Training & Nutrition - Vitamins

Interesting article on vitamins:
http://www.news.com.au/national/multivitamin-link-to-breast-cancer/story-e6frfkvr-1225855021929

"WOMEN who take a daily multivitamin pill are nearly 20 per cent more likely to develop breast cancer, a major study has revealed.

...

They said the result was concerning and needed investigation as many women used multi-vitamins in the belief they prevented chronic diseases such as cancer.

A "biologically plausible" explanation was that taking vitamin and mineral supplements significantly increased the density of breast tissue, a strong risk factor for breast cancer. Folic acid, often present in a potent form in multi-vitamins, may also accelerate tumour growth.

... "

I'd wait for further study before jumping to any conclusions. I want them to drill down and nail the specific vitamin.
When they have the culprit, they can look at the why of it.

Yes, I want to hear further studies too.

I noticed this in particular because I've been told by my Dr to take a multi-vit and folic acid (both of which are mentioned in that article) to help reduce the effects of a condition I have which puts me at high risk for cardiac disease ... and now research tells me that taking the multi-vit and folic acid increase my chances of breast cancer. You just can't win!!

"Your body will absorb vitamins and minerals so much better from food,"

Nutritional Therapies for Cancer...

Intravenous vitamin C:

http://www.orthomolecular.org/library/ivccancerpt.shtml

Vitamin D:

http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/cancerTreatment.shtml

http://www.naturalnews.com/008567.html


Another study comparing IV versus oral administration:

http://www.annals.org/content/140/7/533.full


New study on oral therapy:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/sardi/sardi144.html


Not realted to vitamin C but there has been quite a bit of work on somehing called dicholoroacetate and cancer treatment. DCA activates PDH (an enzyme of aerobic metabolism) and somehow this makes cancer cells more likely to undergo apoptosis (Cell death) and/or respond to chemo.

OF coures, DCA isn't approved for this use and obtaining it can be a hassle. It can be had online.

In this vein, cancer cells are known to be massively glycolytic and can only use glucose for fuel. Eons ago folks used fasting as treatmen for cancer but similar effects in terms of starving the cells of glucoe can be had with ketogenic (very low carb) diets. Note that such diets can also impair immune function and blunt appetite which isn't automaticaly a good thing during cancer treatment.

But at least some work, mainly on brain type cancers has shown utility of keogenic diets for treatment.

A handful of abstracts below:

***

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2567082/?tool=pubmed


Br J Cancer. 2008 Oct 7;99(7):989-94. Epub 2008 Sep 2.
Dichloroacetate (DCA) as a potential metabolic-targeting therapy for cancer.

Michelakis ED, Webster L, Mackey JR.

Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. evangelos. michelakis@capitalhealth.ca

The unique metabolism of most solid tumours (aerobic glycolysis, i.e., Warburg effect) is not only the basis of diagnosing cancer with metabolic imaging but might also be associated with the resistance to apoptosis that characterises cancer. The glycolytic phenotype in cancer appears to be the common denominator of diverse molecular abnormalities in cancer and may be associated with a (potentially reversible) suppression of mitochondrial function. The generic drug dichloroacetate is an orally available small molecule that, by inhibiting the pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, increases the flux of pyruvate into the mitochondria, promoting glucose oxidation over glycolysis. This reverses the suppressed mitochondrial apoptosis in cancer and results in suppression of tumour growth in vitro and in vivo. Here, we review the scientific and clinical rationale supporting the rapid translation of this promising metabolic modulator in early-phase cancer clinical trials.

***


Epilepsia. 2008 Nov;49 Suppl 8:114-6.
Targeting energy metabolism in brain cancer with calorically restricted ketogenic diets.

Seyfried TN, Kiebish M, Mukherjee P, Marsh J.

Department of Biology, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts 02467, USA. thomas.seyfried@bc.edu

Information is presented on the calorically restricted ketogenic diet (CRKD) as an alternative therapy for brain cancer. In contrast to normal neurons and glia, which evolved to metabolize ketone bodies as an alternative fuel to glucose under energy-restricted conditions, brain tumor cells are largely glycolytic due to mitochondrial defects and have a reduced ability to metabolize ketone bodies. The CRKD is effective in managing brain tumor growth in animal models and in patients, and appears to act through antiangiogenic, anti-inflammatory, and proapoptotic mechanisms.

***

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1819381/?tool=pubmed

Nutr Metab (Lond). 2007 Feb 21;4:5.
The calorically restricted ketogenic diet, an effective alternative therapy for malignant brain cancer.

Zhou W, Mukherjee P, Kiebish MA, Markis WT, Mantis JG, Seyfried TN.

Department of Biology, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, USA. zhouwb@bc.edu

BACKGROUND: Malignant brain cancer persists as a major disease of morbidity and mortality in adults and is the second leading cause of cancer death in children. Many current therapies for malignant brain tumors fail to provide long-term management because they ineffectively target tumor cells while negatively impacting the health and vitality of normal brain cells. In contrast to brain tumor cells, which lack metabolic flexibility and are largely dependent on glucose for growth and survival, normal brain cells can metabolize both glucose and ketone bodies for energy. This study evaluated the efficacy of KetoCal, a new nutritionally balanced high fat/low carbohydrate ketogenic diet for children with epilepsy, on the growth and vascularity of a malignant mouse astrocytoma (CT-2A) and a human malignant glioma (U87-MG). METHODS: Adult mice were implanted orthotopically with the malignant brain tumors and KetoCal was administered to the mice in either unrestricted amounts or in restricted amounts to reduce total caloric intake according to the manufacturers recommendation for children with refractory epilepsy. The effects KetoCal on tumor growth, vascularity, and mouse survival were compared with that of an unrestricted high carbohydrate standard diet. RESULTS: KetoCal administered in restricted amounts significantly decreased the intracerebral growth of the CT-2A and U87-MG tumors by about 65% and 35%, respectively, and significantly enhanced health and survival relative to that of the control groups receiving the standard low fat/high carbohydrate diet. The restricted KetoCal diet reduced plasma glucose levels while elevating plasma ketone body (beta-hydroxybutyrate) levels. Tumor microvessel density was less in the calorically restricted KetoCal groups than in the calorically unrestricted control groups. Moreover, gene expression for the mitochondrial enzymes, beta-hydroxybutyrate dehydrogenase and succinyl-CoA: 3-ketoacid CoA transferase, was lower in the tumors than in the contralateral normal brain suggesting that these brain tumors have reduced ability to metabolize ketone bodies for energy. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that KetoCal has anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic effects in experimental mouse and human brain tumors when administered in restricted amounts. The therapeutic effect of KetoCal for brain cancer management was due largely to the reduction of total caloric content, which reduces circulating glucose required for rapid tumor growth. A dependency on glucose for energy together with defects in ketone body metabolism largely account for why the brain tumors grow minimally on either a ketogenic-restricted diet or on a standard-restricted diet. Genes for ketone body metabolism should be useful for screening brain tumors that could be targeted with calorically restricted high fat/low carbohydrate ketogenic diets. This preclinical study indicates that restricted KetoCal is a safe and effective diet therapy and should be considered as an alternative therapeutic option for malignant brain cancer.

THC

http://scienceblogs.com/scientificactivist/2009/04/thc_gives_cancer_cells_the_mun.php


Green Tea/EGCG Blocks Benefits of Cancer Drug

Stumbled across this study that points to the interference of green tea with the drug Valcade (bortezomib), which is used to treat multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma.

http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/16226.html

Yes, I want to hear further studies too.

I noticed this in particular because I've been told by my Dr to take a multi-vit and folic acid (both of which are mentioned in that article) to help reduce the effects of a condition I have which puts me at high risk for cardiac disease ... and now research tells me that taking the multi-vit and folic acid increase my chances of breast cancer. You just can't win!!

You have to balance various risks.

As an adult, there are several things that are trying to kill you.
One of them will. Pick the most likely to attack, let the other ones go.

This article does not contain a link to the study. One of the links, which looks impressive just goes back to the newspaper version of the same article. It's pretty unlikely that merely taking a vitamin gives a woman breast cancer. The only possible link cited is that taking a vitamin may make a woman's breast tissue more dense. It's well known that denser tissue makes a tumor harder to detect, so dense women are more likely to be missed in screening. This is the reasoning behind the reluctance of some in the medical community in the US to test women under 40. Since I can't read the study, I'm going to guess that cause and effect for the general population is not demonstrated in this study, nor even an undisputed epidemiological link.

Ah, decided I would google and found:
http://vitamins-minerals.suite101.com/article.cfm/multivitamin--breast-cancer-scare-harvard-medical-disagrees

You've already won, anyway.

There was also a well-publicized study in which the a treatment group of smokers were given vitamins A and E as an attempt to reduce lung cancer. They actually got it more often. The trial was stopped.

Did the vitamins cause cancer? Probably not. A change in other behaviors is more likely.

In a recent HIV vaccine study, those who got the vaccine actually got HIV more often. This trial was also aborted. Since it was biologically impossible for them to have gotten the virus from this vaccine, researchers eventually concluded that they were just taking more sexual risks.

When people think they are protected by something, they stop trying as hard to protect themselves.

Did the vitamins cause cancer? Probably not.


No! It was the smoking.

I'm sorry, but I don't have no sympathy for smokers who get lung cancer who are told of the risks.

Basically I feel the same about the HIV comment too.

The normal tension of day-to-day life, along with deficiencies of essential daily nutrients, put our bodies under a tremendous amount of stress. That's why it is so essential to take nutritional supplements for daily nutrition.Within the vitamin family, one can find a supplement for any health concern, including the eyes, heart, brain or immune system.

