[HN Gopher] Fructose in diet enhances tumor growth: research
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Fructose in diet enhances tumor growth: research
        
       Author : gmays
       Score  : 164 points
       Date   : 2024-12-06 19:46 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (source.washu.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (source.washu.edu)
        
       | lambdaba wrote:
       | Steve Jobs is a prime example, he tried to treat his pancreatic
       | cancer with fruit.
       | 
       | Also see Thomas Seyfried's work on ketogenic diets for cancer
       | https://www.bc.edu/bc-web/bcnews/science-tech-and-health/bio...
        
         | methyl wrote:
         | Pancreatic cancer doesn't have good prognosis in the first
         | place, no matter what you eat or don't eat.
        
           | twostorytower wrote:
           | But his was actually one of the most treatable forms and he
           | could have potentially had many many years added to his life
           | had he initially listened to his doctors.
        
             | SoftTalker wrote:
             | Yes I was downvoted last time I posted this, but: Don't try
             | to be your own lawyer, and don't try to be your own doctor.
        
           | mchannon wrote:
           | This is the tail wagging the dog.
           | 
           | Jobs' fruitarianism meant he didn't eat eggs, meat, dairy, or
           | other sources of selenium. Fruit doesn't contain selenium.
           | One of Selenium deficiency's side effects, well established
           | in the literature: pancreatic cancer.
        
         | throw646577 wrote:
         | He's not a prime example of anything to do with fruit making
         | things worse. His chosen therapy just as likely had no
         | worsening impact on his cancer; the problem was it had no
         | positive impact _either_ and he put off surgery.
         | 
         | He had a rare form of pancreatic cancer that grows from the tip
         | of the pancreas and can _sometimes_ be snipped out without
         | consequence early enough that it doesn 't spread.
         | 
         | He presumably freaked out about it all nevertheless (because
         | it's terrifying), avoided surgery for too long and ended up
         | having a Whipple procedure, which is fucking brutal.
         | 
         | But there's still a pretty good chance he would have had early
         | surgery and still ended up needing a Whipple procedure and
         | still have passed away on roughly the same timescale. Because
         | pancreatic cancer is a stealthy thing, and the Whipple
         | procedure comes with its own frightening future.
         | 
         | It's really sad he freaked out, it's really sad he didn't
         | listen. But it's not that unusual. He's far from unique in
         | making irrational decisions in the face of terrifying
         | diagnoses. Should it have been a slam dunk decision? Yeah. Of
         | course. But there we are.
        
           | lambdaba wrote:
           | He was following "fruitarianism" on and off even before his
           | diagnosis, I think it's reasonable to suspect it had
           | something to do with his cancer, but I wasn't aware of those
           | details, so thanks for providing them.
        
             | throw646577 wrote:
             | And yet:
             | 
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16172215/
             | 
             | I mean... in terms of our scientific understanding at this
             | point, sporadic pancreatic cancer just comes from nowhere.
             | We don't know why. In the case of the parent I lost to it,
             | it _could_ have been triggered by a response to
             | inflammation from previous surgery. It seems plausible. But
             | nobody knows.
             | 
             | I just think people snarking or factoiding about Steve
             | Jobs' panicked response to an awful disease comes across as
             | projection of other judgements more than anything else. He
             | was a complicated, self-reliant person who made a bad
             | decision when he was scared. And it _probably_ (but by no
             | means certainly) cost him a few years of health. And now he
             | is gone. And it 's still sad for the people who lost him
             | and for the wider world.
        
               | lambdaba wrote:
               | I'm sorry about your parent.
               | 
               | I didn't mean to dunk on Steve Jobs, but I'm sure even he
               | would agree he had an eccentric and extremist personality
               | and the bit about fruitarianism seems very relevant esp
               | with happenings like [Ashton Kutcher being hospitalized
               | when he tried to mimick
               | it](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/jan/28/ashton-
               | kutcher-...)
               | 
               | relevant quote:
               | 
               | > "First of all, the fruitarian diet can lead to, like,
               | severe issues," Kutcher told USA Today. "I went to the
               | hospital like two days before we started shooting the
               | movie. I was like doubled over in pain. My pancreas
               | levels were completely out of whack. It was really
               | terrifying ... considering everything."
        
