 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Prostate Cancer / February 2008Diet Post RP
Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to promote healing and more importantly delay mets? A naiive question I know, but I 'm asking because I have the attitude that it doesn't matter what the hell i consume at this point... the horse is out of the barn, so why not ride the pony? The only thing I've heard consistently is "cancer feeds on sugar" which I almost believe cos I've been pratically a sugar addict my whole life. So even if that's true,, should I deny myself my few pleasures left such a good quality chocolate, etc., based on an unproven anecdote about sugar? Red meat is another one we all hear...but someone in this group mentioned he was a vegetarian for 20 years and still was dx'd with pca. I'd also hate to give up a nightly glass of wine with my meal. So, bottom line: does diet/food even enter in the discussion at this stage of the game? Anything else you care to add is welcome...pro or con. > Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting > pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to > promote healing and more importantly delay mets? > A naiive question I know, but I 'm asking because I have the attitude > that it doesn't matter what the hell i consume at this point... the > horse is out of the barn, so why not ride the pony? (snip) I agree. On-line we see much about this or that diet, avoidance of this or that food, yada yada yada. The *fact* is that no one *no one* knows what causes PCa, or what dietary regimen will prevent/reduce its progression. If anyone has reliable information, based upon science, to the contrary, I'd like to see it. Regards, Steve J Gobbling whatever I please and seeing NO adverse results. > Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting > pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to > promote healing and more importantly delay mets Not sure what your "so called healthy diet" was. Most of what goes for a "healthy diet" in the USA is nowhere near what those societies, where PCa is low, are eating. You might look at this UCSF site for a overall guide but no one is going to tell you its "known" to absoutely promote healing or delay mets. http://cancer.ucsf.edu/crc/nutrition_prostate.pdf Obviously there is tons of stuff all over the net, but that site has a fair overview. > The only thing I've heard consistently is "cancer feeds on sugar" > which I almost believe cos I've been pratically a sugar addict my > whole life. So even if that's true,, should I deny myself my few > pleasures left such a good quality chocolate, etc., based on an > unproven anecdote about sugar? More is said about refined carbs in general rather than sugar or chocolate in particular. I think the refined carbs angle has to do with eating a diet that will not produce inflammation which more and more is being thought to be linked with the development of PCa....... Not sure about the carbs/ sugars inflammation angle regarding recurrence of PCa or mets, though common sense might suggest it wouldn't hurt. > Red meat is another one we all hear...but someone in this group > mentioned he was a vegetarian for 20 years and still was dx'd with > pca. > I'd also hate to give up a nightly glass of wine with my meal. > So, bottom line: does diet/food even enter in the discussion at this > stage of the game? Most advise much lower consumption of red meats, actually of all meats and animal protein/fats. I would not give up your glass of wine. Some even suggest red wine can help in moderate amounts. Lastly, more men with PCa will die of heart disease than of their PCa, and the UCSF diet is beneficial for heart disease so that you're probably better off regardless of its effect on the PCa. Off hand, as far as particular elements go... some add in the pomegranate juice daily. Also curcumin is a interesting subject but its difficult to get much without taking a supplement. I take those as well as D3 and Selenium. That along with most of the elements of the above UCSF diet guidelines. Then again, I am still in the pre-diagnosis time frame. Poking along with a family history but with my PSA still under 2.0 for all but one brief leap-up test. All the correct food in the world won't help some, and all the bad food in the world won't give others PCa. Most of us are probably somewhere in the middle. I have no doubt that American/Western PCa incidence would be greatly lower if we were all eating the perfect diet from age 5 onward. However not one person in 100 here eats their entire life in a manner similar to that found in those nations where PCa is far lower. > Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting > pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to I have this ongoing diet debate with IP about the various virtues of exactly what eating healthy is? On one hand you say it didn't help you with PCa, but on the other, you admit to being a sugar addict. I've been a low carb eater for 8 years. No bread, sugar, pasta, rice, or juice. I eat meat, fish, veggies and salad, with a bit of nuts and berries. Pretty healthy, losing 50 lbs on Atkins type eating plan originally and continuing it for the rest of my life. SUGAR IS THE ENEMY. OK.... all that said, guess what? I also got PCa! You can't infuence this with diet.  