In this day, and age, vitamins are not needed. Lots of fresh, canned, and frozen fruits, vegetables, and meats available everywhere.

In this day, and age, vitamins are not needed. Lots of fresh, canned, and frozen fruits, vegetables, and meats available everywhere.

Unfortunately, some peoples lifestyles leave a lot to be desired.

I'm sorry, but I don't have no sympathy for smokers who get lung cancer who are told of the risks.

Basically I feel the same about the HIV comment too. I wasn't saying any of that "excuses" anyone for taking risks. It's about why people take risks. I agree to some extent, but the point is that this pattern is in our brains. When there's something we want, and suddenly the risk seems to be significantly diminished, we're more likely to take it.

This is, apparently, true even if we actually have no way of knowing whether the risk has been lessened; the treatment could be ineffective, or the subject could be receiving a placebo (one has to wonder is participants understand experimental protocol at all). With vitamins, this could mean that people who take a lot of them start to become more relaxed with their diets and exercise. You will find people who have a similar attitude toward exercise: a significant portion feel it is unnecessary if their weight is healthy, and if they eat well.

THC

http://scienceblogs.com/scientificactivist/2009/04/thc_gives_cancer_cells_the_mun.php



The article was interesting, but the comments were HILARIOUS!

To quote:

I know it is hard to believe, but cannabis in hemp oil form truly is the cure for cancer. I've seen it work with my own eyes, not on cancer, but on an incurable skin infection. I've also regularly spoken with Rick for almost a year now, and this is truly legitimate. Hemp oil can cure nearly all types of cancer, if not all types, as well as terminal cancers.
It's not just cancer either. Hemp oil can cure essentially all major human diseases, including diabetes, MS, arthritis, cardiovascular disease (the #1 killer in America), autoimmune disorders, pain disorders, and more. Cannabis is far, far more powerful than anybody could have imagined, and when this knowledge becomes global, it will be a new era in man's history.

After reading the article and doing some research, I believe that this was a poorly controlled study and you probably shouldn't put too much stock into until more research is done.

Also, another study came out around the time of this one that showed the opposite (it had a MUCH smaller sample size though)

James

People get paid to come up with these bogus studies?


:cry: Because some people believe these things, causing more harm than good through fear.

I agree, it's ridiculous, especially as the voluntary unemployed are held in contempt by the people who work these silly jobs.

Did you know that tea 'may be healthy than water'..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/5281046.stm

I see tens of these pointless studies making the national news each year.. as if the money couldn't be put to better use.

In this day, and age, vitamins are not needed. Lots of fresh, canned, and frozen fruits, vegetables, and meats available everywhere.

the problem with this is that most foods arent grown naturally, including meat, and lack the nutrients they should have. if you want to have all your nutrients from your food, i suggest growing your own garden in a CORRECT seasonal manner, and eating organic meat that hasnt spent its life eating corn. It is very possible to get all your nutrients from your food but if you dont eat the right foods you will be either eating too much, or adding alot of chemicals to your diet.
but i agree that vitamins are not necessary.

the problem with this is that most foods arent grown naturally, including meat, and lack the nutrients they should have. if you want to have all your nutrients from your food, i suggest growing your own garden in a CORRECT seasonal manner, and eating organic meat that hasnt spent its life eating corn. It is very possible to get all your nutrients from your food but if you dont eat the right foods you will be either eating too much, or adding alot of chemicals to your diet.
but i agree that vitamins are not necessary.

being a farmer (and architect of sorts, take your pick) ... i have to ask what makes you think an animal eating corn is bad? And when did organic meat mean that an animal can't eat a natural food source? I will guarantee that most animals, given the choice between corn or a similar food source will choose it over grass. It's instinct for the animal to go for a more efficient food source. Nothing more natural than instinct....

Substantiate your claims about organic meat vs non-organic (still a funny term to me. i guess my cattle and sheep are inorganic life forms) before spreading it where others may read it and take it to heart.

being a farmer (and architect of sorts, take your pick) ... i have to ask what makes you think an animal eating corn is bad? And when did organic meat mean that an animal can't eat a natural food source? I will guarantee that most animals, given the choice between corn or a similar food source will choose it over grass. It's instinct for the animal to go for a more efficient food source. Nothing more natural than instinct....

Substantiate your claims about organic meat vs non-organic (still a funny term to me. i guess my cattle and sheep are inorganic life forms) before spreading it where others may read it and take it to heart.I was just looking into using CLA as a dietary supplement. All the sources I read say that it occurs naturally in meat, that grass fed ruminant has the highest concentration, though kangaroo meat has even more. So maybe there are other things going on in grass fed animals that you don't see in feedlot cattle?

We all prefer to eat fat and sugar for the same reason cattle like corn. As you say, it's efficient, but it doesn't mean it's good for us or for them.