           | znpy wrote:
           | steve jobs was known to be an asshole. i wonder how much that
           | had an impact on dealing with the condition.
           | 
           | on the other hand, I wonder what kind of steve jobs would the
           | world have had, had he survived.
           | 
           | would he have pushed cancer research further, somehow? maybe
           | by getting involved and providing funding and technology,
           | maybe novel technology, for cancer research? or would he have
           | gone full-cynical and focused on something else entirely?
           | 
           | we'll never know, for sure.
        
         | andai wrote:
         | Another comment mentioned that the mechanism by which fructose
         | promotes tumor growth is that it increases circulating lipids.
         | But I'm wondering, doesn't keto (which seems to fight cancer)
         | also do that?
        
           | throw646577 wrote:
           | Not much evidence that keto fights cancer any better than any
           | other exclusion diet; it might even be worse than meat
           | exclusion diets.
        
             | lambdaba wrote:
             | "Not much evidence"? That is so far from the truth.
        
         | outworlder wrote:
         | > Steve Jobs is a prime example, he tried to treat his
         | pancreatic cancer with fruit.
         | 
         | That is true - and probably didn't help. But his case is a poor
         | example since he delayed treatment for months.
         | 
         | EDIT: Also, actual fruits are probably not an issue. It's
         | difficult to eat too much fruit, unless in juice form... which
         | he did.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | > Steve Jobs is a prime example, he tried to treat his
         | pancreatic cancer with fruit.
         | 
         | Pancreatic cancer will fuck you up pretty much no matter what
         | you do. I think it literally is the cancer with the smallest
         | survival rate
        
       | WorkerBee28474 wrote:
       | > "We were surprised that fructose was barely metabolized in the
       | tumor types we tested... We quickly learned that the tumor cells
       | alone don't tell the whole story... one way in which high levels
       | of fructose consumption promote tumor growth is by increasing the
       | availability of circulating lipids in the blood. These lipids are
       | building blocks for the cell membrane, and cancer cells need them
       | to grow... Over the past few years, it's become clear that many
       | cancer cells prefer to take up lipids rather than make them
       | 
       | A bit of a red herring, but still interesting.
        
       | jcims wrote:
       | Went though a cancer journey with a loved one a few years ago. I
       | was quite surprised at the complete lack of specialized guidance
       | on nutrition. It was basically 'eat healthy', which isn't bad
       | advice but it seems like there are probably optimizations to be
       | had there.
       | 
       | (Of course there's no end of it on the Internets, but as part of
       | heathcare it was absent)
        
         | bell-cot wrote:
         | Cynical Reaction: There are no patent royalties, fat profits,
         | nor bragging rights to be found in giving nutritional advice.
        
           | WithinReason wrote:
           | Or in researching nutrition
        
           | stevenwoo wrote:
           | The first half of her book talks about nutrition and health
           | but the second half talks about her company that offers
           | services to give people personal guidance on nutrition and
           | monitoring their health, so there are some attempts to do
           | this. https://www.caseymeans.com/goodenergy
        
         | stvltvs wrote:
         | We tend to emphasize diet a lot, I think because it's something
         | we can control, but it might not help as much as we hope.
         | 
         | Eating a healthy, plant-forward diet while minimizing alcohol
         | and red meat might give us most of the benefit we can squeeze
         | out of diet for cancer risk reduction.
        
           | lambdaba wrote:
           | > minimizing red meat
           | 
           | could you provide the evidence that convinced you that red
           | meat is detrimental to health?
        
             | toomuchtodo wrote:
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41945838
             | 
             | https://newatlas.com/medical/red-meat-iron-colorectal-
             | cancer...
             | 
             | https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/risk-
             | re...
             | 
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27597529/
        
         | liveoneggs wrote:
         | I shared this story before on here but my aunt found out she
         | had lung cancer when her t2 diabetes suddenly cured itself.
        
           | cipheredStones wrote:
           | Is there a known mechanism by which that happens? Or was it
           | just a weird idiosyncrasy of her body and her diseases?
        
         | andrewmcwatters wrote:
         | There are people who think eating bread is healthy. "Eat
         | health," and "eat cleaner" are two phrases that are doing
         | cultural damage.
         | 
         | Even the more educated members of family believe this.
        
           | Nasrudith wrote:
           | Healthy is always relative. I mean eating bread is healthy
           | compared to say, eating deep-fried cake.
        
           | alkyon wrote:
           | With low fructose content (less then carrots per 100g), it's
           | not a stupid choice. Naturally, if you don't binge on it,
           | otherwise 2-3 slices daily won't kill you. I mean wholegrain,
           | sourdough bread, to be precise.
        