SignatureJK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com > I've been a low carb eater for 8 years. No bread, sugar, pasta, rice, > or juice. I eat meat, fish, veggies and salad, with a bit of nuts and > berries. My only concerns about that diet are its emphasis on sat fat at any age and activity level and its dearth of carbs for athletic people, which we should all be. The rest is fine, and if you swapped off some red meat for more fish your diet may be just fine for you. I.P. >> I've been a low carb eater for 8 years. No bread, sugar, pasta, rice, or >> juice. I eat meat, fish, veggies and salad, with a bit of nuts and >> berries. > > My only concerns about that diet are its emphasis on sat fat Not at all. The only emphasis is on reducing carbs. You can substitute many different kinds of fat for fuel. SignatureJK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com >>> I've been a low carb eater for 8 years. No bread, sugar, pasta, rice, or >>> juice. I eat meat, fish, veggies and salad, with a bit of nuts and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Not at all. The only emphasis is on reducing carbs. You can substitute > many different kinds of fat for fuel. Only if our muscle cell metabolism is trained via specific aerobic conditioning to burn fat instead of sugar for our more moderate exercise such as long walks or casual runs. Forcing our muscles to burn fat by starving them of carbohydrates causes many kinds of problems, shoving all that sat fat into our bodies is still believed to contribute to arterial damage, our brains can run only on sugar, and athletes -- even diabetic ones -- still need carbs as their major fuel source. While the advanced stages of the Atkins diet can be healthier than its initial weight-loss stages, many adherents get stuck in its no-carb/hi-fat/hi-protein phase, to the detriment of their health, the likely abandonment of the diet, and the likely weight gain. If I see evidence that changes in that scenario are accepted by medical science, I'll be glad to change my tune. I.P. >>> My only concerns about that diet are its emphasis on sat our brains can >>> run only on sugar, and athletes -- even > diabetic ones -- still need carbs as their major fuel source. Our bodies have no trouble converting fat to carbs if needed, as it so easily takes excess carbs and converts them into fat.... as our American waistlines show. Excess carbs, (pasta, potato, sugar) go to fat fat fat, while excess dietary fat gets excrited. It's really quite a simple concept. Atkins speculated in his first book that it was SUGAR that was causing heart disease and cancer, not fat. You don't get fat eating fat. And no one ever said NO CARBS.... it's LOW CARB. The goal is eliminating the junk carbs that do us no good. There's no evidence that dietary fat becomes lipid fat. As to your athletic needs, well you can always eat a few nuts and berries before your workout if you need a boost. But then again, I'm not trying to convert you. SignatureJK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com >>>> My only concerns about that diet are its emphasis on sat our brains can >>>> run only on sugar, and athletes -- even >> diabetic ones -- still need carbs as their major fuel source. > Our bodies have no trouble converting fat to carbs if needed, as it so > easily takes excess carbs and converts them into fat Yup. But it takes carbs to convert the protein into carbs, which is the only final energy source muscles and brain cells can run on. Eating insufficient carbs leads to consumption of our muscles, as exemplified in its extreme at Auschwitz. > excess dietary fat gets excrited. ... You don't get fat eating fat. > ... There's no evidence that dietary fat becomes lipid fat. > As to your athletic needs, well you can always eat a few nuts and berries > before your workout if you need a boost. Sorry, but that is absolute nonsense according to the many scores of books and probably thousands of research abstracts, health and fitness and medical newsletters and articles I've studied, courses I've taken, and several professional health and fitness, nutrition, and medical educators and practicioners I've paid a lot of money to and even taught a few things in some cases. You're welcome to eat any way you like, but I'm not going to stand here quietly while you advise others to follow suit. Once again, even the Atkins and other low-carb authors admit their schtick is for people with impaired insulin response, aka Syndrome X, aka prediabetes or diabetes, aka metabolic disease AND who are not athletic. And, once again, virtually every university and hospital medical source condemns long term low-carb dieting for people with normal insulin response OR for people who get a lot of exercise. I.P. http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm > http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm Thousands of studies and authors and hospitals contradict him, and even he doesn't claim we excrete the fat we eat. That one's straight out of the tin foil hat brigade. I.P. >> http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I.P. The only way I'll be convinced is when they do a study that tracks carbs as well as fat consumption, before drawing any conclusions. All the fat intake studies ignore everything else. SignatureJK Sinrod www.MyConeyIslandMemories.com >>> http://www.ravnskov.nu/cholesterol.htm >> Thousands of studies and authors and hospitals contradict him, and even he [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > carbs as well as fat consumption, before drawing any conclusions. All the > fat intake studies ignore everything else. The only diet proved to improve and extend our life is the Mediterranean. It's also the most common diet of the effective losers in the National Weight Control Registry. And hundreds of studies have addressed the whole gamut of carb/protein/fat percentages. I.P. >. all > that said, guess what? I also got PCa! You can't infuence this with diet. You may not influence it that much with a few years of eating differently, but I doubt anyone who looks at the situation doubts that a lifetime of eating differently will influence the rate of prostate cancer in large populations. Examples in various parts of the world where rates of prostate cancer are far lower but increases to our rates when those genes move here. BTW, in those nations where we find a low incidence of prostate cancer we seldom find a "low carb" diet as is typically practiced here. >>. all >> that said, guess what? I also got PCa! You can't infuence this with diet. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that a lifetime of eating differently will influence the rate of > prostate cancer in large populations. > Examples in various parts of the world where rates of prostate cancer > are far lower but increases to our rates when those genes move here. It could be that there is a microbe common only to the orient exists within the soil or water table and enters just about all the rice that exist there and that, when there is plenty of sun and Vitamin D is a high levels, this microbe attacks prostate cancer cells. Ergo, technically, it was a difference in eating, but it was also attended by a difference in biological organisms and sunshine. To further exacerbate the issue, it might be a totally different combination in another location on Earth, such as the Eskimos who eat a lot of meat virtually unavailable anywhere else except in the northern climates. I guess I don't "doubt" that a lifetime of eating differently will influence PCa in large populations, but since most of the scientific community has focused on it for decades and found nothing, I also cannot, at this time, "accept" the notion. > <gvk2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > the soil or water table and enters just about all the rice that exist there > and that, Microbes in the soil or water..... I think this is the definition of "a stretch" >when there is plenty of sun and Vitamin D is a high levels, This point may have a little more credibility or possibility. > I guess I don't "doubt" that a lifetime of eating differently will influence > PCa in large populations, but since most of the scientific community has > focused on it for decades and found nothing, I also cannot, at this time, > "accept" the notion. You "don't doubt it" but "cannot accept the notion"..... Now that is a very strange logic. I suppose you require iron clad proof of direct cause and effect in X years or you won't even take general dietary steps proven to have so many other beneficial effects for other more common diseases...heart disease, diabetes, weight loss, other cancers via weight reduction. As I've said, more men diagnosed with prostate cancer end up dying of cardio vascular problems, heart disease and strokes, than from their prostate cancer. Or are you also in denial about the other healthy aspects of eating on the typical "anti- prostate cancer" diet? > Microbes in the soil or water..... I think this is the definition of > "a