Help pls - Cancer/Diet

Tony - not talking about aeitiology of cancer
I am talking about cancer at the metatastic stage where treatment is palliative - and that only.

Nige - interesting paper: one comment - an induced brain tumour in mice is a long way from a tumour in humans, and a even further distance from a metatastic cancer in anyone.

Sorry - but that is a lovely research direction - that isnt news to anyone but the research community.
Also it is taling about ketones, and we already know they have a unique role in brain metabolism - and I would already suggest that the applicability of anything based on ketones would be limited largely if not exclusively to brain based tumour growth.
I wouldnt even be looking at possible venues for your party just yet!

I may appear cynical - but really I dont want false hope to very vulnerable people. People with metatastic cancer die; I wont lie to anyone about this, I have seen it, I have had to explain it - and I think anyone who holds out false hope to these people is anything from genuinely misguided to a lowlife depending on what they are doing.
And I also think dangling false hope is cruel and unethical.

Hope for the best - by all means; but plan for the worst - exceptions are big news because they are just that exceptions!

Big Les
Nige - interesting paper: one comment - an induced brain tumour in mice is a long way from a tumour in humans, and a even further distance from a metatastic cancer in anyone. Sorry - but that is a lovely research direction - that isnt news to anyone but the research community.  Also it is taling about ketones, and we already know they have a unique role in brain metabolism - and I would already suggest that the applicability of anything based on ketones would be limited largely if not exclusively to brain based tumour growth. I wouldnt even be looking at possible venues for your party just yet!

Les, THIS study was on 86 cancer patients so it was a human trial. Whether MG level from a keto diet is as effective is unknown.

Big Les
I may appear cynical - but really I dont want false hope to very vulnerable people. People with metatastic cancer die; I wont lie to anyone about this, I have seen it, I have had to explain it - and I think anyone who holds out false hope to these people is anything from genuinely misguided to a lowlife depending on what they are doing. And I also think dangling false hope is cruel and unethical.

Hope for the best - by all means; but plan for the worst - exceptions are big news because they are just that exceptions!

Agreed. Although miracles can & do happen, they are extremely rare. However, it ain't over 'til it's over.

Big Les

I may appear cynical - but really I dont want false hope to very vulnerable people. People with metatastic cancer die; I wont lie to anyone about this, I have seen it, I have had to explain it - and I think anyone who holds out false hope to these people is anything from genuinely misguided to a lowlife depending on what they are doing.
And I also think dangling false hope is cruel and unethical.

A nutritionist powerlifter we sponsor, Pat Reeves (http://www.foodalive.org/index.html), has a genetic predisposition to cancer, and has metstases (sp?!) in various places (last time I spoke to her she had about 16 tumours) around her body.

She "should" of died a long, long time ago.

Instead she still competes in powerlifting setting records in her age/weight classes.

What she doesn't know about diet and cancer I'd probably fit on a stamp.

False hope is wrong, but shutting the door on possibility is potentially worse. As I said earlier you should always prepare yourself for the worst, but you should also aim for the best.

i believe the person should do whatever is going to make them enjoy what time they have the most.

following a very restricted diet, particularly in the later stages will be a huge battle.  they may end up trying to live on food that makes them feel ill, and that they almost cant physically eat.  Driven on by false hope that its somehow going to cure them.  It wont.  some people may have lived longer than expected, but it cant be show that this is related to diet anymore than it can be shown it isnt.

i dont like posts that seem to promise things, or give false hope. Ive seen just how much people can put themselfs through because of this false hope.  And because of how hard the news is to deal with, there is a real risk of people finding false how in the most ridiculous or restricted of lifestyles.

quality of life has to come first.  As les put it, 'if they fancy a bacon sandwich, eat a bacon sandwich'. 

palletable foods can change so much day to day, to suggest they then live on a highly restricted diet, is in my view counterproductive.

Hi guys,
Still yet to sink in tbh, this discussion is interesting even purely from a academic POV.

Ive forwarded the macmillion site to the person but thats all for now, i'm not sure what to do interms of diet advice & this research stuff.

I suppose what ill do is mention it and maybe it can be brought up with the Dr's, even if it inspires one doctor to work harder thats good enough. As of yet ive avoided the subject to be honest, its quite a wierd thing to think about, specially talk about.

Id rather have fun times, than the depressing conversations.

