membrane and elemental uptake, vs. cellular membranes in an unenergized state such as cancer cells exhibit.  He wrote a number of papers discussing the cellular mechanisms of cancer cells and the changes in metabolism induced or indicated by the lack of or presence of oxygen in combination with other elements, particularly potassium and calcium.   He noted that cancer cells share one characteristic no matter what type of cancer:  they have lost their pH control mechanism.
Brewer's summary conclusion regarding cancer was that by changing the pH of cancer cells to alkaline (above 7.5), they will cease to function as they need an acidic, anaerobic environment to thrive.  In other words, he proposed that cancer cells will die if they can be pushed into an alkaline, oxygenated state.[ix]
Brewer's work cites areas in the world where cancer incidents are very low.  These areas contain concentrations of alkalizing minerals in the soil and water, which are greater than in other parts of the world.  For example, the Hunza of northern Pakistan and the Hopi Indians of the American West share both similar soil and water conditions and diet.  The alkaline elemental minerals of cesium chloride, germanium and rubidium are heavily present in the soil and water.  Ingestion of these elements is correspondingly high.  These peoples also live in similar high, dry climates and grow apricot orchards, traditionally eating the fresh or dried fruit and the seeds each day. 
It should be noted that apricot seeds are the source of the controversial cancer treatment Laetrile or B-17/Amygdalin.[x]   Apricot seeds contain trace amounts of cyanide, which has long been identified as a potential chemotherapeutic agent against cancer proliferation.[xi]   Other similarities in the diet include a low consumption of dairy products, meat and wheat, as these foodstuffs are difficult to farm in high, arid climates and a correspondingly greater consumption of millet, buckwheat, nuts, dried fruits and berries in their traditional diets, all of which contain a similar enhanced (though sill minute) concentration of cyanide.
This is all very interesting, but what does it really mean for cancer patients who wish to avoid the pain of cancer and the typical course of treatment using surgery, chemotherapy and radiation?  What are the conditions that will force cancer cells to change their pH?
Conventional chemotherapeutic agents such as Cytoxan usually cause more damage to normal cells than to cancer cells, because cancer cells have a very thick, unenergized cellular membrane that essentially protects them from absorbing many drugs.  Normal cells have no such protection. 
Conversely, cancer cells have no way to normalize their internal pH, where normal cells are relatively unaffected by high concentrations of alkalizing minerals.  However cancer cells take up primarily two elements:  glucose and potassium.
In practical application, then, it is necessary to find a way to guide alkalizing elements - such as cesium, germanium or rubidium - into cancer cells, without impacting normal cells.  It turns out this can be done using a transport agent that penetrates the bone/blood barriers, then relying on the normal uptake of alkalizing elements that follow the potassium pathway.  Cancer cells appear to have preferential uptake of cesium chloride in particular, but also take up germanium, rubidium, selenium, etc. all through the potassium pathway.
There is a compound that is frequently applied to the skin by arthritis sufferers for relief of inflammation, used in brain surgery to relieve intracranial pressure and topically used in sports medicine and veterinary medicine,[xii] also for reducing inflammation.  This compound is called DMSO and it is formed in the slurry created from soaking wood chips in water that is a bi-product of the paper making industry. 
Folklore has it that workers in the paper making industry were observed to have their hands in water continuously, but they never developed arthritis and had rapidly healing skin and strong nails.  Experimentation with DMSO as a medical treatment began in the 1800's and continues to the present day.  DMSO is medically approved in the United States only for the treatment of interstitial cystitis, a type of inflammation of the bladder.[xiii]
The reason DMSO is so interesting to cancer patients is that, in addition to its anti-inflammatory properties, it is a "carrier agent."  It penetrates the brain/blood barrier and carries with it whatever drug or mineral is mixed with.
There is now some interest in the cancer industry in potentially using DMSO to carry chemotherapeutic agents into cancer cells and get beyond their protective membrane.  However, for the purposes of changing the alkalinity of cancer cells using cesium chloride, germanium, rubidium and other alkalizing minerals, DMSO and its ingestible form, MSM, are an effective medium.  Essentially these agents carry the minerals into all areas of the body including the brain, organs and bone marrow, where they can be used with other nutrients in ordinary cellular metabolism.
Using topically applied and ingested alkaline minerals to change cancer cell pH is not a new idea.  Controlled experiments and the personal use of this method have been ongoing since the mid-1900s.   However, it is important to note that the only FDA approved clinical trial did not have outstanding results.[xiv]  About 50% of the participants died – though if you read the study results in detail you will discover that they had been pronounced terminal before the trial began and some of them never even took one treatment.  Others had side effects ranging from leg cramps to heart arrhythmia.  A careful read will lead you to believe that perhaps they were given too strong a dose in too short a period of time.[xv]