stretch" I don't know about it being "the definition of a stretch", but it certainly wasn't intended to be an actual theory. I'm trying to demonstrate how difficult the job is of finding why Orientals in the Orient have less prostate cancer than Orientals in the Western Hemisphere. Red meat, fat, hormones, etc. were an obvious first guess. That's where I would have looked first. It's certainly the easiest to test. Smaller things and/or combinations of things are much harder to study; especially for a disease the grows years before anyone detects it. > You "don't doubt it" but "cannot accept the notion"..... > Now that is a very strange logic. It's a neutral stance. I can find nothing that says it is so. I can find nothing that says it aint so. > I suppose you require iron clad > proof of direct cause and effect in X years or you won't even take > general dietary steps proven to have so many other beneficial effects > for other more common diseases...heart disease, diabetes, weight > loss, other cancers via weight reduction. And what is it that you base that supposition on? The question posed is whether diet has an effect on prostate cancer. The theory is that it does. The debate is that there is nothing indicating such. I have not opined as to whether I believe that a certain diet does not have other beneficial and/or detrimental effects. Some of those have been very well proven going back to the days of prevelence of Beriberi aboard ships. > As I've said, more men diagnosed with prostate cancer end up dying of > cardio vascular problems, heart disease and strokes, than from their > prostate cancer. Lucky bastards! > Or are you also in denial about the other healthy aspects of eating on > the typical "anti- prostate cancer" diet? I am sorry I have apparently offended you. I sometimes make the mistake of assuming all statements and assertions are up for discussion. > <gvk2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:f11e5911-67dc-41fc-b088-d423775860f5@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > I am sorry I have apparently offended you. I sometimes make the mistake of > assuming all statements and assertions are up for discussion. You have not offended me. I probably should have not used the word "denial". I know there are many studies on all types of cancer that do not show a dietary effect. I would say however, that in many cases, such as the large "nurses" study, that when they talk about a "low fat" group, they are in fact no where near what is the common intake of fats seen in Asian cultures. I remember in one recent large study, the standard group was at the typical 34 to 39 percent of calories as fat, and the "low fat" group was supposed to aim for 20% or less. AS the study progressed, the low fat group ended up rather quickly at almost 30% of calories as fat and then the conclusion of the study as reported in the media was "low fat diet fails to reduce breast cancer" or whatever they were looking at. What will happen to a man, who in his late 40's and mid 50's changes his diet (like myself), I don't know. Will it slow down my progression to a clinical diagnosis? For men post diagnosis and post treatment, will it change the rate of recurrence? All these questions are unlikely to be answered in the next 10 to 20 years to the degree doctors would say you absolutely need to do such- and-such. So I read the international differentials in rates of progression and the few studies done here and then try to make a educated guess at what may work, while not doing any harm. I'm very slow to add supplements, especially in mega doses. Changing the course of events after the horse is out of the barn may be questionable, although there are few indicators. Very very preliminary suggestions about pomegranate juice, (mostly funded by the Pom company) and its affect on doubling time. Some preliminary investigation of curcumin. Lower fat and lower body weight seems to be a bit more substantiated but not entirely clear. Depends on what efforts one is willing to make for very questionable benefits. I approve of all efforts everyone makes, dietary or treatment based. I don't believe there are any secret dietary or supplement cures out there. On the other hand, there is a slowly developing body of thinking, by some of the best doctors that, for example, inflammation is one of the precursors to the development of prostate cancer. The famous Dr. Walsh is thinking in that direction. To what extent, diet, supplements, lower body weight, lower simple carb intake, lower fat, etc can reduce this early inflammatory environment, is open to more investigation. Given my age, I don't think I can wait the 10+ years for any of these questions to be made clearer. At my current age, if he there was PSA testing at his time, I'm sure my father