         | lm28469 wrote:
         | They also will gladly prescribe you statins for life without
         | mentioning that losing your excess 30kg and walking every now
         | and then would likely greatly improve your cholesterol issues
         | (or even solve them) and improve your general health. You can
         | apply this to pretty much any modern wide spread disease.
         | 
         | I think doctors don't even bother because they assume people
         | already do as much as they're willing to do, the problem is
         | that the interests of capitalism are diametrically opposed to
         | your well being so most people start with quite a disadvantage,
         | just look at supermarkets: the alcohol, candies, coke, cakes
         | aisles are all bigger than the healthy food aisle, together
         | they're like 80% of the building
        
           | cipheredStones wrote:
           | "Doctors won't mention that losing weight and exercising more
           | will make you healthier" is quite a take.
           | 
           | I've heard exactly the opposite from any number of people:
           | that if you're overweight at all, many doctors will tell
           | "lose weight and exercise" and then usher you out the door,
           | rather than pay attention to the specifics of your medical
           | problems - sometimes missing serious issues as a result.
        
             | SoftTalker wrote:
             | When they have to turn patients over at the rate of 10 per
             | hour due to the policy of the private equity group that
             | owns their practice, they will be inclined to offer blanket
             | advice that, while actually good and applicable for 80% of
             | people, will tend to miss the edge cases.
        
       | outworlder wrote:
       | > "one way in which high levels of fructose consumption promote
       | tumor growth is by increasing the availability of circulating
       | lipids in the blood. "
       | 
       | Glad to see more research on this. Until recently, people trying
       | to sound the alarm with regards to high fructose consumption
       | (mainly high fructose corn syrup) have been dismissed.
       | 
       | Excess fructose consumption increases tryglicerides, uric acid.
       | Just uric acid alone causes a lot of issues, from heart disease
       | to erectile dysfunction(inhibits NOX), even before gout starts.
       | The range that's considered 'normal' has changed over time, but I
       | feel it's too high.
       | 
       | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7352635/
       | 
       | Note that fruits are unlikely to be an issue (except perhaps as
       | fruit juice). Most people don't eat enough of them and they have
       | plenty of nutrients that are beneficial.
       | 
       | EDIT:
       | 
       | > "Interestingly, the cancer cells themselves were unable to use
       | fructose readily as a nutrient because they do not express the
       | right biochemical machinery," Patti said. "Liver cells do. This
       | allows them to convert fructose into LPCs, which they can secrete
       | to feed tumors."
       | 
       | Forgot about this. Non alcoholic fatty liver disease has been on
       | the rise for a while now, and it's mostly the high fructose corn
       | syrup again.
        
         | meiraleal wrote:
         | > Glad to see more research on this
         | 
         | You are glad to argue for exactly the opposite of what the
         | research found?
         | 
         | Fructose is metabolized to lipids in the liver and that counts
         | fruit juice, too. And the whole fruit.
        
         | sneak wrote:
         | FYI, high fructose corn syrup has only slightly more fructose
         | (a single digit percentage) than normal sugar, which also has a
         | fuckton of fructose in it.
         | 
         | Corn syrup is a red herring.
        
           | nayuki wrote:
           | Correct. Sucrose (table sugar) is exactly 50% fructose, 50%
           | glucose. The most common blend of HFCS is 55% fructose, 45%
           | glucose - which is barely different.
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup
        
             | tasty_freeze wrote:
             | That link has a bit of nuance. Some HFCS has _lower_
             | fructose content:
             | 
             | "HFCS 42" and "HFCS 55" refer to dry weight fructose
             | compositions of 42% and 55% respectively, the rest being
             | glucose. HFCS 42 is mainly used for processed foods and
             | breakfast cereals, whereas HFCS 55 is used mostly for
             | production of soft drinks.
        
           | sithadmin wrote:
           | Yup. ~5% more fructose than table sugar in its most common
           | formulations, actually lower content than table sugar in some
           | formulations (e.g. HFCS-42). The 'high fructose' moniker is
           | derived from a reference to 'pure' corn syrup which is nearly
           | 100% glucose, not a reference to table sugar as commonly
           | assumed.
        
           | tashoecraft wrote:
           | I've heard the issue with high fructose corn syrup is that
           | the levels of sugar in it does not correspond to its
           | sweetness level. Corn syrup on its own is not very sweet, so
           | to make it taste sweet you have to add much higher levels
           | than if you had used other types of sweetener.
        