From this research and subsequent studies, it is now understood that alkaline minerals look to normal cells and to cancer cells like potassium.  All cells require potassium to function.  The reason cancer cells take up these alkaline minerals is their resemblance to potassium. 
Functionally, however, these minerals cannot take the place of potassium in cellular metabolism.  While substituting alkaline minerals for potassium creates exactly the desired result in cancer cells – increased alkalinity - when normal cells replace potassium with other minerals over the long term the consequences can be quite serious as it causes electrolyte imbalance, manifested as heart arrhythmia and leg cramps.[xvi]
The remedy to this condition of electrolyte imbalance, caused by replacement of potassium in healthy cells with other alkaline minerals during pH therapy, is simple in practical application.  Alkaline minerals are ingested or applied to the skin only during the day.  Then before sleep, the user must take potassium chloride supplementation along with other electrolytes such as magnesium and calcium if needed.  Monitoring of potassium blood levels every two weeks by a doctor is critical if a cancer patient decides to incorporate alkaline therapy into their cancer regime.   
When properly balanced, the side effects of using alkaline minerals are greatly if not completely remediated by electrolyte rebalancing.  Despite the "fear, fire, foe" tone of Mssrs. Wiens et al in the article cited above[xvii] there is no risk of dying of a heart attack (or leg cramp), unless the patient ignores the proper method using alkaline minerals and is not working in consultation with an experienced specialist.  A caution: electrolyte rebalancing cannot be properly implemented by casual methods such as drinking sports drinks, particularly since commercial products are generally full of sugar and artificial substances.  Electrolyte rebalancing must be carefully applied using specific doses of supplements, based on your personal blood composition, in consultation with a nutrition expert or endocrinologist.
My personal experience with pH therapy has been nothing short of spectacular.  I have seen stage four, terminal cancer patients recover using alkalizing minerals.  There are patients who report untreatable cancers, such as nasal or fully metastasized breast cancers, which after a very persistent course of tiny doses over several years, eventually disappeared altogether.  Patients who have never had chemotherapy or radiation often experience rapid remission after changing to an alkaline diet and incorporating the use of alkaline minerals into their regime. 
However pH therapy using alkaline minerals requires quite a bit of knowledge (do your homework!) and is greatly enhanced with the support of a mineral provider or cancer coach who has the experience to guide you through the process.  Many mineral providers sell minerals, but do not have the ability to assist the users.  Therefore, it is critical to seek a mineral provider who can provide references to extensive information and is available to help you work through the rough spots – and there will be some!
It is my direct personal experience that cancer can be controlled using alkaline minerals.  There are thousands of people who have had similar positive experiences.  Does it work for everyone?  No.  However if high pH therapy is properly applied, it works for a very respectable percentage of cancer sufferers – estimated at upwards of an 80% response rate by providers.  Significant when compared to traditional therapies.
This finding is why I started The Cancer Alternative Foundation - to help cancer patients feel comfortable using effective, natural therapies like pH therapy as part of their overall treatment strategy.  The Foundation simply researches and vets the claims of various alternative offerings for cancer – and there are more than 400!  To date, we have concluded that high pH therapy is one of the most effective alternatives, particularly for later stage cancers.
However alkaline therapy outcomes (as well as those for other sound alternatives) have yet to be documented in a systematic way, such that the medical community could reliably understand the positive impact that incorporating it into cancer treatment could make to hundreds of thousands of cancer sufferers.   Collecting outcomes is a current project at The Cancer Alternative Foundation and should prove invaluable to cancer patients and their doctors and care givers alike.[xviii]
If nothing else, it is my contention that alkaline therapy could be used in a supporting role to conventional treatment, which will only improve the long-term outcome for patients.  It is my hope that this promising and effective natural approach to cancer becomes more accepted by mainstream cancer care providers - as well as those enlightened individuals seeking a natural alternative, who are willing to close their eyes and jump. 
An alkaline approach to cancer can only help them to enjoy their future – as in having one!
Nancy Elizabeth Shaw is a strategist, meta-analyst and Founder of The Cancer Alternative Foundation.  Contact information: www.thecanceralternative.org/contact_us

