Feet, fork and fingers was..... The Definitive Guide to Cancer

[Guest guest]

Alan,

It is no surprise that you say <snip>

I'm very skeptical about the alternative medicine community, in

which the percentage of cranks and quacks seems higher to me than in the

scientific medicine community, and the standards of evidence seem lower. <snip>

That is certainly the default position of anyone with a scientific background –

and may well be correct although just how you’d measure (scientifically)

the percentages of cranks and/or quacks might present some difficulties in

definitionsJ

I was sent a link recently to an article

in the Huffington Post at http://tinyurl.com/feetfork 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 :

<snip> 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. <snip>

The study referred to is a very small one

but the genetic changes observed may well be the scientific basis of the observations

made by people in the alternative medicine community.

All the best

Prostate men need enlightening, not

frightening

Terry Herbert - diagnosed in 1996 and

still going strong

Read A Strange Place for unbiased information at http://www.yananow.net/StrangePlace/index.html

From: ProstateCancerSupport [mailto:ProstateCancerSupport ] On Behalf Of Alan Meyer

Sent: Sunday, 11 July 2010 5:09 AM

To: ProstateCancerSupport

Subject: Re:

" The Definitive Guide to Cancer "

I'm very skeptical about the

alternative medicine community,

in which the percentage of cranks and quacks seems higher to me

than in the scientific medicine community, and the standards of

evidence seem lower. However, on Doug's above recommendation I

found Dr. Alschuler's website and listened to the podcast.

I was fairly impressed. She sounded like a person who takes the

requirement for evidence very seriously and may know a lot more

about diet and dietary supplements than most oncologists do.

However, I haven't read her book and I don't want to wax too

enthusiastic without having read it.

Unfortunately, she doesn't give any information on her website.

If you want her advice, you have to pay for it either by buying

the book or becoming one of her patients (sigh). I'll look for

the book in my local library. If I find it, I may say more.

Here's her website. A link to the podcast (which gives very

little actual medical information) is on the home page.

http://www.drlise.net/

Alan