             | cwillu wrote:
             | Not sure how to square that with the chemical composition
             | of hfcs.
        
           | 01100011 wrote:
           | Right. The main issue with HFCS is that it's really cheap so
           | it gets added to a lot of things that wouldn't normally
           | contain sugar or it is added in greater amounts than other
           | sugars.
        
         | jandrewrogers wrote:
         | > mainly high fructose corn syrup
         | 
         | It should be pointed out that contrary to what many people
         | assume, "high-fructose" does mean that it has more fructose
         | than sugar. Sugar is 50% fructose, and many widely used HFCS
         | formulations contain _less_ fructose than sugar (e.g. the 42%
         | fructose formulation used in most processed food). Even the
         | formulation used in soft drinks is only 55% fructose,
         | marginally more than sugar.
         | 
         | If you replace HFCS with sugar in your diet it is basically a
         | no-op in terms of being healthy and in many cases will increase
         | your fructose intake.
        
           | gus_massa wrote:
           | In table sugar each fructose is conected to a,glucose in a
           | single molecule (so 50% and 50%).
           | 
           | In high fructose corn syrup they are disconected.
           | 
           | This cange a lot of things like how fast they get to the
           | blood and how fast cells can use them.
           | 
           | I'm skeptical of a lot of good/bad reported health effects,
           | but it's not obviously a nop.
        
             | XorNot wrote:
             | Fructose _can 't_ be used by cells directly - it does not
             | effect blood sugar levels, because it has to be processed
             | by the liver into glucose first.[1]
             | 
             | The potential issues with fructose are related to the
             | matabolic processes which convert it into glucose, which is
             | what your cells actually use.
             | 
             | So eating say, straight fructose in fact won't spike your
             | blood sugar since it has a much more convoluted metabolic
             | path to consumption. Something like HFCS is more likely to
             | be a problem because the _glucose_ content is not in the
             | dissacharide form of sucrose and _can_ be directly
             | absorbed.
             | 
             | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fructose
        
         | chiph wrote:
         | I was recently diagnosed with fatty liver disease. The liver-
         | related numbers in my blood work were slightly elevated. An
         | abdominal ultrasound confirmed it.
         | 
         | Liver problems have historically been caused by excessive
         | alcohol consumption (leads to cirrhosis, etc.) But I'm a
         | teetotaler. The other version of fatty liver disease - the non-
         | alcoholic kind - can be caused by excessive fructose
         | consumption. Since I have been drinking diet sodas for years,
         | that likely isn't it either (Diet Dr Pepper uses Aspartame as a
         | sweetener).
         | 
         | But there are hints that artificial sweeteners trick the body
         | into thinking they're getting the real thing and it will store
         | those calories as fat. So I have started a fat-loss program
         | where the first thing to go has been soda. And I'm down 15
         | pounds so far.
         | 
         | Many thanks to the "LoseIt" app developers for making it easy
         | to track my calories. And please get your numbers checked at
         | your next doctor visit.
        
           | 01100011 wrote:
           | Fatty liver here as well. Not a big consumer of sugar or
           | alcohol though so I suspect something else is the cause. My
           | liver doc ordered a couple dozen obscure blood tests to see
           | if we can find the cause. I take a lot of supplements and
           | vitamins, but the doc didn't see anything that should have
           | caused it. My parents and siblings, despite being more obese
           | and consuming more sugar, also do not have it.
        
           | unsupp0rted wrote:
           | Is fatty liver disease also common in teetotalers / non-
           | fructose drinkers of average weight?
        
           | Gibbon1 wrote:
           | Thing I read that's a bit fascinating and possibly important
           | is your digestive system has taste buds and it's own nervous
           | system. I wouldn't be gobsmacked if it responded to
           | artificial sweeteners. And that causes issues.
           | 
           | Other thing I read is fructose is processed by the liver via
           | some of the same paths that alcohol does. Would surprising if
           | they didn't share some of the same negative health outcomes.
        
         | heisenbit wrote:
         | Fructose is primarily processed in the liver and shares some
         | processes with alcohol processing with toxic byproducts.
         | Fructose processing yield triglycerides contributing to the
         | less ideal fat in blood. When I cut my fructose consumption
         | down for a while to less than 10g/day my triglycerides in my
         | blood dropped considerably - my GP did not believe it was my
         | diet. It is shocking how little some doctors know about
         | fructose influence on the body despite the considerable amount
         | is is consumed.
        
