We are pleased to announce that on March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor will be introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the upcoming changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
What does cancer eat? Sugar, mostly, and other lessons

Wetcoaster
Posts: 1,788 Member
Pretty interesting article. What makes it interesting is the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency are not selling
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Jane Macdougall: What does cancer eat? Sugar, mostly, and other lessons from my dinner with a professor of pathology
http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/02/01/jane-macdougall-what-does-cancer-eat-sugar-mostly-and-other-lessons-from-my-dinner-with-a-professor-of-pathology/
What got my attention was his remark about celery.
You know: the dieters’ wishful thinking on whether eating celery is a sum negative activity, or not.
He was certainly entitled to speak. His name is Dr. Gerald Krystal and he’s a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia, as well as Distinguished Scientist at the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency.
We were perched like vultures over a buffet table, commenting on the many ways to die. Fats, salts, sugars, alcohol: pick your delicious poison. I like ’em all.
The dietary folklore related to celery hardly registers in Dr. Krystal’s purview. He started his career as molecular biochemist working on cell signalling, which is to say the ways cells communicate with each other. Delightfully, he describes it as a molecular square dance, with cells reacting to specific instructions that we’re still just beginning to comprehend.
What we call cancer, the medical profession refers to as malignant neoplasm. For reasons researchers are still trying to establish, cells spontaneously divide and grow uncontrollably creating malignant tumours. These tumour cells can then invade other parts of the body. Unfortunately, many of us are all too familiar with this hideous science lesson called metastasis.
But here’s what I was surprised to learn. I might have had cancer several times in my life. Same goes for you. The immune system — well-supported — is a trooper. It’s capable of dispatching proliferations and inflammations, vanquishing many invaders without you ever being aware of it. How real is the threat of cancer in a lifetime? No one knows for sure, but here’s a surprising statistic: Patients on immune-suppressant drugs following organ transplantation have a 100-fold increase of cancer incidence. When the body’s natural defences are inhibited, cancer cells can easily run amok, and they do so 100 times more often than in other people.
So, what makes the critical difference in what wins this silent battle: cancer, or your immune system? This is the question that has occupied much of Dr. Krystal’s career.
He began by observing that Positron Emission Tomography — PET scans used for tumour and inflammation detection — revealed a particular pattern of deoxyglucose use. Apparently, cancer has an appetite for glucose that is three times that than of other cells; that’s what the PET scan is looking for. This rapid ingestion of glucose leads to the secretion of lactic acid which decreases cellular pH and — here’s the aha! moment — that’s what encourages metastasis. And where does the body get all this glucose? Well, it gets it from the standard Western diet; a diet, it turns out, that’s perfectly designed to kill us all.
Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein
.
I was doing my best to wade through Dr. Krystal’s research, Googling every third word. In the basest of laymen’s terms I’ll tell you that his findings hinged on a suspicion that it might be possible to starve cancer by blocking a tumour from accessing glucose. Dr. Krystal set about to see if it was possible to affect tumour growth or — perhaps even better — tumour initiation by affecting blood glucose levels. At the time he started his inquiry, this theory flew in the face of the prevailing science. Almost a decade after he began, his findings reveal that diet may play an even larger role than previously suspected in who gets cancer and which cancers metastasize.
Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein. Protein has a unique capacity to enhance a body’s immune system but most of us don’t get nearly enough of this essential nutrient. We love our fats, however, but the wrong sort of fats in the wrong amounts can also prove deadly.
The foodstuffs we favour create a hospitable environment for cancer in a variety of ways. Calorie-rich, but nutrient-unbalanced, our grub tends to render us immuno-incompetent. That’s a big word that means defenceless. Obesity, unhealthy in and of itself, is a widespread side effect of the typical Western diet, but also a source of systemic inflammation. Inflammation engenders DNA damage which increases the risk of cancer.
Dr. Krystal’s team continues to explore the subject of diet-related tumour growth and initiation. The clinical trials with mice, however, suggest that we should all be making massive shifts in what we eat. Almost half the mice on the western diet developed mammary cancers by middle age, whereas none of the mice on the low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet did. Only one of the test mice achieved a normal life span on the standard western diet, with the rest of dying early of cancer-associated deaths. More than 50% of the mice on a low-carbohydrate diet, however, reached or exceeded a normal life span.