would already have been screened, flagged, biopsied, and diagnosed. As it was, in the early 70's he was diagnosed at about age 63. I wish you well. Having followed PCa for many years, I'm just trying to keep the horse in the barn, properly fed, calmed down, and happy in his stall. BTW, I also cross my fingers on a regular basis. > You have not offended me. I probably should have not used the word > "denial". > What will happen to a man, who in his late 40's and mid 50's changes > his diet (like myself), I don't know. Will it slow down my > progression to a clinical diagnosis? > For men post diagnosis and post treatment, will it change the rate of > recurrence? > All these questions are unlikely to be answered in the next 10 to 20 > years to the degree doctors would say you absolutely need to do such- > and-such. > Given my age, I don't think I can wait the 10+ years for any of these > questions to be made clearer. > I wish you well. Having followed PCa for many years, I'm just trying > to keep the horse in the barn, properly fed, calmed down, and happy in > his stall. BTW, I also cross my fingers on a regular basis. There in lies a difference. You are trying to stave off PCa and a whole host of deadly diseases that you believe are diet-deterred or diet-deferred. And, I gather, you have no problem eating more vegetables and less meat and ice cream. We, on the other hand, are diagnosed with PCa. A bunch of us are diagnosed with Advanced (ergo terminal) PCa. Some of us don't think we will see the next decade of our lives; some the next decade on the calendar; some Christmas. Personally, I don't think I will live long enough to build up sufficient cardiovascular disease to die from anything other than PCa. So, I eat what I enjoy eating and am careful to not put any more stress on these bones or make my coffin any heavier for my pallbearers than necessary. If I come across something easy to take that might work -- Vit D, Capsacin -- I'll try it. If it is something I have to give up in order to maybe help, forget it. SignaturePSA 16 10/17/2000 @ 46 Biopsy 11/01/2000 G7 (3+4), T2c RRP 12/15/2000 G7 (3+4), T3cN0M0 Neg margins PSA <.1 <.1 <.1 .27 .37 .75 PSAD 0.19 years EBRT 05-07/2002 @ 47 PSA .34 .22 .15 .21 .32 PSAD .056 years Lupron 07/03 (1 mo) 8/03 and every 4 months there after PSA .07 .05 .06 .09 .08 .132 .145 PSAD 1.4 years Casodex added daily 07/06 PSA <0.04, <0.05, <0.04, <0.04 10/11/07 Non Illegitimi Carborundum A little off topic perhaps...but after reading Steve Kramer's comments (below), I am reminded how much I think of my mortality. I have to admit that a day doesn't go by that I don't think about life expectancy... I find myself "living for the day". Because of this disease, I retired early at age 55... I have done some things that I always dreamed of doing --- made several trips to Europe, the Grand Canyon, and Africa. I even enrolled in a French immersion course in Belgium. So, in some sort of way, there has been a positive impact on my life due to this illness. However, I do hesitate making long term commitments... > There in lies a difference. You are trying to stave off PCa and a whole > host of deadly diseases that you believe are diet-deterred or [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > might work -- Vit D, Capsacin -- I'll try it. If it is something I have > to give up in order to maybe help, forget it. > I retired early at age 55... I have done some things that I > always dreamed of doing ... I do hesitate making long term > commitments... I had to laugh in unity at that one. I retired in 1988 at 45 because I realized I wasn't going to live forever (I saw radical Islam and nuclear proliferation and human mortality coming decades ago), and it has paid off hugely. And at the same time, I quit making firm commitments farther out than about 12 hours for the same reason John Kerry was not electable: windsurfers (and powderhounds) are flakes. Now that all three of my foreseen threats to my longevity have materialized, I'm mighty glad I bailed when I did. I.P. > We, on the other hand, are diagnosed with PCa. A bunch of us are diagnosed > with Advanced (ergo terminal) PCa. Some of us don't think we will see the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I'll try it. If it is something I have to give up in order to maybe help, > forget it. Yes, I understand your choices regarding dietary matters. I've come to this newsgroup every few days or weeks for some time over the years. I'm usually just looking for something new. I must admit when posting responses I don't always review the current situation of the particular person I may be replying to. Sometimes that may come across as being less than understanding or observant. Both here and in other forums I've visited and participated in, there are