This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
It is no surprise that many people are very skeptical about the alternative medicine community, in which the percentage of cranks and quacks seems to them to be higher than in the scientific medicine community, and the standards of evidence seem lower. This skepticism often flows through to people who suggest that changes in diet and other aspects of lifestyle might also make a difference. This view may well be correct although just how you’d measure (scientifically) the percentages of cranks and/or quacks might present some difficulties in definitions.
I was sent a link recently to an article in the Huffington Post at What attracted the attention of my correspondent – and me - was the reference to the changes in genes associated with changes in diet and lifestyles. Here is the relevant extract that caught our attention :
The compelling case for feet, forks, and fingers as the master levers of medical destiny reaches further still. In fact, it reaches to our very genes.
In a study reported in 2008 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 30 men with early stage prostate cancer received an intensive lifestyle intervention for three months: wholesome, plant-based nutrition, stress management, moderate exercise, and psychosocial support. Standard measures -- weight, blood pressure, cholesterol, and so on -- all improved significantly, as one would expect. But what makes this study unique -- and ground-breaking -- is that it measured, using advanced laboratory techniques, the effects of the intervention on genes. Roughly 50 cancer suppressor genes became more active, and nearly 500 cancer promoter genes became less so.
This, and other studies like it, go so far as to indicate that the long-standing debate over the relative power of nature versus nurture is something of a boondoggle, for there is no true dichotomy. We can, in fact, nurture nature.
The study referred to is a very small one but the genetic changes observed may well prove, in the fullness of time, to be the scientific basis of the observations made by people in the alternative medicine community.
much of alternative treatment does leave one skeptical, primarily if one is evidenced based, Budwig protocol, Gershon therapy, Laetrile, Ozone therapy, Cesium chloride, Rife machines, Grape cure etc etc, with my life at risk I lean heavily to evidence, if there is any SHOW IT! There has been much research on phytochemicals, polyphenols etc. The work of researchers such as Prof Richard Beliveau has found many compounds within foods that are antiangiogenetic, compounds that will help fight cancer, cure a gleason 9? no, but aid in the fight and/or reccurence, yes.