       | fallinditch wrote:
       | My understanding is that naturally occurring fructose found in
       | whole fruits is accompanied by fiber, vitamins, and minerals,
       | which help mitigate any negative effects of fructose when
       | consumed as part of a balanced diet.
       | 
       | However, it sounds like we should maybe be avoiding excessive
       | amounts of certain fruit. See: A Definitive Guide to Fructose
       | Content in Fruit [1]
       | 
       | There was a recent episode from Diary of a CEO with a cancer
       | expert. He seems to have some really sound advice. One particular
       | take away for me was his finding that when the body enters a
       | ketogenic state due to fasting the body produces defences that
       | eat up cancer cells [2]
       | 
       | [1] https://iquitsugar.com/blogs/articles/a-definitive-guide-
       | to-...
       | 
       | [2] https://youtu.be/VaVC3PAWqLk?feature=shared
        
         | ChumpGPT wrote:
         | Fruit has changed dramatically over the last Century. I imagine
         | there was a time when it was much smaller, less sweet, and only
         | available seasonally. In this new world, we have 24/7/365
         | access to as much and whatever we want.
         | 
         | There are Cherries along with every type of fruit you could
         | want at Costco today and it's December.
        
           | Noumenon72 wrote:
           | Cherries out of season are wrinkly and weird tasting, unless
           | Costco has solved that. Cherries and pomegranates are my two
           | most "seasonal" fruits, in contrast to the always-available
           | ones. I feel like mangoes and cantaloupes have seasons too, I
           | just don't know how to detect them since they keep selling
           | them even when they're not good.
        
           | Nasrudith wrote:
           | Except the fruit in the past was often available out of
           | season but as pickling or preserves, via either excesses of
           | salt or sugar. For several centuries. Let alone the parts of
           | the world that don't really have four seasons, instead having
           | only two, wet and dry seasons. The point being I'm not sure
           | how much relatively recent norms will actually be able to
           | tell us about health.
        
         | lambdaba wrote:
         | I doubt modern fruit, optimized for sweetness, has a very
         | favorable vitamin-mineral/fructose ratio.
        
           | url00 wrote:
           | Not sure why you are being downvoted, this is a good point to
           | bring up.
        
             | Vitamin_Sushi wrote:
             | I didn't downvote, but I can imagine that most people
             | weren't aware of that claim. I'm skeptical of it as well
             | since I'm not aware of any research that shows fructose in
             | fruit increasing over time.
        
               | swatcoder wrote:
               | Commercial incentives are to engineer varietals for
               | contemporary aesthetics (sweet, unbitter, colorful,
               | unblemished, large) and crop turnover (rapid growth,
               | tolerance for depleted soil), nutrition has been _way_
               | down on the priority list for nearly a century now.
               | 
               | https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soil-
               | depletion-an...
               | 
               | If you don't believe food is sweeter and less nutritious,
               | you're firing a shot at many-billion-dollar industries
               | that have been earnestly been trying to optimize the
               | above for all that time.
               | 
               | It's not a pleasant thing to believe, but its hard to
               | refute.
               | 
               | IIRC, You should be able to do your own deep dives here:
               | 
               | https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/food-
               | search?type=SR%20Legacy&query=
        
               | sidibe wrote:
               | If you're older I think some of this is obvious. Biggest
               | example for me is grapefruit, they used to be barely
               | sweet, when I was a kid they were mostly bitter and we
               | used to add sugar to them, now they're always extremely
               | sweet.
        
               | lambdaba wrote:
               | same here! Thanks for bringing up memories of sugar
               | grapefruit. My parents' generation used to sugar their
               | strawberries...
        
               | MrDresden wrote:
               | This may differ based on location, as my grapefruit (non
               | organic normal supermarket bought) are still quite
               | bitter. I'm located in Europe so these might be Spanish
               | grapefruit, though not sure.
        
               | l5870uoo9y wrote:
               | Try buying conventional fruit and an organic one and
               | taste the different, e.g. grape fruit.
        
             | XorNot wrote:
             | Because it's not a factual statement. It's a "truthy"
             | sounding statement, but the person making it didn't
             | actually go and look it up, which they could've done in
             | seconds on the device they're currently using.
             | 
             | It's practically the definition of FUD (fear, uncertainty,
             | doubt). Based on no evidence "I think there's a danger
             | because it's feels like there's a danger!"
        