[i] Cassileth, Barrie R. et al, Herb-Drug Interaction in Oncology, pp. 158-159; Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, People's Medical Publishing House, Shelton, CT  2010
[ii] Clark, J., Hunza in the Himalayas, National Geographic, 72, 38-45; 1963
[iii] Brewer, A. Keith and Passwater, R.   Physics of the Cell Membrane V. Mechanisms involved in cancer; American Lab, 1975,-
8, 37-45
[iv] Brewer, A. Keith PhD, Cancer, Its Nature and a Proposed Treatment, 1997; Brewer Science Library; https://www.mwt.net/~drbrewer/brew_art.htm
[v] Ibid, p. 15.
[vi] //www.greenmedinfo.health/blog/nutrition-information-every-cancer-patient-should-know
[vii] Warburg, Otto, On the Origin of Cancer Cells, Science, February 1956, Vol. 123, No. 3191
[viii] Witting, Rainer and Coy, Johannes, The Role of Glucose Metabolism and Glucose-Associated Signaling in Cancer; Perspectives in Medicinal Chemistry, 2007; 1:64-82. Pp. 2; cited PubMed, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2754915
[ix] Cancer: The Mechanism Involved and a High pH Therapy, 1978 papers of A. Keith Brewer, Ph.D. & co-authors, Copyright A. Keith Brewer Foundation, 325 N. Central Ave., Richland Center, Wis, 53581.
[x] Griffin, G. Edward, World Without Cancer:  The Story of Vitamin B17, American Media, Westlake, CA 1974
[xi] Fatma Akinci Yildirim and M. Atilla Askin: Variability of amygdalin content in seeds of sweet and bitter apricot cultivars in Turkey. African Journal of Biotechnology Vol. 9(39), pp. 6522-6524, 27 September, 2010; Available online at https://www.academicjournals.org/AJB; DOI: 10.5897/AJB10.884; 600 mg. of bitter apricot seeds contain up to 1.8 mg of cyanide, where the sweet kernels contain up to .9 mg. of cyanide.
[xiii]https://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/pharmacologicalandbiologicaltreatment/dmso; When used for this condition, a 50% solution of DMSO is instilled into the bladder through a catheter and left there for about 15 minutes to relieve the inflammation
[xvi] Weins, Matthew et al; Cesium chloride-induced torsades de pointes, Can J Cardiol. 2009 September; 25(9): e329–e331; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2780897
[xvii] Ibid.
[xviii] To donate to The Cancer Alternative Foundation's Alternative Outcomes Database, see the website:  https://www.thecanceralternative.org/donate_to_the_cancer_alternative_foundation