Good news: It really does take more calories to digest a stick of celery than are found in celery
.
The patient parking lot next to the BC Cancer Agency was full the day I visited. As I made my way up the stairs, I couldn’t help but think that we do, indeed, dig our own graves with a spoon.
The good news, however, is that it really does take more calories to digest a stick of celery than are found in celery. The other good news is that celery can’t hurt you one bit.
Next week: so what does a cancer researcher have for breakfast, anyway?
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Jane Macdougall: What does cancer eat? Sugar, mostly, and other lessons from my dinner with a professor of pathology
http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/02/01/jane-macdougall-what-does-cancer-eat-sugar-mostly-and-other-lessons-from-my-dinner-with-a-professor-of-pathology/
What got my attention was his remark about celery.
You know: the dieters’ wishful thinking on whether eating celery is a sum negative activity, or not.
He was certainly entitled to speak. His name is Dr. Gerald Krystal and he’s a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia, as well as Distinguished Scientist at the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency.
We were perched like vultures over a buffet table, commenting on the many ways to die. Fats, salts, sugars, alcohol: pick your delicious poison. I like ’em all.
The dietary folklore related to celery hardly registers in Dr. Krystal’s purview. He started his career as molecular biochemist working on cell signalling, which is to say the ways cells communicate with each other. Delightfully, he describes it as a molecular square dance, with cells reacting to specific instructions that we’re still just beginning to comprehend.
What we call cancer, the medical profession refers to as malignant neoplasm. For reasons researchers are still trying to establish, cells spontaneously divide and grow uncontrollably creating malignant tumours. These tumour cells can then invade other parts of the body. Unfortunately, many of us are all too familiar with this hideous science lesson called metastasis.
But here’s what I was surprised to learn. I might have had cancer several times in my life. Same goes for you. The immune system — well-supported — is a trooper. It’s capable of dispatching proliferations and inflammations, vanquishing many invaders without you ever being aware of it. How real is the threat of cancer in a lifetime? No one knows for sure, but here’s a surprising statistic: Patients on immune-suppressant drugs following organ transplantation have a 100-fold increase of cancer incidence. When the body’s natural defences are inhibited, cancer cells can easily run amok, and they do so 100 times more often than in other people.
So, what makes the critical difference in what wins this silent battle: cancer, or your immune system? This is the question that has occupied much of Dr. Krystal’s career.
He began by observing that Positron Emission Tomography — PET scans used for tumour and inflammation detection — revealed a particular pattern of deoxyglucose use. Apparently, cancer has an appetite for glucose that is three times that than of other cells; that’s what the PET scan is looking for. This rapid ingestion of glucose leads to the secretion of lactic acid which decreases cellular pH and — here’s the aha! moment — that’s what encourages metastasis. And where does the body get all this glucose? Well, it gets it from the standard Western diet; a diet, it turns out, that’s perfectly designed to kill us all.
Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein
.
I was doing my best to wade through Dr. Krystal’s research, Googling every third word. In the basest of laymen’s terms I’ll tell you that his findings hinged on a suspicion that it might be possible to starve cancer by blocking a tumour from accessing glucose. Dr. Krystal set about to see if it was possible to affect tumour growth or — perhaps even better — tumour initiation by affecting blood glucose levels. At the time he started his inquiry, this theory flew in the face of the prevailing science. Almost a decade after he began, his findings reveal that diet may play an even larger role than previously suspected in who gets cancer and which cancers metastasize.
Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein. Protein has a unique capacity to enhance a body’s immune system but most of us don’t get nearly enough of this essential nutrient. We love our fats, however, but the wrong sort of fats in the wrong amounts can also prove deadly.
The foodstuffs we favour create a hospitable environment for cancer in a variety of ways. Calorie-rich, but nutrient-unbalanced, our grub tends to render us immuno-incompetent. That’s a big word that means defenceless. Obesity, unhealthy in and of itself, is a widespread side effect of the typical Western diet, but also a source of systemic inflammation. Inflammation engenders DNA damage which increases the risk of cancer.
