Pancreatic Cancer Support

[#1]

Thanks Sailor. Hi Maddie86 We should really be more precise when talking about dieting or eating diff. types of foods. As I've already mentioned a particular diet IMO can not cure cancer but may reinforce the immune system, however what we need to do here is - be more selective when it comes to quality. I would always pick organic food over "mass-manufactured". It is not known exactly what chemicals are being used or what pesticides are being used when producing diff. types of food. This is what is killing us! Not red meat or meat in general etc. Chemicals do. Cancer was HARDLY present and non detectable in the past. When we look back to the times of ancient Egypt - no cancer. Ancient Greece or Rome - no cancer. They were eating meat back then too. Also, with introduction of sugar in the western diet over the last century or so the rate of diff. cancer related diseases has boomed, and will not stop until we do something about it. And we can't do much about it because no major conglomerate will be willing to take a leading role. I would BAN the use of sugar in ANY product. I would also BAN maltodextrin or similarly dangerous sweeteners. This is what is killing us. Also, we have been told to avoid exposure to the Sun and therefore we lack of vitamin D. Vitamin D is a very important hormone. Test your blood and I reckon 2/3 of the Australian population will bi vitamin D deficient. Lack of vitamin D among other things can cause cancer. I will write about it more in my blog. I consider sugar - an addictive DRUG which is much more dangerous than heroin or cocaine. Sugar kills more people than heroin by far! I would not say - eat fruit and veggies and do not eat meat. Some fruit and veggies (the way how it is grown) are equally toxic. When I go shopping I buy HOMEBRAND Rolled Oats ($1) not because it is $1 and the cheapest product in the market but because it does not have sugar and other stuff in it. What a paradox! The healthiest stuff is at the same time the cheapest. While all other products that are being advertised on TV are far less healthy and much more expensive. People just do not look at it that way but they should. We need to start living differently and remain living that way LONG TERM. Again, people just don't. Until something cataclysmic happens. Only then we will learn how to accept the fact and live with it. Such is life.

[Sailor]

Hi DPC I do have to take exception to some of your comments. If you want a list of know human carcinogens then go the the International Agency for Research on Cancer http://www.iarc.fr. They regularly review all the evidence and publish lists that include, known human carcinogens, suspected human carcinogens, carcinogenic in animals but no evidence of carcinogenicity in humans, etc. Raw processed sugar may be bad for you but there is no evidence that it produces cancer in any animal, including humans. Excess Vitamin D has a been accused of causing cancer now you are saying deficiency of Vitamin D cause cancer. What is your evidence? Also to state that their was no cancer back in ancient Egypt or Rome is false. There was and it is recorded. However, cancer is largely a disease associated with ageing, as I have said elsewhere on this site. The median age for the onset of cancer in our society is in our sixties. In Egyptian, Roman and Greek times people didn't live that long. The average life expectancy in ancient Rome and Greece times was little changed from paleolithic times at 28 years. By medieval times that had increased to 30 years and just before the industrial revolution in Britain that had got to 40 years. There was a significant increase in life expectancy in Britain during the late 1700's that was associated with increased standards of living as a result of the Industrial Revolution. By early twentieth Century life expectancy had increased to 35 - 50 years depending on which part of society you were in and where you lived. Now someone born in Australia can expect to live well into their eighties. So there will be more cancer. Such is life. Regards Sailor An incorrectly identified mark is a hazard, not an aid, to navigation. Alton B. Moody

[#3]

Hi Sailor I respectfully disagree with some of your comments. Vitamin D http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s805444.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--NqqB2nhBE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PYsXQ16Ztg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15ycdbSsnAU&feature=related http://www.boneandcancerfoundation.org/pdfs/Vitamin_D_Booklet.pdf http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/cancerMain.shtml These just some quick references for your consideration. Ancient times and cancer It is highly debatable what was considered to be interpreted as cancer in the ancient times. There are numerous archeologists and other scientists and scholars who would debate on this topic especially if the evidence is in the written format. Ageing and cancer Since 1900 to present ageing has increased by some 2 years on average while the number of cancer diseases has jumped in millions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGJYQ5E5T7Y (I am not sure which clip has this particular table that compares an average lifespan in 1900 and today but if you watch the video it is there as a quick reference) I also suggest watching; http://www.sbs.com.au/shows/secretsofthehumanbody/tab-listings/page/i/3/h/Immortal/