Thursday, 17 October 2019

New basic understanding of how lung cancer spreads: antioxidants implicated

New basic understanding of how lung cancer spreads: antioxidants implicated





Date:
June 27, 2019
Source:
Karolinska Institutet
Summary:
Lung cancer cells use antioxidants, endogenous or dietary, to spread in the body by activating a protein called BACH1 and increasing the uptake and use of sugar, researchers report in two independent studies. The studies pave the way for new therapeutic strategies for lung cancer.

FULL STORY

Illustration of lungs (stock image). | Credit: (c) yodiyim / stock.adobe.com

Lung cancer cells use antioxidants, endogenous or dietary, to spread in the body by activating a protein called BACH1 and increasing the uptake and use of sugar, Swedish and American researchers report in two independent studies. The studies, which are published in the eminent scientific journal Cell, pave the way for new therapeutic strategies for lung cancer.
It is a known fact that cancer cells, owing to their special metabolism, are exposed to oxidative stress caused by free oxygen radicals. It is also well-known that cancer cells are characterised by the high uptake and use of glucose, or sugar, and that this is one of many factors that govern their ability to divide and metastasise. Studying mice and human tissue, two independent research teams have now discovered how these circumstances interact when cancer cells metastasise to other parts of the body.
The process begins when the cancer cells manage to reduce their oxidative stress, which can happen in one of two ways: the cancer cells can either obtain antioxidants, such as vitamins A, C or E, from the diet, or synthesise their own. In about one in every three cases of lung cancer, the tumour cells have special mutations, linked to the NRF2 and KEAP1 genes, which enable them to start producing their own antioxidants.
It is when the oxidative stress has subsided that the fundamental process of the new discovery occurs: the protein BACH1 is stabilised and accumulates in the cancer cells. This protein presses several start buttons in the cancer cell which stimulates metastasis mechanisms, including one that orders the cancer cell to increase both the metabolism of glucose into cell fuel and lactic acid, and the stockpiling of glucose from the blood stream. The higher rate of glucose use then greatly boosts the ability of the cancer cells to spread.
"There is nothing to suggest, however, that the amount of glucose in the blood has anything to do with this; rather, it is the tumour cells' ability to utilise glucose that is essential to the accelerating metastasis," says Martin Bergo, professor at the Department of Biosciences and Nutrition at Karolinska Institutet, who led the Swedish study.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. The most life-threatening aspect of lung cancer is metastasis.
"We now have important new information on lung cancer metastasis, making it possible for us to develop new treatments, such as ones based on inhibiting BACH1," says Professor Bergo. "In this present study, we show that the aggressive metastasising induced by antioxidants can be blocked by stopping the production of BACH1 or by using drugs that suppress the breakdown of sugar. Our American colleagues show how inhibiting another enzyme, heme oxygenase, which is linked to BACH1, can also curb the metastasis process."
Professor Bergo and his Swedish colleagues have previously shown that antioxidants, such as vitamin E, in dietary supplement doses accelerate tumour growth. When the first studies to show this were presented in 2014 they drew a great deal of media attention and sparked a fierce debate, since it was generally believed that antioxidant supplements had beneficial effects on cancer. What the researchers have done now is to explain how antioxidants go about expediting the course of the disease -- specifically, in the case of the present study, lung cancer.
"This is one of the most exciting findings we've made," says Volkan Sayin, assistant professor at the Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Gothenburg, and co-corresponding author. "Our results also provide a new explanation for how the so-called Warburg effect is activated. The Warburg effect describes how cancer cells absorb sugar and convert it into energy and lactic acid under normal aerobic conditions. Since this is one of the most well-known hallmarks of cancer, our results provide a crucial new piece in the oncological puzzle."
The Swedish study was conducted at Karolinska Institutet and Gothenburg University, whereas the American study was conducted at New York University. The pair of studies, as well as a "Preview" commenting on the new findings, are published at the same time in the journal Cell.
The Swedish study was financed with grants from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, the Sjöberg Foundation, StratCan (the strategic research programme in cancer at Karolinska Institutet), CIMED (the Centre for Innovative Medicine at Karolinska Institutet), the Swedish Cancer Society, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Society for Medical Research, the Wallenberg Center for Molecular and Translational Medicine, and the Alex and Eva Wallström Foundation.

Story Source:
Materials provided by Karolinska InstitutetNote: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal References:
  1. Clotilde Wiel, Kristell Le Gal, Mohamed X. Ibrahim, Chowdhury Arif Jahangir, Muhammad Kashif, Haidong Yao, Dorian V. Ziegler, Xiufeng Xu, Tanushree Ghosh, Tanmoy Mondal, Chandrasekhar Kanduri, Per Lindahl, Volkan I. Sayin, Martin O. Bergo. BACH1 Stabilization by Antioxidants Stimulates Lung Cancer MetastasisCell, 2019; DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.06.005
  2. Luca Lignitto, Sarah E. LeBoeuf, Harrison Homer, Shaowen Jiang, Manor Askenazi, Triantafyllia R. Karakousi, Harvey I. Pass, Arjun J. Bhutkar, Aristotelis Tsirigos, Beatrix Ueberheide, Volkan I. Sayin, Thales Papagiannakopoulos, Michele Pagano. Nrf2 Activation Promotes Lung Cancer Metastasis by Inhibiting the Degradation of Bach1Cell, 2019; DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2019.06.003