almost ZERO individuals pre-diagnosis, or even pre-unusual PSA results. Seems like despite the frequency of the problem, that almost no one is looking ahead to such a degree that they consider changing lifestyle. And given the "iffy" nature of what actually might work, I'm not sure its likely many would change what they eat anyway. I guess I've just had too many people around me who have had PCa. My father and more recently 2 friends in 2007 alone. Both had surgery. Anyway, I appreciate the posts all of you write. Gives me a continuing education about the reality of prostate cancer which is too often thought of as non-serious by many in the general public. > Both here and in other forums I've visited and participated in, there > are almost ZERO individuals pre-diagnosis, or even pre-unusual PSA > results. Seems like despite the frequency of the problem, that > almost no one is looking ahead to such a degree that they consider > changing lifestyle. Which disease or diseases do we try to prevent? Many individual nutrients help prevent some diseases and promote others ... and many of those change sides with each new study. We could dislocate our knees knee-jerking to each new protocol while achieving nothing. Which set of the ever-changing nutrition guidelines do we believe and follow? When do we change protocols? And how hard do we beat our heads against a brick wall when the supplement or even treatment we took to prevent disease A turns out to promote disease A or a worse one? Who wants to drink noni juice or eat pomegranates or put marinara sauce on everything for years only to find out that they don't fight PC and do cause our big toes to fall off? Which of the hundreds of recommended lifestyle changes are severe, stupid, useless, expensive, and/or harmful? Which are valid? Who can afford enough psychiatric help to resolve all those dilemmas? And with all that angst consuming our lives, when the heck do we have time to enjoy life? Mediterranean diet, plenty of sleep, exercise, no substance abuse, routine preventive health care, and living within our means will take care of most of our worries. The rest is generally up to genetics and luck, and isn't worth worrying about until it happens, IMO. I.P. > Mediterranean diet, plenty of sleep, exercise, no substance abuse, > routine preventive health care, and living within our means will take > care of most of our worries. The rest is generally up to genetics and > luck, and isn't worth worrying about until it happens, IMO. Well I agree with that. But I doubt 10% of the population is eating as well as is normally found in the Mediterranean diet. Mind you, there are many variations of the Mediterranean diet to be followed. I've read about the Crete version where red meat is only eaten about once a month and poultry about once a week. Much more beans, nuts and oils. Interestingly, its not that low in fat. So yes, I'd say most men would make a excellent choice in following the "traditional" Mediterranean diet. I'm certainly not advocating that everyone be reduced to tofu and mung beans, washed down with rice milk. > You "don't doubt it" but "cannot accept the notion"..... > I suppose you require iron clad proof of direct cause and effect ... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Or are you also in denial about the other healthy aspects of eating on > the typical "anti- prostate cancer" diet? I'm not going to have my diet dictated by any very long list of specific dietary do's and don'ts, especially unproven ones. It's far too much hassle and sacrifice and planning and counting and shopping and studying and weighing, especially considering that a) it's mostly unproven and b) the damned do's and don'ts change every couple of weeks. It's FAR simpler, probably just as healthy, and *FAR* healthier than eating the crap most people eat, to just cut way back on sat fat, cut out trans fats altogether, generally watch the glycemic index and glycemic load of what we eat, find an exercise we enjoy, stop smoking, and average 8 hours' sleep. That very simple list, if followed, will probably add a decade of heartbeat and two decades of significantly higher quality to our lives with minimal sacrifice ... a great application of the old 80/20 rule but maybe closer to 90/10. I.P. > Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting > pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > stage of the game? > Anything else you care to add is welcome...pro or con. Very little is proven. As such, I pretty much go with what makes sense or what has some evidence showing that it works. Lycopene and Green Tea seem to work to some extent, so I take them. Fat, sugar, and red meat don't make sense in the scheme of testosterone, etc., so I eat them. Vitamin D seems to make sense based on what "they" say is going on with Vitamin D, so I take it. Capsaicin seems to make the most sense of all since it burns my belly whenever I take it on an empty stomach; so why shouldn't it drive the little bastards to suicide. But, so far, no one has figured out what is bad for PC and good for us or visa versa. > Well, my so called healthy diet did nothing to prevent me from getting > pca in the first place, so is there any post RP diet that is known to [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > stage of the game? > Anything else you care to add is welcome...pro or con. The Nutrition section of the Free Downloads page on my site has a few prostate cancer nutrition guides ranging from 16 - 148 pages. They are all free to download. http://palpable-prostate.blogspot.com/2007/02/free-downloadable-materials-on-pro state.html A very recent authoritative source is the 10 year WCRF/AICR report that came out only a few months ago. There is a summary of the prostate cancer portion of it here: http://palpable-prostate.blogspot.com/2007/11/wcrfaicr-diet-and-cancer-report.html and at that link there are also links to the entire 500 page report as well as to associated documents and sites. The report does address some of your questions when it says "From the point of view of cancer prevention, the best level of alcohol consumption is zero." Their recommendations include limiting energy dense foods (including sugars) and starchy foods and they make specific mention of eliminating sugary drinks. They also recommend limiting red meat. There are a variety of other posts on prostate cancer nutrition under the Nutrition tag on the site. --- The Palpable Prostate http://palpable-prostate.blogspot.com > is there any post RP diet that is known to > promote healing and more importantly delay mets? No. > does diet/food even enter in the discussion at this > stage of the game? Yes, but that proves nothing about the effects of diet on PC. We've discussed LOTS of things here. I.P. -=> Quoting Gvk2six@yahoo.com to All <=- > BTW, in those nations where we find a low incidence of > prostate cancer we seldom find a "low carb" diet as is > typically practiced here. How about a list of those nations with their numbers of PCa? ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 > Look, I don't have time to find the perfect list or chart. Meaning you spew garbage without being able to back it up. > Take a look at Figure 11.7, Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. VII: Lyon, IARC, 2002 Read the statements at the top: "There are large areas of the world that could not be included because they do not have any high-quality, population-based registries, notably Africa." Interesting that they manage to have all the figures for AIDS in Africa, though. "Although all included areas have cancer registries that meet IARC quality criteria, methods of registration, COMPLETENESS and ACCURACY VARY CONSIDERABLY and undoubtedly account for some of the international variation." "During this time period, countries such as the U.S. and Canada were undergoing an "epidemic" of prostate cancer, related largely to increased uptake of PSA testing for early detection. INCIDENCE HAS SINCE RETURNED TO A LOWER LEVEL, presumably as the pool of prevalent cases was depleted. However, there is still considerable variation in the true underlying incidence of prostate cancer. Some of this is likely related to the level of clinical suspicion and intensity of diagnostic work-up, since this disease can remain asymptomatic for many years, while some is undoubtedly related to race or ethnicity." They used 10% of the U.S. population, but single cities in Colombia (Cali), Poland (Warsaw), Japan (Osaka), China (Hong Kong), and India (Mumbai/Bombay).....that's less than half the sampling in South America, Asia, and Europe than in the U.S. > I'm 58. I just assume I have small amounts of prostate cancer > already in place. Studies indicate that to be the case. YOU JUST ASSUME? YOU DON'T KNOW? You haven't had a PSA test? Wait, yes you said in October, "my last PSA dropped to 1.6 after having a blip up to 2.9. I feel lucky no one wanted to rush me into a biopsy or I may well be in your position of uncertainty......" You haven't had a DRE? You haven't had a biopsy? Yet you wrote, "Fully informed, eyes wide open choices." And, "As a pre-diagnosis individual........." Are you fully informed? Is that why you disappeared between December 5 and February 6? You've been reading all the medical journals? ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 -=> Quoting SafireAllele-net.com <=- > Says the officially recognized idiot Ah, ha! Looking in the mirror again while at the keyboard. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12 |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.