Fighting Cancer By Putting Tumor Cells On A Diet
German physician, Otto Warburg, reported in the 1920s that rather than generating energy using the oxygen-based process of respiration like healthy cells do, that cancer cells preferred the oxygen-free, process of fermentation. Currently, cancer doctrine says that most malignancies are caused by DNA mutations inside the nuclei of cells and that these mutations ultimately lead to runaway cellular proliferation; a good cell turned bad. Cancer has come to be understood as a set of diseases and many oncologists offer personalized treatments to be most successful.
But what if Otto Warburg was right?
Dr. Thomas Seyfried, a leading proponent of Warburg’s theory, and Boston College biology professor, published a book in 2012 called Cancer as a Metabolic Disease (his book’s Facebook page has over 6,000 followers).
Citing decades of research, including his own, Seyfried believes that aberrant (irregular) metabolism can somehow induce malignancy. He also believes that research supports the idea that starving the cancer of the fuel it needs to ferment, the sugar glucose and the amnio acid glutamine, could be a potential treatment option (many of our doctor friends have been saying this for a long time).
From the NPR article:
“He specifically implicates mitochondria, our energy-producing organelles, in spurring on malignancy. This belief is in part based on work from the ’70s and ’80s showing that if the cytoplasm (the buoyant cellular goo that contains the mitochondria) is transferred from a normal cell to a tumorigenic cell (one with the potential to develop into a cancer) the tendency toward cancer is suppressed. Conversely, animal research has shown that transferring the nucleus of a malignant cell into the cytoplasm of a normal cell inhibits the tumor potential of that initially malignant cell, implying, according to Seyfried, that whatever is causing the cancer lies in the cytoplasm, not the nucleus.”
And Seyfried isn’t alone in his belief. His colleague, Dominic D’Agostino- a biology professor at the University of South Florida- also believes that the primary driver of cancer is mitochondrial dysfunction, and that this process can begin with any number of carcinogens — genetic predilections, radiation, chemical exposures and even diet. Injured mitochondria create volatile compounds called “reactive oxygen species” that can damage DNA and D’Agostino speculates that this might explain why most cancers have mutations.
Seyfried also believes strongly in diet. The ketogenic diet is intended to starve the cancer cells of the glucose they need for fermentation.”The drugs we have now are so toxic and there’s no reason people should have to be poisoned to be healthy. There are a number of studies, including those we’ve published, showing a direct relationship between the ketogenic diet and slowed tumor growth,” says Seyfried, reports NPR.
While many have been using this method and seeing results, the idea worries some. The Mayo Clinic’s, Dr. E. Aubrey Thompson, a cancer biologist says, “I get a little scared when people start talking about diet for cancer since you can quickly get into pseudoscience here.” He feels that the data to support a ketogenic diet for treatment of cancer is limited and says, “The drug companies aren’t going to fund these types of trials. They can’t make money marketing a diet.” Sadly, truer words were never spoken. Cancer equals profits. If it was this simple, there would be no need for the multi-billion dollar a year business.
Seyfried feels that eventually diet and nutrient-based treatments will serve along side existing therapies. But, if the growth of tumors can be slowed so that less-toxic doses of the drugs we already have can be used, it’s still a win. The idea here to to think outside the box and be willing to look at all alternatives.
Now that’s a statement we can get behind.
Source: NPR