Thanks guys,
Good has come from this, but it feels a bit selfish to admit that and has made me question my morals and values in wierd ways. "Good" coming from someones inevitable death is kinda hard to take, in a way i guess good coming from it is better than nothing. Yet you almost feel like your taking advantage of someones disadvantage/bad luck which doesnt sit well.

Strange place to be

Value your health guys, appreciate your loved ones!

Tony Barnes

Big Les

I may appear cynical - but really I dont want false hope to very vulnerable people. People with metatastic cancer die; I wont lie to anyone about this, I have seen it, I have had to explain it - and I think anyone who holds out false hope to these people is anything from genuinely misguided to a lowlife depending on what they are doing.
And I also think dangling false hope is cruel and unethical.

A nutritionist powerlifter we sponsor, Pat Reeves (http://www.foodalive.org/index.html), has a genetic predisposition to cancer, and has metstases (sp?!) in various places (last time I spoke to her she had about 16 tumours) around her body.

She "should" of died a long, long time ago.

Instead she still competes in powerlifting setting records in her age/weight classes.

What she doesn't know about diet and cancer I'd probably fit on a stamp.

False hope is wrong, but shutting the door on possibility is potentially worse. As I said earlier you should always prepare yourself for the worst, but you should also aim for the best.

You're still missing Les' point though Tony. From the information we're given this is is palliative care, not just stopping progression of cancer.  There is a certain stage when cancer has to be treated as palliative.  In particular it depends where the tumours are and if they are still growing.

That's still giving up in my book though James.

I'm an optimistic person, always have been, but at the same time I do feel I am a realist too.

Realistically, the chances of diet and lifestyle changes saving the life of someone who has maybe months ahead of them are slim. Optimistically slim is better than none.

If they feel they don't want to fight any more, and just enjoy what time they have left, fine, their choice, their right. I'm just highlighting that there is always the choice to try, as that's also everyone's right.

Personally I'd rather go down fighting.

When conventional medicine switches from active treatment to palliative treatment, it means that conventional medicine has given up.

Some study on PubMed mentioned the survival rate of women with metastatic breast cancer. The 5 year figure was ~1.5%. That's pretty bad, but it's not zero.

Have the doctors tried absolutely everything? See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15325667 & http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15446562 & http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15864701 & http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10431585 & http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17940392 to name a few.

The above case studies may of course be irrelevant to Chris' friend/relative's case.

and of course 5 year survival rates tell you nothing of the quality of life in those 5 years.

I think the Liverpool care pathway and the gold standards framework are the best guides in palliative care.

There is much talk about not giving up the fight etc and trying other options etc to prolong life/cure etc.

My own personal experience is that it is better to keep doing as the patient always did. This gives the patient a feeling of well being and normality in their lives i think. Radical changes in diet act as a constant reminder of sickness to the patient i think and are wont have any effect on prognosis etc. Normality and quality of life are paramount at this time especially since everything in their lives has been thrown into disarray.

Im considering a post in General about cancer as i am struggling with various issues but i think it may upset many people on the board, opening old wounds. 

Tony Barnes


That's still giving up in my book though James.

I'm an optimistic person, always have been, but at the same time I do feel I am a realist too.

Realistically, the chances of diet and lifestyle changes saving the life of someone who has maybe months ahead of them are slim. Optimistically slim is better than none.

If they feel they don't want to fight any more, and just enjoy what time they have left, fine, their choice, their right. I'm just highlighting that there is always the choice to try, as that's also everyone's right.

Personally I'd rather go down fighting.

But it's not giving up.  There's some point where fighting will reduce quality of life.  Like you I'm an optimist and a fighter, but from my mother I realised there was some give up point.  She fought cancer for 11 years, and I cannot emphasise the hardness of the fight enough - she fought so hard she had loads of other cancer sufferers come and visit her for inspiration.  The last few months for her were not good.  One day she sat me down and told me she was giving up and I was furious with her.  But over the next few days she convinced me this was the best thing for her and the point had come to relax.  Then a few years later I was working in the health service and saw many palliative cancer patients, some I chatted with and realised it's a common mindset for the very terminally ill.

Sure it's everyone's right, and the fact that you say this confirms you're still completely missing Les' and my point!  I certainly agree with everything you say ... but that's not what I meant.

I am a very positive person, trust me on that, and sometimes palliative care is the positive way.  But, hey, don't ask me, you can only go on what those in that condition have said.

dazc


i believe the person should do whatever is going to make them enjoy what time they have the most.

I agree with this.

Sorry to hear your sad news Rich, best wishes x