RELATED STORIES

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190627114056.htm

Thursday, 25 August 2016

The alternative approach to cancer is triumphant

17 August 2016

Long before his death in 1970, German scientist Dr. Otto Warburg was considered one of the greatest biochemists of the 20th century. His research provided some of the first insights into cellular respiration, photosynthesis, and the origins of cancer.
In 1931, he won the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his work. It seemed like he was set up for a world-changing career.
But that all changed in 1953, when James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA and ushered in the age of molecular biology. .
With this new development, researchers were soon convinced that genes were the key to defeating cancer and that genetic mutations forced cells to divide and multiply relentlessly.
Aside from that, mainstream medicine glommed onto the strategy of killing cancer cells with chemotherapy, radiation and surgery rather than identifying and curing the underlying root causes of cancer.
Dr. Warburg’s theories were largely forgotten. Until now. . 
The strategy of treating cancer by killing cancer cells has been a failure, because cancer stem cells survive these therapies and the disease almost always returns. These treatments work only for certain early-stage (and usually non-aggressive) cancers where it really IS possible to kill every cancer cell.
As for the gene-mutation theory – the only “root cause” cancer theory in which mainstream medicine has shown any interest – hundreds of billions of research dollars have produced almost nothing.
So here we are, more than 60 years later with cancer diagnoses continuing to rise. While we certainly know a lot more about cancer genetics, we’re no closer to a cure.
Were Dr. Warburg’s theories the key all along? I’ll give you a simple answer: Yes. And – of all people – Dr. James Watson now agrees.
Today’s generation of scientists are digging back in to cancer metabolism to find out…
The Warburg effect and how cancer creates energy
Healthy cells need oxygen for energy and replication. They’re aerobic cells.
While studying sea urchin eggs in the 1920s, Otto Warburg was the first to discover that cancer cells are the exact opposite. In cancer cells, the aerobic or normal form of energy production has failed, and the cells are forced to fall back on “Plan B”: producing energy by fermentation, specifically fermentation of sugar.
When cells begin to ferment glucose (blood sugar) instead of using oxygen to burn glucose, it’s called the Warburg effect, aptly named, and it’s present in about four out of five of all cancers.
He had evidence that cells start going crazy for sugar because their mitochondria — cellular “batteries” or “energy factories” — get so damaged they can’t use oxygen anymore.
Altered metabolism is now known to be one of the hallmarks of cancer.
Cancer’s voracious appetite for sugar is the reason that the positron emission tomography (PET) scan is the best existing test to locate and diagnose cancer. We know cancer needs massive quantities of sugar, far more than healthy cells that oxidize sugar. This is not in dispute.
In a PET scan, sugar molecules are tagged with a radioactive marker. The sugar molecules then concentrate in much higher density in cancer cells than in healthy cells, and the bright spots of radioactivity are easy to see on the scan. Voila, the doctor can see what parts of the body have cancer.
Dr. Warburg believed the change from the aerobic to the anaerobic or fermentation type of metabolism was the cause of cancer.
Connecting cellular metabolism and molecular biology
Dr. Warburg’s research is the cornerstone of cancer diagnosis and, increasingly, it’s the cornerstone of cancer treatment, at least among knowledgeable doctors. Cancer cell metabolism differs from healthy cell metabolism, and this difference has become the most effective avenue to treatment.
This approach is simply more effective than the gene-mutation approach of trying to find and treat broken DNA. One problem is that there are hundreds of thousands of gene mutations and it’s impossible to treat this riot of dysfunction.
Researchers thought they could find “the” mutation, or a few mutations, that “caused” cancer. And that’s where most of the research money has gone for decades. Instead they found more mutations than they could count.
The other problem is that – although this isn’t absolutely confirmed yet – it’s most likely that cancer originates in the mitochondria, NOT in the genes. That is, cancer is a metabolic or mitochondrial disease at its very heart, and genes are just a sideshow.
The DNA probably gets damaged by the toxic byproducts of the sick mitochonrdria. These deadly byproducts account for the “acid bath” that surrounds cancer tumors.
The gene approach may have produced
one useful bit of knowledge…
Mainstream molecular biologists – ever obsessed with genes — have been searching for the missing link between Warburg’s discovery and what we understand today about gene mutation.
This group more or less concedes that the problem is with mitochondria but they think a genetic defect is causing the mitochondrial malfunction. So they’ve been looking for genes that control cell division and regulate nutrient consumption.