         | 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
         | Is there a lower prevalence of cancer in cultures that fast?
        
           | wigster wrote:
           | or in Inuit people who i imagine don't get much fresh fruit
           | except a few berries?
        
             | lambdaba wrote:
             | everywhere, cancer & chronic disease rates go up as diets
             | get westernized
        
               | lm28469 wrote:
               | Yep, that's because most cancers are lifestyle related,
               | remove alcohol, tobacco and bad diets/obesity and you
               | remove 75% of cancers.
               | 
               | https://www.oatext.com/which-environment-makes-cancer.php
        
               | lambdaba wrote:
               | Obviously yes, so is most chronic disease, but bring up
               | people being healed by lifestyle & diet intervention and
               | prepare for relentless attacks from both doctors and
               | laypeople.
        
               | cortic wrote:
               | Isn't that just selection bias, as diets get westernized
               | so does medical care and so we detect more diseases..
        
               | lambdaba wrote:
               | this is even counter to mainstream medical opinion
        
               | unsupp0rted wrote:
               | Life expectancy also goes up as lives get westernized, so
               | people live long enough to become adults and die from
               | cancer, rather than Malaria, diarrhea, etc
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | > cultures that fast?
           | 
           | Are there any culture that fast in a way that would matter
           | here ? Most of fasting traditions are mostly performative.
           | The average joe probably fasted more by default a few
           | thousand years ago than most people do now
        
           | steve_adams_86 wrote:
           | I don't know about that, but there does appear to be a
           | tradeoff between nutrition and fertility. When you eat less,
           | you're less fertile. When you're less fertile, you live
           | longer. A lot of what appears to allow us to live longer is
           | lower rates of cancer, but the data I've seen there isn't
           | rock solid and it isn't something I've dug deeply into. I
           | only mention it because it's certainly studied and a question
           | worth pursuing, with very interesting papers available if you
           | look.
           | 
           | Something I read recently was about eunuchs living something
           | like 25% longer than intact counterparts. However, the data
           | was limited (15 each of eunuchs and intact as I recall).
           | There were very few confounding factors, however. Really
           | interesting stuff.
        
         | altairprime wrote:
         | It would still be net beneficial for anyone consuming
         | industrial fructose to switch to fresh fruit of any kind.
         | However, yes, if you've already withdrawn added fructose in
         | processed foods and drinks from your diet, you could certainly
         | optimize further on which kinds of fresh fruit you consume. It
         | won't make any difference if you still drink fructose soda,
         | though.
        
         | throw646577 wrote:
         | Going to go out on a limb here and say you probably shouldn't
         | get any scientific advice about nutrition -- or really any
         | scientific advice at all -- from anyone on Diary Of A CEO.
        
           | lambdaba wrote:
           | what a dumb remark, what does it matter who the host is
        
             | thot_experiment wrote:
             | It absolutely does matter?? If you're trying to do
             | reference class forecasting and your class is "a person who
             | is not a CEO" and then you're forecasting based on anecdata
             | of "people who are a CEO" you're not going to get good
             | predictions.
        
               | airstrike wrote:
               | people on the show aren't strictly "CEOs" in the truest
               | sense of that word. just to pick an obvious
               | counterexample, Robert Greene is an author, not a CEO,
               | and he was a guest
        
             | throw646577 wrote:
             | The host in this case is a significant investor in Huel who
             | seemingly fails to mention his relationship to it when
             | bigging it up.
             | 
             | https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0rwz5xkrg8o
             | 
             | To me it casts any discussion of nutrition on his podcast
             | in a somewhat different, less than neutral light.
        
               | lambdaba wrote:
               | Okay, but the parent was implying that would discredit
               | the interviewee. One thing I've observed with people that
               | have an important message to disseminate is they are not
               | fussy about what the medium is
        
               | throw646577 wrote:
               | I don't know if it would or would not. But some cynicism
               | feels warranted by association.
               | 
               | And then there's the further research you can do:
               | 
               | https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/ketogenic-diets-for-
               | cancer-...
               | 
               | I dunno. I don't know enough to evaluate this in precise
               | detail. But I do know enough to feel cynicism about
               | extraordinary claims.
        
           | Ronwe wrote:
           | In general yes, but there are some good guests that were
           | there. For example, in case of nutrition, Dr. Layne Norton
           | called him out on having a guy that was talking nonsense on
           | the podcast and then they got in touch with Layne and had him
           | on the podcast where he explained many of the misinformation
           | about nutrition currently in wild.
        