[Sailor]

Hi DPC Your actual statement was " Cancer was HARDLY present and non detectable in the past. When we look back to the times of ancient Egypt - no cancer. Ancient Greece or Rome - no cancer." Unfortunately that is not the case. Cancer was known in those times and referred to in various written articles. They certainly would not have known all the range of cancers that we can detect today, but that does not say those cancer didn't exist. Life expectancy - I'm sorry, but I'm afraid that I disagree regarding the increase in life expectancy over time. Average life expectancy in neolithic and paleolithic times has to be estimated and there are methods of doing this. Further information on this can be obtained from Caspari, Rachel & Lee, Sang-Hee (July 27, 2004). "Older age becomes common late in human evolution". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101 (20): 10895–10900 and the references therein. In more modern times records have been kept and there has been a lot of analysis of parish registers of births and deaths in the pre industrial period. If you want the references I can get them but it will take sometime as I am not going into a major library for some few weeks. For modern times good records exist as governments around the world have collected such figures. I would recommend the following article: Kinsella Kevin G., (1992), Changes in Life Expectancy 1900 - 1990, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 55, 1196S-1202S For Australia the average life expectancy at birth for males in 1900 was 53.2 years and for females 56.8 years. In 1990 it had risen to 73.5 and 79.8 respectively. Australian Bureau of Sattistics indicate that in 2007 this had risen to 79 and 84: http://www.abs.gov.au/. Perhaps your Youtube reference got 2000, not 1900 as the base for the two year increase. If you want data on cancer statistics then I would recommend http://vcrdata.cancervic.org.au:8082/ccv/ It is data from the Victorian Cancer Registry. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare publishes data for Australia, but it is not as easily accessible and there is no reason to believe that Victoria is significantly different from other states. Regards Sailor Exhortation to Apprentices in the Art of Navigation:
“When so ever any Shipmaster or mariner shall set forth from land out of any river or haven, diligently to mark what buildings, castles, towers, churches, hills, downes, windmills and other marks are standing upon the land…..all of which, or many of them, let him portray with his pen, how they bear and how far distant. A. Ashley, 1583

[maddie86]

im sorry i agree with sailor as my bfs oncologist points out theres no evidence that sugar can worsen cancer.. i believe this as seeing my bfs diet yet he is recovering.. sugar isnt the best thing but it cannot do much more harm.. cancer is a bad make up of cells.. look at people with lung cancer that have never smoked before.. cutting out bad foods might make you feel better but i believe they cannot help cure cancer as there is no medical evidence for this

[#6]

