And I'm no Einstein either which I'm proud of.
Well I’m glad we can finally agree on something.
Fascinating thought Dear ICreely. That glucose could be important in the healing process.
Why thank you, my dear partix. It’s just a thought though.
Your Honor, may I have permission to treat Mr. Patrix as a hostile witness?
So your hypothesis is then that it should be beneficial to consume glucose?
I never said that, so please refrain from putting words into my mouth.
…since you claim to be knowledgeable in medicine…
Nice try, patrix, but I believe I’ve already addressed your straw man fallacy.
… while you avoid to say anything on the actual research even though you claim authority on medical knowledge.
If I gave you the impression that I’m an authority on medical knowledge, then I apologize. Rest assured I’m not an authority on any form of knowledge.
Speaking of St. Seyfried’s actual research:
Dr. Gonzalez Dismantles the Ketogenic Diet For Cancer
So, what evidence does Dr. Seyfried himself provide to prove his point that the best diet for all cancer patients, whatever the type, is the ketogenic, high fat, no carb diet? Well, very little. Certainly the 400 plus pages of elaborate biochemistry and theory are impressive and informative. But in terms of practicalities, that is, results with actual human patients diagnosed with cancer, there is next to no evidence.
Dr. Seyfried does include a chapter toward the book’s end entitled “Case Studies and Personal Experiences in using the Ketogenic Diet for Cancer Management.” Here, Dr. Seyfried provides a description of a pilot study, written by the investigators themselves, discussing the use of the ketogenic diet in children with inoperable brain cancer. However, the authors admit the study was intended only to evaluate the diet’s tolerability and effect on glucose metabolism as determined by PET scanning, not treatment benefit or survival
As the authors write, “the protocol was not designed to reverse tumor growth or treat specific types of cancer.” The researchers also acknowledge the patient numbers were too small to allow for meaningful statistical evaluation, even for the avowed purposes. Overall, the discussion centers on the practicalities of implementing the diet and the results of the PET scans.
-Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, MD
This article originally appeared on Natural Health 365.
https://www.chrisbeatcancer.com/dr-gonz ... or-cancer/
In my previous post, I pointed out the limitations, if not uselessness, of PET scans vis-à-vis
“cancer.” As usual, in your zealous attempt to defend your guru, you jump to false (positive) conclusions. Moreover, the late Nicholas Gonzalez provided plenty of detailed criticism of St. Seyfried’s research in the above article that you’ve obviously decided to ignore.
So if a researcher comes along with evidence that glucose, the main energy we can get from plants, is promoting or rather feeding cancer, this will be disregarded.
If you understood the machinations behind PET scans, you’d realize that his so called evidence falls in line with oncological orthodoxy. That there’s nothing “groundbreaking” about it.
I find this hypothesis of yours very unlikely however (if it suggests consuming glucose) and it completely goes against the now growing understanding within medicine that it is in fact excessive carbohydrate intake (including glucose) that drives inflammation and many diseases including cancer.
I for one, refuse to avoid consuming, in moderation, sugar (glucose) especially fruits (fructose) because of the now growing (like a malignant tumor) [mis]understanding within allopathic medicine.
I’m afraid my diagnosis (Terminal Seyfriedosis) still stands. Under the informed consent principle you have every right to refuse my recommended course of treatment (Thomasectomy).
Apologies for bringing up medicine in this thread, but I couldn't help myself commenting the radical idea ICFreely put forward here.
Apology accepted, dear parix. But seeing as your disease is contagious I’m going to have to kindly ask you to refrain from infecting this thread with Seyfriedosis. Diet dogma debates should be addressed at a future space-time in the “Engineering Nutrition” thread and quarantined therein. If not, then the bailiff will be forced to remove us from (and lock) this thread as well.