- Joined
- Nov 19, 2011
- Messages
- 51,007
- Reaction score
- 84,096
At first glance, it seems Ryan Garcia is being Ryan Gracia...
But I've always wondered what I'd do if I was diagnosed with cancer and couldn't afford treatment.
*Fast for 2 months straight, drinking only water, tea, and coffee. (Ryan Garcia says 3.5 days? Um no, only long-term fasting would be effective. 16-8 intermittent fasting or not eating over a long weekend ain't doing shit).
*Only calories would be from powdered fiber (which is a hunger supressant) and needed vitamins.
-The plan is to force my body to eat the cancer.
-Then I'd go back in and check to see if the cancer was still growing, or getting smaller.
This wouldn't be applicable for come cancers, like in the brain, but who knows.
And apparently that fantasy plan... isn't as crackpot crazy as I thought.
Effect of fasting on cancer: A narrative review of scientific evidence
Emerging evidence suggests that fasting could play a key role in cancer treatment by fostering conditions that limit cancer cells' adaptability, survival, and growth. Fasting could increase the effectiveness of cancer treatments and limit adverse events. ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Effect of fasting on cancer: A narrative review of scientific evidence
"Emerging evidence suggests that fasting could play a key role in cancer treatment by fostering conditions that limit cancer cells' adaptability, survival, and growth. Fasting could increase the effectiveness of cancer treatments and limit adverse events. Yet, we lack an integrated mechanistic model for how these two complicated systems interact, limiting our ability to understand, prevent, and treat cancer using fasting. Here, we review recent findings at the interface of oncology and fasting metabolism, with an emphasis on human clinical studies of intermittent fasting. We recommend combining prolonged periodic fasting with a standard conventional therapeutic approach to promote cancer‐free survival, treatment efficacy and reduce side effects in cancer patients."
Yes, it says 'Fasting could increase the effectiveness of cancer treatments and limit adverse events,' but its practically impossible for a study to be done with enough patients refusing all modern cancer trestments and exclusively fasting with absolutely no callorie consumption for semi-long term results.
And pointing that out isn't an excuse to believe the theory of exclusively fasting for a cancer treatment would be effective way to kill it completely. It may pause its growth, or slowly lessen its size, but how far would someone have to go to completely kill it?
Guess it depends on... *the specific cancer.
(There's more than one, not just which area of the body its located).
*The size of the cancer. (Stage 1, 2, 3, or 4)
*...and I'm sure there may be a few more factors, but that's why this may be an interesting topic to discuss.
I may be talking out of my colon, which may be completely filled up with Stage 4 cancer shit as I type this.
Edit - Would like to add that periodic fasting (not intermittent) is the most effective means to PREVENT cancer.
Last edited:
