Cancer can only metabolise glucose
Carbohydrates of all types turn into glucose.
Humans can live without eating carbohydrates.
Going strict zero carb (carnivore) will stop feeding the cancer extra fuel, reducing the growth rate. For some people this is enough so their own bodies can get ahead of the cancer.
This makes carnivore a great ADJUNCT to a cancer treatment plan. By itself carnivore will not cure cancer.
Without medical intervention the body will still make glucose, which cancer can use. This production is at a much lower rate then eating carbs. There is a human trial testing cancer protocol that presses of zero carb eating with pulses of drugs that stop the bodies glucose production. The studies that use this focus on glioblastomas in the brain and show very promising results (in humans, not mice)
Tldr: carnivore doesn’t cure cancer, but it doesn’t enable cancer either, it couldn’t hurt to go zero carbohydrate while fighting cancer.
— a shower thought, since I’ve been talking to my friends about cancer seemingly over and over. Every body knows somebody fighting cancer
In terms of metabolic diseases, I do understand chronically fermenting cells, though I partially think about polyps from parasites, as most diseases come from parasites (terrain theory, however, postulates that if the terrain is bad, then health tends to go down with it).
Fenbendozole and ivermectin are anti-parasitic drugs (hence, why they were banned for some amount of time) from what I’m aware of…
I’m still not seeing how cancer is a parasite
@msokiovt@lemmy.today
Doing some other reading I do see the anti-parasitics having a beneficial impact on fighting cancer. It appears the mechanism of action is interference with cellular pyruvate function, which reduces the cells ability to metabolize glucose, slowing down the rate of growth. This doesn’t mean that cancer is a parasite, just that the drugs impact cellular metabolism in a way that demonstrates the warburg hypothesis (i.e. how pet scans work).