Dr. Krystal’s team continues to explore the subject of diet-related tumour growth and initiation. The clinical trials with mice, however, suggest that we should all be making massive shifts in what we eat. Almost half the mice on the western diet developed mammary cancers by middle age, whereas none of the mice on the low-carbohydrate, high-protein diet did. Only one of the test mice achieved a normal life span on the standard western diet, with the rest of dying early of cancer-associated deaths. More than 50% of the mice on a low-carbohydrate diet, however, reached or exceeded a normal life span.
Good news: It really does take more calories to digest a stick of celery than are found in celery
.
The patient parking lot next to the BC Cancer Agency was full the day I visited. As I made my way up the stairs, I couldn’t help but think that we do, indeed, dig our own graves with a spoon.
The good news, however, is that it really does take more calories to digest a stick of celery than are found in celery. The other good news is that celery can’t hurt you one bit.
Next week: so what does a cancer researcher have for breakfast, anyway?
0
Replies
-
so Carbs, actually
"Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein. Protein has a unique capacity to enhance a body’s immune system but most of us don’t get nearly enough of this essential nutrient."0 -
Shame that celery tastes like sticks of misery.0
-
Cancer cells also love high quality complete proteins like whey and casein and animal flesh.
So... yeah. It's no surprise that fast-growing cells crave nutrition. Structural building blocks and energy. Protein and carbs.0 -
Does this mean I can go on an all-fat diet?0
-
Does this mean I can go on an all-fat diet?
Depends on da fats
"wrong sort of fats in the wrong amounts can also prove deadly."
That's right. Fat is a murderer.
I would like to know...can water in the wrong amount also kill?0 -
Does this mean I can go on an all-fat diet?
At first I was "seriously? This thread?" And then I was like "all fat diet you say? ...could get behind."0 -
Pretty interesting article. What makes it interesting is the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency are not selling
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Everyone has an agenda.0 -
In cause sugar is the devil and causes cancer...0
-
Pretty interesting article. What makes it interesting is the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency are not selling
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Everyone has an agenda.
Yeah really. Look at how many people on MFP promote sugar fearorism, despite having no professional interest of any kind. It's no surprise that individual researchers have agendas too. There's a reason science is subjected to peer review.0 -
Pretty interesting article. What makes it interesting is the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency are not selling
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Everyone has an agenda.
Are you Canadian? Trust me the agenda is to cure cancer.0 -
I am not sure why people are questioning the science of it. I don't think the researcher made any specific recommendations except to put the research forward.
The person who wrote the article has put a bias toward the findings though.
For the record I agree with Alan Agaron on sugar. I do find the research here interesting though.0 -
didn't read your article, but i would imagine cancer eats basically the same things health ones do.
demonizing any particular food marco isn't really of any use.
whats the point? are you going to cut out carbs completely? they all turn into glucose0 -
didn't read your article, but i would imagine cancer eats basically the same things health ones do.
demonizing any particular food marco isn't really of any use.
whats the point? are you going to cut out carbs completely? they all turn into glucose
Perhaps you should read it.
And cut out carbs? That would mean I would have to cut out beer. Might as well cut off my penis too while we are at it.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
didn't read your article, but i would imagine cancer eats basically the same things health ones do.
demonizing any particular food marco isn't really of any use.
whats the point? are you going to cut out carbs completely? they all turn into glucose
Perhaps you should read it.
And cut out carbs? That would mean I would have to cut out beer. Might as well cut off my penis too while we are at it.
well what is the proposed take home from this then?
t0 -
I don't think there is a take home yet on the research. As I stated before whoever wrote the article put their own slant on it.
I find the science interesting and I don't think even the researcher is telling anyone to avoid sugar from what I can tell.
Like I say I agree with Alan Agaron on sugar but I also leave my mind open to new research.
"He began by observing that Positron Emission Tomography — PET scans used for tumour and inflammation detection — revealed a particular pattern of deoxyglucose use. Apparently, cancer has an appetite for glucose that is three times that than of other cells; that’s what the PET scan is looking for. This rapid ingestion of glucose leads to the secretion of lactic acid which decreases cellular pH and — here’s the aha! moment — that’s what encourages metastasis."
I would be more interested in research on cancer patients and restricting sugar/carbs or whatever.