Hey Sailor "For Australia the average life expectancy at birth for males in 1900 was 53.2 years and for females 56.8 years. In 1990 it had risen to 73.5 and 79.8 respectively." - Yes, including deaths of infants and children. I encourage you to watch the videos as I could not be bothered looking for evidence. Maddie86 Sugar may cause many illnesses including cancer in some people NOT IN EVERY human. Does it feed cancer cells? Yes. It provides energy to both healthy and cancer cells. If one has cancer why one would want to feed it? Defies the logic! I am not saying do not eat sugar. Eat whatever you like. I know that 1 kg of sugar in my house lasts more than 1 year. Tell your b/f to start informing himself a little more 🙂 Does Sugar Feed Cancer? New Research Sheds Light On Old Saying Main Category: Cancer / Oncology Also Included In: Diabetes Article Date: 18 Aug 2009 - 9:00 PDT Researchers at Huntsman Cancer Institute (HCI) at the University of Utah have uncovered new information on the notion that sugar "feeds" tumors. The findings may also have implications for other diseases such as diabetes. The research is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). "It's been known since 1923 that tumor cells use a lot more glucose than normal cells. Our research helps show how this process takes place, and how it might be stopped to control tumor growth," says Don Ayer, Ph.D., a Huntsman Cancer Institute investigator and professor in the Department of Oncological Sciences at the University of Utah. During both normal and cancerous cell growth, a cellular process takes place that involves both glucose (sugar) and glutamine (an amino acid). Glucose and glutamine are both essential for cell growth, and it was long assumed they operated independently, but Ayer's research shows they are inter-dependent. He discovered that by restricting glutamine availability, glucose utilization is also stopped. "Essentially, if you don't have glutamine, the cell is short circuited due to a lack of glucose, which halts the growth of the tumor cell" Ayer says. The research, spearheaded by Mohan Kaadige, Ph.D., a post-doctoral fellow in Ayer's lab, focused on MondoA, a protein that is responsible for turning genes on and off. In the presence of glutamine, MondoA blocks the expression of a gene called TXNIP. TXNIP is thought to be a tumor suppressor, but when it's blocked by MondoA , it allows cells to take up glucose, which in turn drives tumor growth. Ayer's research could lead to new drugs that would target glutamine utilization, or target MondoA or TXNIP. Ayer says the next step in his research is to develop animal models to test his ideas about how MondoA and TXNIP control cell growth. "If we can understand that, we can break the cycle of glucose utilization which could be beneficial in the treatment of cancer," Ayer says. Source Huntsman Cancer Institute As I am interested in pancreatic cancer; STOCKHOLM — People who drink large quantities of fizzy drinks or add sugar to coffee or tea run a higher risk of developing cancer of the pancreas, Swedish research showed on Wednesday. Researchers at the Karolinska Institute studied the diets of almost 80,000 men and women between 1997 and 2005. A total of 131 developed pancreatic cancer, a deadly form of the disease that is difficult to treat. “The researchers have now been able to show that the risk of developing pancreatic cancer is related to the amount of sugar in the diet,” the institute said in a statement. The group of people who said they drank fizzy or syrup-based drinks twice a day or more ran a 90 percent higher risk of getting cancer of the pancreas than those who never drank them. The risk was 70 percent higher for those who added sugar to their drinks about five times a day, and 50 percent for those eating creamed fruit, a sugary, fruit-based Swedish dessert, at least once a day, according to the research published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. “Despite the fact that the chances of developing pancreatic cancer are relatively small, it’s important to learn more about the risk factors behind the disease,” Susanna Larsson, one of the researchers involved in the study, said in the statement. About 216,000 new cases of pancreatic cancer, mostly in developed countries, are diagnosed each year. The illness is most common in people aged over 60. It is difficult to treat because it is often not diagnosed until it has spread beyond the pancreas. “It is perhaps the most serious form of cancer, with very poor prognoses for its victims. Since it’s difficult to treat and is often discovered too late, it’s particularly important that we learn to prevent it,” Larsson said. Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions. And; Cancer and Sugar - Studies Which Show The Link One of the most important things a cancer suffererer needs to do is to avoid refined sugar in his or her diet. I’m talking candy bars, cakes, sugary beverages, and the like. Cancer cells love these sugars. It amazes me that, in hospitals, they actually serve items with refined sugar to cancer patients. Don’t they know any better? Even for those not hit by this disease, refined sugar is something to avoid if you want to pursue good health. Such sugars throw your metabolism out of whack, overwork your pancreas (to produce insulin), cause obesity, etc. Quite simply, these are empty calories which provide no other nutrition to the body. Ten Studies Showing the Link Between Sugar and Increased Cancer Risk by Reuben Chow How many times have you heard it mentioned that sugar causes cancer, that cancer patients should avoid sugar, or that sugar is the favorite food of cancer cells? The truth is, this goes beyond mere hearsay or traditional knowledge; there is actually a large volume of scientific evidence available which shows the link between sugar and increased cancer risk. Here, ten such studies are summarized. 1. Colorectal Cancer in Women (United States) A study conducted by Harvard Medical School found that women who ate the most foods with high glycemic load – the glycemic index, or GI, of a food gives an idea of how quickly sugar (more specifically, glucose) levels in the blood rise after eating it – had almost three times the risk of getting colorectal cancer in the future, compared with women who ate lesser amounts of such foods. Typically, processed foods made from refined grains and refined sugar, including candy bars, cakes, cookies and other snacks, are high glycemic foods “We find a very straightforward and clear association between high-glycemic foods and the risk of colorectal cancers,” said lead researcher Simin Liu, MD, ScD. This study involved some 40,000 American women. 2. Colorectal Cancer in Men (United States) Another study at Harvard University found that middled aged men whose diets tended to increase blood sugar levels quicker, i.e. those who ate more high GI foods, had a 32% higher chance of getting colorectal cancer over a period of 20 years. The study, which involved more than 50,000 men, also found that this effect seemed to be more pronounced in heavier men. 3. Breast Cancer in Women (United States) The Women’s Health Study found that those who consumed a diet which raised blood sugar levels more had a 135% higher risk of getting breast cancer in the 7-year period of the study. 4. Endometrial Cancer in Women (United States) The Iowa Women’s Health Study looked at some 23,000 post-menopausal women. It found that those who consumed a diet which raised blood sugar levels more had a 46% higher risk of getting endometrial cancer over a period of 15 years. 5. Endometrial Cancer in Women (Italy) Another study in Italy carried out on women with endometrial cancer found that those who consumed a blood sugar-raising diet had a 110% higher risk of getting this disease. 6. Pancreatic Cancer in Women (United States) In a study which followed almost 90,000 US women participating in the Nurse’s Health Study for a period of 18 years, it was found that women with a high glycemic load intake had a 53% higher risk of getting pancreatic cancer. A similar increase in risk, 57%, was observed for fructose intake. Further, the study also found that women who were heavy and with low levels of physical activity experienced greatly enhanced risk. Women in this group with high glycemic load had 2.67 times the risk of their counterparts with low glycemic load intake! 7. Pancreatic Cancer in Men and Women (Sweden) A study carried out by Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden and Central Hospital in Västerås, Sweden followed almost 78,000 Swedish men and women with no previous diagnosis of cancer or history of diabetes for a mean period of more than 7 years. The subjects were aged from 45 to 83 years. The study found that consuming added sugar, soft drinks, sweetened fruit soups or stewed fruit increased the risk of pancreatic cancer. Those who ate the most sugar had a 69% higher risk compared with those who ate the least sugar. The corresponding higher risk for soft drinks was 93%, while for sweetened fruit soups or stewed fruit it was 51%. The study concluded that “high consumption of sugar and high-sugar foods may be associated with a greater risk of pancreatic cancer”. 8. Prostate Cancer in Men (Italy) An Italian study examined the habits of men aged 46 to 74 who had prostate cancer and compared their dietary choices to similar men who did not contract the disease. The study found that those men whose diets were more likely to increase blood sugar levels had a 57% higher risk of getting prostate cancer. 9. All Cancers in Men and Women (Korea) A large study carried out by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea tracked almost 1.3 million Korean men and women, aged between 30 and 95 years, for a period of 10 years. The study found that those with the highest fasting glucose levels were more likely to die from all types of cancer combined. For the men, the strongest link was found for pancreatic cancer, while significant links were also reported for oesophagus, liver and colorectal cancers. For the women, the strongest associations were for liver and cervical cancers. All in all, besides being more likely to die from cancer, those with highest fasting blood glucose levels also had higher risk of developing cancer. And obesity had a part to play, too. “This study provides more information on glucose intolerance, an emerging cause of cancer. It points to increased cancer risk as another adverse consequence of rising obesity around the world,” concluded Sun Ha Jee, leader of the study. Another thing to note - the study participants were said to be substantially leaner than the typical population in Western countries, as mentioned by the study team. 10. Various Cancers in Men and Women (Sweden) A study carried out at Umea University Hospital in Sweden looked at almost 65,000 people in northern Sweden for a mean period of 8 years. The study found that women with the highest blood sugar levels had a higher risk of getting cancer before the end of the study period. This group of women also had higher risk of endometrial cancer, while those below 49 years of age had higher risk of breast cancer. In addition, both men and women who had the highest levels of blood sugar had higher risks of pancreatic cancer, urinary tract cancer, as well as malignant melanoma. These results led Par Stattin, MD, PhD, part of the study team, to state that keeping blood sugar levels within the normal range “may reduce cancer risk”. Why Does Cancer Love Sugar? – A Study Suggests Why A study team at Duke University School of Medicine has suggested a possible reason why cancer cells like sugar so much. Basically, according to the researchers, in healthy cells, certain growth factors regulate their metabolism and cell survival. When these growth factors are removed, there is loss of glucose uptake and metabolism, and the cells die. However, they found that cancer cells are able to maintain glucose metabolism by using a protein called “Akt”, which promotes glucose metabolism. This prevents cell death, even when the growth factors are not available. What We Need to Take Note of So, then, based on the findings of the abovementioned studies, can we conclude that sugar feeds cancer? The truth is, sugar feeds all cells in our bodies. It therefore cannot be all bad. Two things we must take note of, however, is the amount and the type of sugar which we consume. Consuming too much sugar causes our bodies to produce excessive amounts of insulin. And insulin itself encourages the growth of cells, something which is good for healthy cells, but not cancerous cells. The other key point is to avoid simple sugars. Broadly speaking, processed and refined foods, including soft drinks, sugary beverages, candy bars, cakes, other desserts, as well as other snacks, contain high amounts of simple sugars. These are high GI foods, which can cause insulin levels to spike. On the other hand, natural sugars found in fruits and vegetables are so much safer and better for health. Even fresh fruit juice, despite its high sugar content, is great for health. On top of that, healthy whole foods come with a wide concoction of vitamins and minerals, something which refined sugar is totally devoid of. Simple Sugars Cause Obesity When one’ insulin levels suddenly increase, the level of sugar in the blood can suddenly crash. This, then, can cause one to feel intensely hungry. People then eat more, and feel hungry again soon, and the cycle keeps going. Further, because of their lack of nutrition, foods with a lot of simple sugars are basically empty calories. When the body’s nutritional needs are not met, it continues to crave for food, which again explains the non-stop eating and feasting. The more refined sugars one eats, the fatter one becomes, yet the more malnourished one can be. It is a huge paradox, and a dangerous one at that. Conclusion Refined sugar is devoid of important nutrients, causes obesity, causes cavities, and also increases cancer risk. If you or a loved one are battling cancer, or are serious about avoiding the disease, you may want to take note of your intake of this common yet dangerous substance. Main Sources Various medical journal and health websites Related posts: 1. Link Found Between Allergies and Lower Cancer Risk Physical symptoms like runny nose and fever can be very... 2. Exercise Is An Excellent Cancer Fighter Exercise is not only a great health booster, it is... 3. Breast Cancer Risk Found To Be Lower For Those Who Eat Native Mexican Diet A study, called the Four-Corners Breast Cancer Study, was carried... 4. Cancer Survivors Struggle With Employment Cancer, without doubt, is a much feared and potentially debilitating... 5. Two Studies Showing Cruciferous Vegetables Lower Risk of Bladder Cancer Cruciferous vegetables, particularly when eaten raw, are well-known for their... This entry was written by CancerResearchInformation.com, posted on April 17, 2009