They did find the gene AKT … which creates a chain of signaling proteins that play a prominent role in cell division. When this chain is mutated, it causes the cell to disregard signals to stop eating… and instead go on a glucose-eating rampage.
Though it sounds scary, there’s good news.
Once AKT is activated, these new cancer cells are dependent on glucose for energy. So if you remove sugar completely, they’re far more prone to automatic cell death.1
Regardless of this genetic discovery and many others like it, many researchers, including molecular biologist James Watson, now think that Dr. Warburg was right:
Cellular metabolism is the root cause of cancer — and while there are secondary causes and influences in growth, targeting metabolism first will yield greater results than starting with the gene mutation.
Dr. Watson was quoted in a New York Times article about the Warburg revival that “locating the genes that cause cancer has been remarkably unhelpful.” And if he was going into cancer research today, he “would study biochemistry rather than molecular biology.” 2
Overall, sequencing DNA to find the cause of cancer was “unhelpful” because there can be many kinds of gene mutations in a single cancer. In fact, researchers have found no consistency in gene mutations from tumor to tumor.
For example, commonly cited oncogene p53 is only present in half of tumors.3 And scientists still aren’t sure if the expression of “metabolic master” oncogene myc causes metabolic changes or is a result of metabolic changes.4
The story seems to be the same with thousands of other enzymes, proteins, and genes… where the line between overexpression, suppression, and tumor formation is very thin.
But there are only a few, limited ways human cells can use energy…
And cancer cells use fuel in distinctly different ways than healthy cells, every single time.
It may turn out that altered metabolism is not the one and only cause of cancer, but it provides an easy target for cancer treatment. Metabolic dysfunction is something we can see, understand and change now.
A high-sugar diet and elevated insulin levels
feed cancer cells
There’s no questioning the strong link between the standard American diet (SAD) – with its massive consumption of sugar and other refined carbs – and our deadly rates of obesity, diabetes, inflammation, and cancer.
Dr. James Watson said in the New York Times article, “I think there’s no doubt that insulin is pro-cancer.”
The standard American diet of processed foods, simple carbohydrates and sugar causes permanently elevated insulin levels, which in turn cause the insulin signaling pathways to go haywire.
This can also trigger the Warburg effect and cause cells to feed on sugar and grow uncontrollably.
In fact, metformin, a common drug used to lower blood glucose and insulin levels in people with diabetes, has been shown to reduce the risk of developing cancer in its users.5
I wouldn’t be surprised if Big Pharma used this to multiply their sales and start selling metformin as a cancer prevention drug in the future …
But as a Cancer Defeated reader, you know it’s far better to take matters into your own hands now by adjusting your diet and starving cancer cells before they have the chance to grow.
Ketogenic diet may be the key to starving cancer
I’m convinced: Cancer feeds on glucose. So the best way to fight it is to starve it out.
That means you need to reduce your sugar intake and lower your insulin levels to keep cancer cells from thriving.
I don’t think a totally non-carbohydrate diet is sustainable for most people for years on end. But eat the lowest levels of carbs you can tolerate, and make sure the carbs you do eat are not high-glycemic “white foods” like sugar, rice, wheat products and potatoes.
These foods almost immediately turn to sugar in your body and spike your blood sugar and insulin levels.
Instead, train your body to use fat for energy with a diet high in healthy fats (also called a ketogenic, or “keto” diet).
When you’re a “fat burner” instead of a “sugar burner,” your body burns fat for energy instead of glucose. This has the added benefit of lowering body fat content in addition to limiting the fuel for cancer cells.
The traditional keto diet also recommends between 40 and 60 grams of protein per day… though I think this is low. Most people need 1 – 1.5g of protein per pound of bodyweight, depending on your goals (building muscle, maintaining muscle, and/or losing fat.)*
Protein does raise your blood sugar and cause an insulin response, but not nearly as much as processed carbs. Healthy fats from nuts, coconut oil, avocado and olive oil have little to no impact on blood sugar.
Here are other foods to eat, not only to keep your blood sugar low but also to flood your body with healthy nutrients:
  • Organic fruits and vegetables
  • High-fiber foods like chia seeds, root and cruciferous veggies and some berries
  • Protein from grass-fed meats, beans and pasture-raised eggs
  • Alkalizing foods like ginger, lemon, apple cider vinegar, and “specialty” greens like chlorella
Of course, this isn’t news if you’ve been reading Cancer Defeated for any length of time. The science behind the kind of diet I’ve been promoting keeps stacking up, proving that diet and lifestyle have a profound impact on cancer risk.
Getting cancer isn’t always “bad luck” or “bad genes” or another fatalistic excuse. You CAN take an active role in reducing your risk of developing cancer.
You hold your health in your hands. You have a choice.