Having lost a nephew to cancer I always keep an open mind when it comes to cancer research.0 -
This is interesting to me. I saw this before and brought it up with my mom. She's a cancer survivor. It turns out, her Oncologist told her something along those lines when she was undergoing treatment. He strongly encouraged her to reduce the amount of sugar in her diet. She still eats that way.
Who knows if it played a role in her survival. I guess time and further research will tell.0 -
Funny how so many people's opinions I respect looked at the title and made comments without taking time to look at the study and context.0
-
In cause sugar is the devil and causes cancer...
Thanks for reading the study cause it does not say that.0 -
Cancer cells also love high quality complete proteins like whey and casein and animal flesh.
Cool.
So we've now eliminated pretty much everything edible.
There's nothing new in the OP - researchers have known for donkeys years that starvation diets do a real number on cancer cells. The reasons for which should be obvious from J-Man's post, although they won't be, thanks to people's never-ending ability to confuse cause and effect...0 -
so basically if you have cancer you need to follow a different diet then people would don't have cancer? I was under the impression that oncologists already recommended various dietary adjustments though in my experience people going through chemo weren't able to eat much of anything.0
-
Initial thoughts:-
Would rather read the published findings rather than the interpretation from someone who admits to needing a dictionary to understand it.
There are many different types of neoplasms which behave differently
There are even more types of neoplasms in the animal kingdom which humans don't get
Lab mice are bred to be susceptible to cancers, so not good models for dietary studies
But
Yes all neoplastic cells need energy to replicate - this not correlate to that energy source (carbs, glucose whatever) causing neoplasm0 -
In cause sugar is the devil and causes cancer...
Thanks for reading the study cause it does not say that.
I did read the article and I did read the study not just the abstract...and guess what I am Canadain...did you read the full study or just the article?
It did say that cancer cells need more glucose to grow...and that our western diet is great for that...but as others have said any cell given nutrition will grow. The abstract indicated that 50% of the mice on the reg diet had cancer I believe and that only 1 on the low carb diet had it..but it didn't say how many mice were in the study...it also stated that 50% of the non carb dieting mice lived longer but again no numbers.
In the research it actually said you really can't extrapolate these findings to people...or if you do be very careful about it..as well there were other factors involved such as initially the mice wouldn't eat the food on the low carb/sugar diet so they had to switch it up to something more palatable...as well to ensure no significant weight loss happened...because in their first go at it the mice eating low carb didn't eat much and lost weight.
I googled it as well and it is plastered all over paleo, atkins etc sites and now I am just waiting on lustwig to get a hold of it or these other fanatics on this site.0 -
Thanks for posting- it's good to look at all kinds of information and do some research.
I'd like to know what a cancer specialist eats for breakfast!0 -
The scientist isn't pushing the agenda, Jane McDougall is. She's a vegan and her and her husband promote veganism all the time.
Here's what real scientists say about the McDougalls
http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/10/08/dairy-food-causes-all-disease/
Interestingly, this person also mentions the 30 bananas a day woman (who promotes really bad stuff) & McDougall
http://30bananasadaysucks.com/2013/03/mcdougall-and-deception/
Skepticproject say that McDougall is full of baloney
http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/4805/funny-comment-on-fast-food-skeptoid-episode/0 -
It would have been nice to have someone other than a free lance writer talk about it.....anyway the sugar cancer link is common knowledge......I have a suspicion that if someone with more knowledge wrote that piece or had the Dr talked about it they might have talked more about sugar and the immune system.0
-
In cause sugar is the devil and causes cancer...
Thanks for reading the study cause it does not say that.
I did read the article and I did read the study not just the abstract...and guess what I am Canadain...did you read the full study or just the article?
It did say that cancer cells need more glucose to grow...and that our western diet is great for that...but as others have said any cell given nutrition will grow. The abstract indicated that 50% of the mice on the reg diet had cancer I believe and that only 1 on the low carb diet had it..but it didn't say how many mice were in the study...it also stated that 50% of the non carb dieting mice lived longer but again no numbers.
In the research it actually said you really can't extrapolate these findings to people...or if you do be very careful about it..as well there were other factors involved such as initially the mice wouldn't eat the food on the low carb/sugar diet so they had to switch it up to something more palatable...as well to ensure no significant weight loss happened...because in their first go at it the mice eating low carb didn't eat much and lost weight.