[#7]

Hi again Sailor http://www.demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html Take a look at this link. Pay attention to the data in the lead up to the WWI; 1909 - 1914 And then 1918! It went down from around 50 to 36 on average 🙂 Do you know why? Have a guess? Example Males 40,50,60,70 and 80 = average 60 right? Males including infants - 0.6, 1, 3, 50, and 80 - average ~27 years! Put that into a statistical equation and one would conclude that in 1900 people lived shorter than during the paleolithic times :) Not any statistical data should be taken when talking about these things. One more quote for Maddie86 in relation to sugar and cancer; "Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar." -- Dr. Otto H. Warburg in Lecture (a German physiologist, medical doctor and Nobel laureate. Warburg was one of the twentieth century's leading biochemists) This was known during the third decade of the last century.

[#8]

All I can say is whatever the food when it is minced,strained and mushed into Baby food I cannot tell the difference between organic,frozenganic,pestaganic or whatever as unfortunately this is the only way I can have my food at the moment(being toothless). Sugar enhanced condiments help to make the weetbix taste better and to be honest it's up to the individual, tks for the advice though. Dave

[Sailor]

Hi DPC I do not have the time, energy or inclination to go into a dissertation on evidence, validity of evidence and above all the need to read a complete paper. You have directed me to a table from a paper by Professor Andrew Noymer from the University of California at Irvine. As he points out in his more complete paper in 2009 (Noymer, Andrew,Testing the influenza–tuberculosis selective mortality hypothesis with Union Army data", Soc Sci Med. 68(9): 1599–1608.), he is interested the the interplay between tuberculosis and influenza. He comments on the the Spanish Flue epidemic that swept the Western World in 1918. His hypothesis is that those with pre-existing tuberculosis were more susceptible to the influenza infection and so that there was a decline in tuberculosis infection in the subsequent years. His data for life expectancy shows a similar increase over a century as there is for Australia - 46.3 - 78.6 years for males and 48.3 - 79.5 years for females. Professor Otto Warburg lived from 1883 to 1970 and was indeed a Nobel prize winning biochemist, receiving the Nobel prize for medicine in 1931 for his work on cellular respiration. I would hope that our understanding of the causes of cancer has advanced somewhat since the pioneering work of Otto Warburg! My point is simply that as cancer is understood to be associated with aging and as we live longer, then there will be an increase in the incidence of cancer. We do not have to postulate other causes such as refined carbohydrates in diet, modern lifestyle events etc. Remember, one of the fundamental principles of science is Occam's Razor - loosely translated as the simplest explanation consistent with the facts is the one to be chosen. More correctly translated as "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity" (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). I have no intention of continuing this exchange of ideas . It is getting nowehere and I do not have time energy or inclination to do so. Regards Sailor If one does not know to which port one is sailing, no wind is favorable. Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[#10]

"Professor Otto Warburg lived from 1883 to 1970 and was indeed a Nobel prize winning biochemist, receiving the Nobel prize for medicine in 1931 for his work on cellular respiration. I would hope that our understanding of the causes of cancer has advanced somewhat since the pioneering work of Otto Warburg!" Hi Sailor Certainly as I expected. I have noticed your passion for debating even when you are wrong :) That's OK. If my mere example of the earliest studies on the sugar/cancer issue has been interpreted as "outdated", I can leave here a study from August 2010. I hope that it is "fresh" enough for your particular taste :) http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/196572.php Fructose Encourages Pancreatic Cancer Growth "The bottom line is the modern diet contains a lot of refined sugar including fructose and it's a hidden danger implicated in a lot of modern diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and fatty liver," said Heaney, who also serves as director of the Pituitary Tumor and Neuroendocrine Program at UCLA. "In this study, we show that cancers can use fructose just as readily as glucose to fuel their growth." Or; Dietary Sugar, Glycemic Load, and Pancreatic Cancer Risk in a Prospective Study http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/94/17/1293.long Or; Consumption of sugar and sugar-sweetened foods and the risk of pancreatic cancer in a prospective study http://www.ajcn.org/content/84/5/1171.abstract Conclusion: High consumption of sugar and high-sugar foods may be associated with a greater risk of pancreatic cancer. Now, it is entirely up to you to decide whether to include sugar in your diet or not. I know that my family has not been consuming it for years and if we do it is in minimal doses. However, my partner has been diagnosed with PC but her cause of pancreatic cancer was not excessive sugar consumption, rather something else. I will be writing about it in my blog.