Comments on: Why Is It That American Doctors Do Not Tell Their Cancer Patients About Sugar?

By: doctor frog

doctor frog — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 12:15:02 +0000

probably the same reason a sales person won’t tell you that those new jeans you are purchasing look terrible on you.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 06:14:39 +0000

Many have answered this question correctly already, so I am here to just say HELLO APRIL, MISSED YOU!

By: april

april — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 04:53:10 +0000

Well duh, because it’s not true. Your whole body needs sugar and will make sugar out of whatever you put into your body. Sugar will make you fat and rot your teeth, not feed cancer.
HI DAVE!!! Hope you and your wife are doing great!! I had to take a break from YA for a little while, but I’m back!

By: Jethro

Jethro — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:20:11 +0000

Because it’s essentially an alarmist myth mixed with a tiny bit of truth.
Yeah, sugar fuels cancer cells… it fuels ALL cells!
The truth is a lot of cancer patients have enough to worry about without trying to cut out sugar all together… and many need all the calories they can get (and keep down)!
We should all aim for balanced, healthy diets, cancer or no cancer.

By: jbird

jbird — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 22:11:37 +0000

American doct0rs only receive aobut one class in nutrition during their entire training even though as we all know, nutrition is the building block of the body. As a group I have found them woefully inadequately trained. Unfortunately their hubris however often negates their networking with other educated, enlightened professionals. You do find some that go beyond their initial training and are quite informed, but they may be difficult to find.

By: Panda

Panda — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 16:47:59 +0000

Sweetie, it is you who is misinformed . . the sugar fuels cancer is mythology . . its not fact. You ‘heard’ this from someone who ‘heard’ it from someone else . . you believed an urban legend without looking into whether it is based in scientific documented evidence. No other medical doctor from any other country would repeat this myth either.http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/library/cancer…
“Myth: People with cancer shouldn’t eat sugar, since it can cause cancer to grow faster.
Fact: Sugar doesn’t make cancer grow faster. All cells, including cancer cells, depend on blood sugar (glucose) for energy. But giving more sugar to cancer cells doesn’t speed their growth. Likewise, depriving cancer cells of sugar doesn’t slow their growth.
This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans, which use a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer, but tissues that are using more energy — including cancer cells — absorb greater amounts. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn’t true.”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 12:09:34 +0000

“Sugar is fuel to cancer cells”? But not others?
What research came to that conclusion? Research performed at which university or hospital? What medical journal was this discovery published in? Please amend your question to include your legitimate and authoritative source on this never-heard-before medical conclusion. Sugar “fuels” all cells, just like every other nutrient does, not just cancer cells.
It is important to distinguish real science from nonsense.

By: lo_mcg

lo_mcg — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:57:07 +0000

Because it isn’t. Doctors in other countries don’t tell their patients that either, as it isn’t true.
There is no scientific evidence that supports the claim that sugar either causes cancer or makes it grow faster.
It’s a common belief, but it’s wrong.
Read this link on cancer myths from the Mayo Clinic.http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/cancer/…
About the sugar myth, they say:
”This misconception may be based in part on a misunderstanding of positron emission tomography (PET) scans. Doctors use PET scans to help determine the location of a tumor and see if it has spread.
During a PET scan, your doctor injects a small amount of radioactive tracer — typically a form of glucose — into your body. All tissues in your body absorb some of this tracer. But tissues that are using more energy — exhibiting increased metabolic activity — absorb greater amounts.
Tumors are often more metabolically active than healthy tissues. As a result, they may absorb greater amounts of the tracer. For this reason, some people have concluded that cancer cells grow faster on sugar. But this isn’t true.”.
========
@ Paddy 1969. I don’t see anyone defending sugar, or claiming it as a health food. But it doesn’t fuel cancer cells.
And your paranoia is reaching fever pitch if your bizarre belief that all the regulars on this forum are in the pay of the drug industry has grown to a belief that we are all shills for the food and chemical industries too.
Sugar is garbage; processed food is garbage. You will never hear me say different, your libellous attacks notwithstanding..

By: Paul Hxyz

Paul Hxyz — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:15:12 +0000

Please provide a link. I want to see it. Please email me with the link via my contact page if you would be so kind. I’ve seen a report by Australian scientists that say sugar may actually cause genetic mutations, but didn’t see their research.
Cancer is complicated – some things that are good for the body are also good for cancer growth. It is very difficult to avoid sugar in a modern diet – its everywhere. As to why American doctors don’t tell their patients perhaps they think that as it is impossible to avoid it why scare the patients even more? Good question.

By: SkepCroc

SkepCroc — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:37:42 +0000

The answer from jbird pretty much answers your question, doctors receive minimal training in matters of nutrition – the cornerstone of health maintenance. The doctors will also not mention other substances in food that certainly aggravate this condition, such as fats, preservatives, colours, artificial flavourings, etc. The mandate of the medical system is to give people drugs, NOT advise them on prevention/treatment through nutritional advice. It should also be noted that the chemical, food, and drug industries are really just one government backed conglomerate selling people chemically derived or laced products ( drugs, food contaminated with pesticides, hormones, ant-biotics, chemical sweeteners/flavours, preservatives etc ). This explains people falling over themselves here to defend sugar ( and presumably chemical food additives ) as posing no threat to cancer patients.
Edit – Naturally people with vested interests will resort to ad hominem attacks ( logical fallacies ). This serves as a ( not so fresh ) red herring to divert attention away from the topic in question. Its a technique that is as old as the hills, an impoverished substitute for debate.