             | unsupp0rted wrote:
             | Is there any information on nutrition at all? Isn't it 100%
             | misinformation?
             | 
             | Every week a new thing contradicts last week's thing.
        
             | guerby wrote:
             | A researcher opinion on Dr. Layne Norton:
             | 
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ4p1bCsUio
             | 
             | "When Predator Becomes Prey: Will Dr Layne Norton Choose
             | Humility or Humiliation? by Nick Norwitz"
             | 
             | YMMV
        
           | turing_complete wrote:
           | I don't like the interviewer, but just three weeks ago, Eric
           | Schmidt was on the podcast and he is obviously very smart and
           | knowledgeable about technology and business.
        
             | throw646577 wrote:
             | And yet, and yet, I still wouldn't take his diet advice
             | that seriously.
        
           | airstrike wrote:
           | If you're going to make a bold claim like that, shouldn't you
           | provide some support? Otherwise you're expecting us to just
           | take an anonymous person's word for it... and particularly a
           | throwaway account.
           | 
           | You're saying "discount science based not on facts, but on
           | the form in which such science is published" which is utterly
           | unscientific
        
             | throw646577 wrote:
             | I did reply to another comment about my concerns about
             | Diary of a CEO in the context of nutrition advice.
        
         | culopatin wrote:
         | That list of fructose levels is pretty useless when the units
         | of measurement change per fruit. 1 cup vs 1 guava or 1 banana?
        
           | doodlebugging wrote:
           | At least they didn't use standard layman units like a
           | fractional volume of an Olympic sized swimming pool.
        
         | eikenberry wrote:
         | I thought levels of fructose weren't as important as other
         | qualities, like fiber content. For example, Dates are often
         | referenced as a good fruit option due to the high fiber content
         | but that guide doesn't mention fiber at all and has dates in
         | the high fructose category. This seems like standard operating
         | procedure in anything dietary where it is more about a specific
         | aspect of the food and less about communicating well rounded
         | advice.
        
           | lm28469 wrote:
           | > I thought levels of fructose weren't as important as other
           | qualities, like fiber content.
           | 
           | > Dates are often referenced as a good fruit option
           | 
           | fyi, 100gr of dried dates it like 3 to 4 times the average
           | amount of sugar recommended per day. Just 2 medjool dates and
           | you hit your daily sugar recommendation.
           | 
           | At the end of the day your body will have to process the
           | stuff you ingest, if it comes with fibers the digestion will
           | be slower, but if you eat too much of X Y Z day after day
           | it's just a matter of time before your body gives up
        
             | papa_bear wrote:
             | I believe you'll meet the "Added or Free sugar"
             | recommendation with 2 medjool dates, but AFAIK, the
             | guideline isn't as strict on naturally occurring sugars, if
             | there is any guideline at all aside from general carb
             | consumption. Dates also have a surprisingly low glycemic
             | index for how sweet they are.
        
         | l5870uoo9y wrote:
         | Monkeys at a UK were put off "human" bananas and developed
         | diabetes[1]. Fruit is healthy desert not - like vegetables -
         | main course.
         | 
         | [1]: https://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/15/world/europe/uk-zoo-
         | monke...
        
         | georgecmu wrote:
         | > One particular take away for me was his finding that when the
         | body enters a ketogenic state due to fasting the body produces
         | defences that eat up cancer cells
         | 
         | As with everything, mileage will vary.
         | 
         | Pro: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6375425/
         | 
         | Contra: https://www.cancer.columbia.edu/news/study-finds-keto-
         | diet-c...
         | 
         | "We did indeed see that the ketogenic diet suppressed tumor
         | growth -- but we also saw, surprisingly, that it promoted tumor
         | metastasis," says Gu. "That was really a shock to us."
        
           | fallinditch wrote:
           | I think there's a misunderstanding here, my fault for not
           | being clearer. I think I should have used the phrase 'when
           | the body enters a state of ketosis' i.e. the state you get to
           | when fasting when your body starts burning core fat. I
           | believe the word ketogenic refers to the type of meat heavy
           | diet. Thanks for those links, the fact that eating a lot of
           | meat can promote tumor metastasis does not surprise me.
        
             | sophacles wrote:
             | There are plenty of vegetarian ketogenic diets. A ketogenic
             | diet is one that contains very few, or no carbohydrates to
             | maintain the ketosis - just high in fats and medium in
             | proteins. Meat is a convenient form of food with those
             | properties, so often people maintaining such a diet eat a
             | lot of meat.
        
             | arcticbull wrote:
             | Ketosis occurs when your body switches from consuming
             | glucose as its primary fuel source to consuming ketones
             | which are generated from the breakdown of fatty acids,
             | either from the diet or endogenous.
             | 
             | Almost all body tissue can run on ketones instead of on
             | glucose, except for certain important tissues like red
             | blood cells, 30% of the brain, retina, some kidney tissue,
             | etc.
             | 
             | For the rest, your body synthesizes the glucose it needs
             | via gluconeogenesis from some protein substrates and from
             | glycerol backbodes from triglycerides. These inputs can be
             | either from the diet or from your fat stores.
             | 
             | Fasting for a few days causes your body to enter authophagy
             | through the inhibition of mTOR in addition to ketosis, so
             | that could account for some of the difference.
        
           | weird-eye-issue wrote:
           | In mice. I'm not a mouse, are you?
        
             | mbreese wrote:
             | An oncologist I know was fond of saying that we cured mice
             | of cancer ages ago... cancer in humans is much more
             | complicated.
        
               | neom wrote:
               | Just as an aside, as a complete rat lover and obsessed
               | fancy rat freak, I always find it somewhat sad we could
               | probably come up with some great drugs for them (they
               | notoriously die very easily), just, well, who cares about
               | rats???
        
       | pharrington wrote:
       | correct title is "Research reveals how fructose in diet enhances
       | tumor growth"
        
       | beastman82 wrote:
       | I just asked Gemini about this, and it linked me to this article,
       | published today.
       | 
       | Maybe we have a reliable nutrition guide after all!
        
       | deanc wrote:
       | On a similar note...
       | 
       | There is a particular type of kidney disease called Polycystic
       | Kidney disease which is genetic. Essentially cysts grow all over
       | your kidneys, they swell up, and eventually fail (usually over
       | many years). There is emerging research that glucose contributes
       | to the growth of these cysts and early research suggests
       | ketogenic diet can have a measurable impact on the growth of
       | these cysts and improve kidney function.
        
       | defensem3ch wrote:
       | what was the source of fructose used in the study? it doesn't say
        
       | uhtred wrote:
       | Why are so many techies also keto fanboys.
       | 
       | I suspect it's because diets like keto say it's OK to eat loads
       | of meat and basically don't require any sacrifice. Fuck the
       | environment and fuck other animals right bros?!
        
         | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
         | It's hard to find tech jobs that aren't in support of some
         | activity which is making the world a less pleasant place to be.
         | So you're starting from a pool which has already has some
         | cognitive dissonance momentum going. I don't think it's too
         | surprising that that momentum would carry over into dissonance
         | re: the side effects of your diet.
        
           | Nasrudith wrote:
           | Take your blinders off, please. Tech is nowhere unique in
           | that issue and pretending so itself is its own major delusion
           | of exceptionalism.
        
       | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
       | I feel like fruit used to be food but now the available cultivars
       | resemble candy. Or maybe it's just my taste buds changing, not
       | sure.
        
       | hex4def6 wrote:
       | I feel like I came across some similar research years ago.
       | 
       | It brought up a question that I'm hoping someone in this field
       | could answer: Does it make sense to speed up cancer cell
       | replication while providing chemo drugs?
       | 
       | It seems like this would result in greater discrimination between
       | fast-replicating cells (cancer) and normal cells. In turn, this
       | would allow faster chemo treatments, or less collateral damage.
        
       | eecc wrote:
       | Also this time "In mice"? (I hope)
        
       | zenon wrote:
       | Maybe worth noting that you have to eat a pretty large dose of
       | fructose for it to make it all the way to the liver. More than in
       | a few pieces of fruit. The small intestine converts up to 1g/kg
       | (of bodyweight) fructose to glucose and other metabolites before
       | it enters the liver portal vein.
        
       | mchannon wrote:
       | Fun fact: Sucrose, from our friends cane sugar and beet sugar, is
       | a glucose/dextrose molecule tied to a fructose molecule. And when
       | you digest it, you get the effects of some of each.
       | 
       | Another fun fact: The "H" in HFCS stems from the fact just plain
       | "corn syrup" is defined as 0% fructose. Fast food restaurants
       | push the percentage to 58%+ fructose to turbocharge the sweetest
       | taste in their sodas.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-12-06 23:00 UTC)