I googled it as well and it is plastered all over paleo, atkins etc sites and now I am just waiting on lustwig to get a hold of it or these other fanatics on this site.0 -
The scientist isn't pushing the agenda, Jane McDougall is. She's a vegan and her and her husband promote veganism all the time.
Here's what real scientists say about the McDougalls
http://www.skepticblog.org/2009/10/08/dairy-food-causes-all-disease/
Interestingly, this person also mentions the 30 bananas a day woman (who promotes really bad stuff) & McDougall
http://30bananasadaysucks.com/2013/03/mcdougall-and-deception/
Skepticproject say that McDougall is full of baloney
http://health.skepticproject.com/forum/4805/funny-comment-on-fast-food-skeptoid-episode/0 -
Pretty interesting article. What makes it interesting is the Terry Fox Laboratory at the BC Cancer Agency are not selling
books.....pushing an agenda and neither is the professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at University of British Columbia.
Jane Macdougall: What does cancer eat? Sugar, mostly, and other lessons from my dinner with a professor of pathology
http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/02/01/jane-macdougall-what-does-cancer-eat-sugar-mostly-and-other-lessons-from-my-dinner-with-a-professor-of-pathology/
Hmmm, the author, Jane MacDougall also wrote
"Toast was toast, or how Wheat Belly and its author changed my diet"For reasons researchers are still trying to establish, cells spontaneously divide and grow uncontrollably creating malignant tumours.
No, researchers already know that cancer occurs because of mutations in genes that control cell division and DNA repair (oncogenes and tumour suppressor genes).He began by observing that Positron Emission Tomography — PET scans used for tumour and inflammation detection — revealed a particular pattern of deoxyglucose use. Apparently, cancer has an appetite for glucose that is three times that than of other cells; that’s what the PET scan is looking for. This rapid ingestion of glucose leads to the secretion of lactic acid which decreases cellular pH and — here’s the aha! moment — that’s what encourages metastasis. And where does the body get all this glucose? Well, it gets it from the standard Western diet; a diet, it turns out, that’s perfectly designed to kill us all.
Cancer, it turns out, craves carbs. Typically, the maleficent Western diet is made up of over 50% carbohydrates and only 15% protein
Cancer cells have increased glucose needs due to increased cell division etc. This is well known. Unless, I'm reading it incorrectly, the author seems to be suggesting that a diet made up of 50% or more carbs is somehow associated with cancer. This just seems like scare-mongering to me. Glucose can also be synthesised in the body from proteins and fats by gluconeogenesis., so cancer (and other) cells can get their glucose regardless of diet composition.I was doing my best to wade through Dr. Krystal’s research, Googling every third word. In the basest of laymen’s terms I’ll tell you that his findings hinged on a suspicion that it might be possible to starve cancer by blocking a tumour from accessing glucose. Dr. Krystal set about to see if it was possible to affect tumour growth or — perhaps even better — tumour initiation by affecting blood glucose levels. At the time he started his inquiry, this theory flew in the face of the prevailing science. Almost a decade after he began, his findings reveal that diet may play an even larger role than previously suspected in who gets cancer and which cancers metastasize.
Blocking a tumour from accessing glucose is a world apart from blaming dietary carbs for cancer/metastasis, particularly based on one 2011 study using gene knockout mice. In fact, human studies don't support the idea at all.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23650102
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23651548
I'm surprised that someone who has to google every third word to understand the findings of a study, feels competnt to interpret it and publish the interpretation!0 -
Sorry if I sound bitter... but this is all BS! Cancer is cancer. It is insidious, and if it's gonna get you it will.. Regardless of what you eat (or don't) My son was 21 the first time he was diagnosed with cancer, and 26 when it came back. He (and I) researched and researched and researched. As a result of all of this "cancer eats x, y and z" he changed his diet. He cut out sugar. He exercised. He ate heaps of weird food combinations and supplements. And guess what ... he still died... but he died deprived of the foods he enjoyed so I say phooey to anyone who promotes any specific cancer curing diet or regime - more so since I recently read of a preeminent oncologist who also died of cancer. I say enjoy your life and your favourite food while you are still here. You only live once.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions