The more I research I believe that reducing consumption of animal protein and eliminating dairy are keys to MGUS / myeloma. Animal protein is even more important than reducing carbohydrates to lower IGF-1. This is a long standing study:
TJ Key et al, "Cancer in British vegetarians: updated analyses of 4998 incident cancers in a cohort of 32,491 meat eaters, 8612 fish eaters, 18,298 vegetarians, and 2246 vegans," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 2014 (link to full text of article)
Abstract:
Background: Vegetarian diets might affect the risk of cancer.
Objective: The objective was to describe cancer incidence in vegetarians and nonvegetarians in a large sample in the United Kingdom.
Design: This was a pooled analysis of 2 prospective studies including 61,647 British men and women comprising 32,491 meat eaters, 8612 fish eaters, and 20,544 vegetarians (including 2246 vegans). Cancer incidence was followed through nationwide cancer registries. Cancer risk by vegetarian status was estimated by using multivariate Cox proportional hazards models.
Results: After an average follow-up of 14.9 y, there were 4998 incident cancers: 3275 in meat eaters (10.1%), 520 in fish eaters (6.0%), and 1203 in vegetarians (5.9%). There was significant heterogeneity between dietary groups in risks of the following cancers: stomach cancer [RRs (95% CIs) compared with meat eaters: 0.62 (0.27, 1.43) in fish eaters and 0.37 (0.19, 0.69) in vegetarians; P-heterogeneity = 0.006], colorectal cancer [RRs (95% CIs): 0.66 (0.48, 0.92) in fish eaters and 1.03 (0.84, 1.26) in vegetarians; P-heterogeneity = 0.033], cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue [RRs (95% CIs): 0.96 (0.70, 1.32) in fish eaters and 0.64 (0.49, 0.84) in vegetarians; P-heterogeneity = 0.005], multiple myeloma [RRs (95% CIs): 0.77 (0.34, 1.76) in fish eaters and 0.23 (0.09, 0.59) in vegetarians; P-heterogeneity = 0.010], and all sites combined [RRs (95% CIs): 0.88 (0.80, 0.97) in fish eaters and 0.88 (0.82, 0.95) in vegetarians; P-heterogeneity = 0.0007].
Conclusion: In this British population, the risk of some cancers is lower in fish eaters and vegetarians than in meat eaters.
Forums
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Hi Ron.
Thanks for sending the link to that study: 10% of 61,600 people got cancer but only 6% of those who were fish eaters or vegetarians. That is powerful because it is over such a large group.
Have you seen this study?
http://www.nature.com/bcj/journal/v3/n6/full/bcj201318a.html
" In this study, we have identified the growth factors supporting myeloma self-renewal in eight myeloma cell lines.
IGF1, but not IL6, is the main clonogenic self-growth factor for myeloma cell lines
the present study highlights that IGF1 is an essential growth factor for myeloma cells"
Here is a reason the low protein might still be connected to ketogenic diet ( low protein might be an independent factor - but it is not in conflict with ketogenic):
A Swedish PhD named Tanya Zilberter designed a ketogenic diet based on the food ratio used for epileptic patients. This is the ratio:
(.9*fat + .46*protein) / (.1*fat + .54*protein + 1*carb) = ketogenic ratio, which must be a minimum of 1.5 to be ketogenic. The .9 is for multiplying the fat grams, .46 is for the protein grams, etc; on the right side, the .1 is for fat, .54 is for protein, and the 1 is for carbs. When you adjust protein grams, you see that protein is the deciding factor in whether a food or recipe is ketogenic or glucogenic. The higher the protein amount, the more glucogenic, or the more blood sugar is generated from the food or recipe. The higher the fat, the more ketogenic, the less blood sugar is generated.
I have cut my protein consumption from 60g/day (net carbs 14.5/day) in January to protein 54.4/day (net carbs 13.2/day) since your last post. It is a slow thing for me to change diet but I am trying to lower it more and also move from meat to vegetable protein.
I made a good tofu dinner the other day - sliced tofu very thin, coated in carbquick and fried, then topped with Rao Spaghetti sauce and parmesan. First time I have ever like tofu.
Thanks for sending the link to that study: 10% of 61,600 people got cancer but only 6% of those who were fish eaters or vegetarians. That is powerful because it is over such a large group.
Have you seen this study?
http://www.nature.com/bcj/journal/v3/n6/full/bcj201318a.html
" In this study, we have identified the growth factors supporting myeloma self-renewal in eight myeloma cell lines.
IGF1, but not IL6, is the main clonogenic self-growth factor for myeloma cell lines
the present study highlights that IGF1 is an essential growth factor for myeloma cells"
Here is a reason the low protein might still be connected to ketogenic diet ( low protein might be an independent factor - but it is not in conflict with ketogenic):
A Swedish PhD named Tanya Zilberter designed a ketogenic diet based on the food ratio used for epileptic patients. This is the ratio:
(.9*fat + .46*protein) / (.1*fat + .54*protein + 1*carb) = ketogenic ratio, which must be a minimum of 1.5 to be ketogenic. The .9 is for multiplying the fat grams, .46 is for the protein grams, etc; on the right side, the .1 is for fat, .54 is for protein, and the 1 is for carbs. When you adjust protein grams, you see that protein is the deciding factor in whether a food or recipe is ketogenic or glucogenic. The higher the protein amount, the more glucogenic, or the more blood sugar is generated from the food or recipe. The higher the fat, the more ketogenic, the less blood sugar is generated.
I have cut my protein consumption from 60g/day (net carbs 14.5/day) in January to protein 54.4/day (net carbs 13.2/day) since your last post. It is a slow thing for me to change diet but I am trying to lower it more and also move from meat to vegetable protein.
I made a good tofu dinner the other day - sliced tofu very thin, coated in carbquick and fried, then topped with Rao Spaghetti sauce and parmesan. First time I have ever like tofu.
-
antelope1225 - Name: Cathy1225
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself
- When were you/they diagnosed?: May 25 2012
- Age at diagnosis: 55
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
I had an appointment yesterday with oncologist. My kappa free light chains remain the same (25.7mg/L- slightly above normal) and my ratio is 1.03. My kidneys are still showing much healing with Creatinine 1.22 and Creatinine clearance 46% and BUN 28.
I started my conversation tactfully with:" Axium Pharmacy called to arrange delivery of my Revlimid but I told them I wanted to talk to you first." I went on to explain that I would like to take no Revlimid the next 8 weeks and just do my ketogenic diet and take Curcumin. We discussed it for 10-15 min. Here were his arguments - which were mostly focused against the Curcumin:
He said, "I believe in capitalism and if the pharmaceutical companies found that these substances were really effective, they would add a hydrogen atom and patent it.". He said many chemo drugs are natural substances that have been slightly modified. He went on to describe a neighbor who has an 8 yr old son with leukemia and how he and his wife were invited to dinner - really invited so they could ask about a concoction of herbs. My doctor said that he went and looked the substances up and there were 10 studies - 8 were in test tubes and he threw those out. Of the remaining 2, one showed no effect and the other showed some problems with other organs. He said you need to look at clinical studies involving people, not test tube experiments.
I said that my diet has been very effective and I take a fasting blood glucose reading every morning and take a ketone and glucose reading every evening. I eat very low carb, fairly low protein, and fairly high fat.
He wondered what my lipid profile looks like. I said my Nephrologist has me scheduled for full lipid profile at end of summer, but if I have to worry about either cancer or lipids, I am more concerned about cancer. He nodded. I told him about Thomas Seyfried's book and he must have been familiar with it because he mentioned brain cancer. He also said that Metformin is being used to lower blood glucose in cancer patients.
His last argument was that when I start back on a drug, it will take a couple of months to see the effect. But he said I have been a good patient for 3 years, have been on Revlimid over 2 years and he agreed. So, I will continue to follow ketogenic diet and no chemo drugs next 8 weeks.
I started my conversation tactfully with:" Axium Pharmacy called to arrange delivery of my Revlimid but I told them I wanted to talk to you first." I went on to explain that I would like to take no Revlimid the next 8 weeks and just do my ketogenic diet and take Curcumin. We discussed it for 10-15 min. Here were his arguments - which were mostly focused against the Curcumin:
He said, "I believe in capitalism and if the pharmaceutical companies found that these substances were really effective, they would add a hydrogen atom and patent it.". He said many chemo drugs are natural substances that have been slightly modified. He went on to describe a neighbor who has an 8 yr old son with leukemia and how he and his wife were invited to dinner - really invited so they could ask about a concoction of herbs. My doctor said that he went and looked the substances up and there were 10 studies - 8 were in test tubes and he threw those out. Of the remaining 2, one showed no effect and the other showed some problems with other organs. He said you need to look at clinical studies involving people, not test tube experiments.
I said that my diet has been very effective and I take a fasting blood glucose reading every morning and take a ketone and glucose reading every evening. I eat very low carb, fairly low protein, and fairly high fat.
He wondered what my lipid profile looks like. I said my Nephrologist has me scheduled for full lipid profile at end of summer, but if I have to worry about either cancer or lipids, I am more concerned about cancer. He nodded. I told him about Thomas Seyfried's book and he must have been familiar with it because he mentioned brain cancer. He also said that Metformin is being used to lower blood glucose in cancer patients.
His last argument was that when I start back on a drug, it will take a couple of months to see the effect. But he said I have been a good patient for 3 years, have been on Revlimid over 2 years and he agreed. So, I will continue to follow ketogenic diet and no chemo drugs next 8 weeks.
-
antelope1225 - Name: Cathy1225
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself
- When were you/they diagnosed?: May 25 2012
- Age at diagnosis: 55
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
After thinking about my discussion with my doctor, I decided to continue to take low dose Revlimid as long as it is working.
-
antelope1225 - Name: Cathy1225
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself
- When were you/they diagnosed?: May 25 2012
- Age at diagnosis: 55
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Just a quick update if anyone is interested in my experiment with ketogenic diet
I decided to quit Revlimid after all. So I took Revlimid for about 27 1/2 months.
My last blood test showed my kappa's down slightly - to 24.8 mg/L (slightly above normal, but stable since January), but my ratio up slightly to 1.3 (still in normal range, but up slightly).
It is about 5 weeks to my next blood test and this is my experiment for this 5 weeks:
I decided to quit Revlimid after all. So I took Revlimid for about 27 1/2 months.
My last blood test showed my kappa's down slightly - to 24.8 mg/L (slightly above normal, but stable since January), but my ratio up slightly to 1.3 (still in normal range, but up slightly).
It is about 5 weeks to my next blood test and this is my experiment for this 5 weeks:
- Stay in ketosis, ketones above 3 in evening, by eating at least 3 T coconut oil and maintaining my low carb (under 12 net) and protein (under 50 g). I eat several cups of green leafy salads per day and at least 1 c some sulfur containing vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, onion, garlic etc) and at least 1 c colorful vegetables (red, yellow or orange bell peppers, red cauliflower, tomatoes, few blueberries or blackberries)
- 6 g of Curcumin with bioperine - taken with about 1000 mg omega 3
- 1 tsp black cumin seed oil
- 1-2 cup of green tea per day.
- 500 mg Berberine at noon
- I also take various supplements, but think those are mostly to keep healthy, not to fight the cancer. But, I am very pleased that I have not been sick at all since February - which I attribute to the supplements.
-
antelope1225 - Name: Cathy1225
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Myself
- When were you/they diagnosed?: May 25 2012
- Age at diagnosis: 55
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Ron S wrote:
Hello Cathy,
To interject, I looked through this study thoroughly and I find it incredibly flawed. The meat eaters were older, smoked more, drank more and exercised less, which would make the comparison in cancer rates between meat eaters and vegetarians start to get close. Also, vegetarians were chosen that have been practicing for >5 years, so they take diet seriously, probably eating more whole foods and less processed junk than the meat eaters. This study did not account for what kind of carbohydrates they were eating, so maybe they ate whole oats or snickers bars.
Vegetarians claim that humans want to get vitamins from plant sources instead of animals, cutting out the middle man, but this lacks logic. If the animal eats the plant, it will generate vitamin rich tissues that match the tissues in the human body, allowing humans to absorb the needed tissues for the body and vitamins much more easily. If the animal eats grains, it will make grain into tissue, but absorb very little vitamins and zero vitamin K, so by this logic the human eating grain-fed animals will not be healthy. If they are eating grain-fed, then the fat will marble into meat as the animal becomes sick from an improper diet, and the omega 3/ omega 6 ratio will decrease, becoming mostly omega 6. Here is a report:
Union of Concerned Scientists, ""Greener pastures: how grass-fed beef and milk contribute to healthy eating", 2006(link to report)
If the omega 3 / omega 6 ratio can increase in grass fed cattle, then so could the vitamin K2 content which is only found in animal products. Vitamin K2 is still being studied, but it is in animal products and it is very important for health in regulating calcium throughout the body. They do not account for the quality of meat being purchased in Ron's study. Approximately 5000 meat eaters got cancer and it could be hypothesized that these 5000 were eating grain-fed cattle instead of grass fed cattle.
My mother has multiple myeloma and she is currently going into ketosis. One of the most important things I got her to start doing is drinking bone broth made from beef marrow bones. By the same logic, if she drinks bone marrow, she can help introduce healthy components already in the form she needs to help fight the battle.
Hope this help,
Stephen
The more I research I believe that reducing consumption of animal protein and eliminating dairy are keys to MGUS / myeloma. Animal protein is even more important than reducing carbohydrates to lower IGF-1. This is a long standing study:
TJ Key et al, "Cancer in British vegetarians: updated analyses of 4998 incident cancers in a cohort of 32,491 meat eaters, 8612 fish eaters, 18,298 vegetarians, and 2246 vegans," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 2014
Hello Cathy,
To interject, I looked through this study thoroughly and I find it incredibly flawed. The meat eaters were older, smoked more, drank more and exercised less, which would make the comparison in cancer rates between meat eaters and vegetarians start to get close. Also, vegetarians were chosen that have been practicing for >5 years, so they take diet seriously, probably eating more whole foods and less processed junk than the meat eaters. This study did not account for what kind of carbohydrates they were eating, so maybe they ate whole oats or snickers bars.
Vegetarians claim that humans want to get vitamins from plant sources instead of animals, cutting out the middle man, but this lacks logic. If the animal eats the plant, it will generate vitamin rich tissues that match the tissues in the human body, allowing humans to absorb the needed tissues for the body and vitamins much more easily. If the animal eats grains, it will make grain into tissue, but absorb very little vitamins and zero vitamin K, so by this logic the human eating grain-fed animals will not be healthy. If they are eating grain-fed, then the fat will marble into meat as the animal becomes sick from an improper diet, and the omega 3/ omega 6 ratio will decrease, becoming mostly omega 6. Here is a report:
Union of Concerned Scientists, ""Greener pastures: how grass-fed beef and milk contribute to healthy eating", 2006(link to report)
If the omega 3 / omega 6 ratio can increase in grass fed cattle, then so could the vitamin K2 content which is only found in animal products. Vitamin K2 is still being studied, but it is in animal products and it is very important for health in regulating calcium throughout the body. They do not account for the quality of meat being purchased in Ron's study. Approximately 5000 meat eaters got cancer and it could be hypothesized that these 5000 were eating grain-fed cattle instead of grass fed cattle.
My mother has multiple myeloma and she is currently going into ketosis. One of the most important things I got her to start doing is drinking bone broth made from beef marrow bones. By the same logic, if she drinks bone marrow, she can help introduce healthy components already in the form she needs to help fight the battle.
Hope this help,
Stephen
-
Dietengineer - Name: Dietengineer
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Mother
- When were you/they diagnosed?: 2011
- Age at diagnosis: 59
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Welcome to the forum, Stephen.
Your analysis of the British study mentioned by Ron raises some good points. Usually a study will try to control for the sort of potential biases you mention by running some sort of "multivariate analysis." This wasn't really done in the study, which the authors readily admit, although they do mention that they did some analyses controlling for whether or not study participants smoked and also for the weight (body mass index) of the participants, and the adjustments didn't change the results.
Your general suggestion, however, that people need to eat meat to get the proper balance of nutrients, is not widely supported by most nutrition experts. And your claim that meat is the only possible source of vitamin K2 is just wrong. One of the richest sources of vitamin K2 is natto, a Japanese food consisting of fermented soybeans.
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the largest U.S. professional organization of food and nutrition professionals, issued the following statement on vegetarian diets in 2009:
"It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
http://www.eatrightpro.org/~/media/eatrightpro%20files/practice/position%20and%20practice%20papers/position%20papers/vegetariandiet.ashx
A similar statement was issued in 2015, but seemed in some ways to be watered down a bit versus the 2009 statement. Interestingly, the 2015 statement was retracted after complaints from some of the Associations researcher experts, and a revised statement is in the works.
Your analysis of the British study mentioned by Ron raises some good points. Usually a study will try to control for the sort of potential biases you mention by running some sort of "multivariate analysis." This wasn't really done in the study, which the authors readily admit, although they do mention that they did some analyses controlling for whether or not study participants smoked and also for the weight (body mass index) of the participants, and the adjustments didn't change the results.
Your general suggestion, however, that people need to eat meat to get the proper balance of nutrients, is not widely supported by most nutrition experts. And your claim that meat is the only possible source of vitamin K2 is just wrong. One of the richest sources of vitamin K2 is natto, a Japanese food consisting of fermented soybeans.
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the largest U.S. professional organization of food and nutrition professionals, issued the following statement on vegetarian diets in 2009:
"It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19562864
http://www.eatrightpro.org/~/media/eatrightpro%20files/practice/position%20and%20practice%20papers/position%20papers/vegetariandiet.ashx
A similar statement was issued in 2015, but seemed in some ways to be watered down a bit versus the 2009 statement. Interestingly, the 2015 statement was retracted after complaints from some of the Associations researcher experts, and a revised statement is in the works.
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Hi Cathy,
Thanks for your reply to my earlier posting in the thread about germanium sesquioxide and multiple myeloma. I'm continuing the discussion here because it seems the better place for it.
I did not mean to suggest in my earlier posting that you should stay on Revlimid. Sorry if it came across that way; it wasn't what the point I wanted to make.
The point I did want to make was that a reasonable interpretation of your results and treatment history is that Revlimid did most of the work in bringing your FLC level down. You didn't start your ketogenic diet until after Revlimid had brought the kappa levels down quite a bit. You also were still on Revlimid at the beginning of the diet while your kappas continued to drop.
More and more these days, people seem to have the impression that you have to be on treatment continuously to keep your myeloma under control. They forget that, before maintenance therapy became the "in" thing, myeloma patients were treated for a fixed amount of time, stopped treatment, and then stayed in remission anyway for months and often years.
So, just because your kappa levels have been near normal since you started your ketogenic diet is not proof that the diet is keeping the disease under control. The only thing your results clearly demonstrate is that Revlimid definitely got your kappa levels under control and then lowered them.
I don't have a problem with people trying to use diet and supplements to keep their disease under control above and beyond what they can accomplish with FDA-approved myeloma therapies. What I do have a problem with is when people make claims that their alternative therapy has had "impressive results", as you've said multiple times here in the forum, when the data simply don't support such statements.
Again, I think it's great that you're doing what you're doing, and that you're being as transparent as you have been about the results you've gotten. I'll also be the first one to congratulate you, and help you trumpet your success, when you announce five years from now that you're still in remission.
Until then, though, I think it would be more honest to describe the results of your experiment in more humble terms.
Take care, and good luck!
Thanks for your reply to my earlier posting in the thread about germanium sesquioxide and multiple myeloma. I'm continuing the discussion here because it seems the better place for it.
I did not mean to suggest in my earlier posting that you should stay on Revlimid. Sorry if it came across that way; it wasn't what the point I wanted to make.
The point I did want to make was that a reasonable interpretation of your results and treatment history is that Revlimid did most of the work in bringing your FLC level down. You didn't start your ketogenic diet until after Revlimid had brought the kappa levels down quite a bit. You also were still on Revlimid at the beginning of the diet while your kappas continued to drop.
More and more these days, people seem to have the impression that you have to be on treatment continuously to keep your myeloma under control. They forget that, before maintenance therapy became the "in" thing, myeloma patients were treated for a fixed amount of time, stopped treatment, and then stayed in remission anyway for months and often years.
So, just because your kappa levels have been near normal since you started your ketogenic diet is not proof that the diet is keeping the disease under control. The only thing your results clearly demonstrate is that Revlimid definitely got your kappa levels under control and then lowered them.
I don't have a problem with people trying to use diet and supplements to keep their disease under control above and beyond what they can accomplish with FDA-approved myeloma therapies. What I do have a problem with is when people make claims that their alternative therapy has had "impressive results", as you've said multiple times here in the forum, when the data simply don't support such statements.
Again, I think it's great that you're doing what you're doing, and that you're being as transparent as you have been about the results you've gotten. I'll also be the first one to congratulate you, and help you trumpet your success, when you announce five years from now that you're still in remission.
Until then, though, I think it would be more honest to describe the results of your experiment in more humble terms.
Take care, and good luck!
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
If one plans on incorporating a significant amount of Natto in the diet this would be a good source of vitamin K2 but this is a food not commonly consumed in the American population so I did not see the relevance in this discussion but it is a popular fermented food found mostly in japan that has very high vitamin K2 and yes it is made from soybeans. As for the US population the primary source of vitamin K2 is from animal products, with the majority of the population having never heard of natto. If people think removing animal products from the diet is OK but they neglect their vitamin K2 they are going to be led in the direction of cardio vascular disease. Another reason to lead people in the direction of animal products instead of natto is because animal products not only have vitamin K2 but they also have vitamin's A and D. Vitamin K2 acts like a hormone controlling vitamins A and D to bind calcium throughout the body. You do not receive the full calcium regulation package from natto that you do from animal products.
I looked through your study and unfortunately there are not studies that I can pull from that compare grass fed proteins to soy. All of the studies comparing soy and animal protein do not specify what type of food the animals ate. That means that they are likely comparing grain fed animal products to soy proteins which will lead people in the direction of soy. Many of these animals fed grains are so sick that if a hunter gather came across one on the hunt he would likely put it out of its misery but not eat the meat because nobody wants to eat sick animals. Without the use of antibiotics these sick animals would not even live to the proper slaughter age but they pump them with drugs to keep them alive so people can eat them or use them in a study. It should be no surprise that soy protein is healthier than eating a sick and dying animal. When reviewing these studies it is best to realize that you are comparing conventional meat to soy and it is clear that the conventional meat lacks vitamins and omega 3 so it is no surprise when the results come in that soy is better. Ultimately the information is not available to make a proper decision between vegetable and grass fed meat but here is a study showing that soy protein can lead to vitamin E deficiency so supplementation can be necessary.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnsv1973/47/4/47_4_283/_pdf
A good source for vitamin E is from animal products.
I'm limited on time so I must wrap up for now but I will find more information for you soon.
Hope this helps,
Stephen
I looked through your study and unfortunately there are not studies that I can pull from that compare grass fed proteins to soy. All of the studies comparing soy and animal protein do not specify what type of food the animals ate. That means that they are likely comparing grain fed animal products to soy proteins which will lead people in the direction of soy. Many of these animals fed grains are so sick that if a hunter gather came across one on the hunt he would likely put it out of its misery but not eat the meat because nobody wants to eat sick animals. Without the use of antibiotics these sick animals would not even live to the proper slaughter age but they pump them with drugs to keep them alive so people can eat them or use them in a study. It should be no surprise that soy protein is healthier than eating a sick and dying animal. When reviewing these studies it is best to realize that you are comparing conventional meat to soy and it is clear that the conventional meat lacks vitamins and omega 3 so it is no surprise when the results come in that soy is better. Ultimately the information is not available to make a proper decision between vegetable and grass fed meat but here is a study showing that soy protein can lead to vitamin E deficiency so supplementation can be necessary.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnsv1973/47/4/47_4_283/_pdf
A good source for vitamin E is from animal products.
I'm limited on time so I must wrap up for now but I will find more information for you soon.
Hope this helps,
Stephen
-
Dietengineer - Name: Dietengineer
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Mother
- When were you/they diagnosed?: 2011
- Age at diagnosis: 59
Re: Ketogenic diet and multiple myeloma
Cathy don't worry about what is being said about your results. It is starting to look like you are a survivor of multiple myeloma.
The idea that you should not relate this to your ketosis is biased. Even if the medication might have played its role in fighting your cancer we can draw up a couple meaningful conclusions based on this evidence.
For one, ketosis does not seem to effect the liver or kidneys because your cancer treatment would have caused this to overwhelm your system as the chemo alone does for many patients.
Secondly, your body seems to have overcome the cancer during a time that we know you were in ketosis. So you are a statistic that ketosis doesn't worsen cancer and that it may actually help fight it.
Even though we don't know what your results are over a long period of time stay positive. Things are looking really good and just because people are skeptics doesn't mean you were wrong when you noticed some results as soon as you changed your diet. Only time will tell.
My mother is in a more concerning stage of her multiple myeloma and has seemed to plateau. The chemo just seems to keep the cancer at bay but isn't winning. She started the process ketosis 2 days ago.
So let the skeptics be skeptics and meanwhile thank you for providing the world with such meaningful data. This website has helped convince my mom to try out ketosis and hopefully she will back up your data soon.
Thanks,
Stephen
The idea that you should not relate this to your ketosis is biased. Even if the medication might have played its role in fighting your cancer we can draw up a couple meaningful conclusions based on this evidence.
For one, ketosis does not seem to effect the liver or kidneys because your cancer treatment would have caused this to overwhelm your system as the chemo alone does for many patients.
Secondly, your body seems to have overcome the cancer during a time that we know you were in ketosis. So you are a statistic that ketosis doesn't worsen cancer and that it may actually help fight it.
Even though we don't know what your results are over a long period of time stay positive. Things are looking really good and just because people are skeptics doesn't mean you were wrong when you noticed some results as soon as you changed your diet. Only time will tell.
My mother is in a more concerning stage of her multiple myeloma and has seemed to plateau. The chemo just seems to keep the cancer at bay but isn't winning. She started the process ketosis 2 days ago.
So let the skeptics be skeptics and meanwhile thank you for providing the world with such meaningful data. This website has helped convince my mom to try out ketosis and hopefully she will back up your data soon.
Thanks,
Stephen
-
Dietengineer - Name: Dietengineer
- Who do you know with myeloma?: Mother
- When were you/they diagnosed?: 2011
- Age at diagnosis: 59
Return to Treatments & Side Effects