果汁

DDD888

我现在在喝一个香蕉，大蒜一片，洋葱一个，苹果一个打汁，感觉刚喝下去好难受，我用了替代我的早餐，昨天下午喝了一杯，好像没有腹泻，刚才也喝了一杯

G52

这像是韩国炖牛肉的酱汁

DDD888

G52 发表于 2023-9-27 08:45
这像是韩国炖牛肉的酱汁

是生的，不是烧过的

Evo

用大蒜洋葱打果汁，佩服

lxk

同事哭晕

Evo

lxk 发表于 2023-9-27 12:53
同事哭晕

昨天一个家暴新闻贴里面有网友提到了被老婆强迫交作业算不算家暴，今天发现那位网友抵制强迫交作业的绝招有了

lxk

Evo 发表于 2023-9-27 13:08
昨天一个家暴新闻贴里面有网友提到了被老婆强迫交作业算不算家暴，今天发现那位网友抵制强迫交作业的绝招 ...

以近乎自虐的方式排她

静好如初

蔬果汁~

DDD888

我刚才又喝了一杯来替代早餐，闭着眼睛喝下去，极其难受，但今天早上我称了下体重，68公斤，三天前好像是72公斤，好像这果汁可以减重

jennyxio

胃不会不舒服？

DDD888

jennyxio 发表于 2023-9-28 06:23
胃不会不舒服？

非常不舒服，要持续一小时不舒服，但我想我吃的东西都健康的水果和蔬菜，唯一和传统中国饮食的区别就是打碎混在一起生喝了

我原先早餐吃蛋糕，牛奶，我想这吃法可能帮助产生癌症，因为蛋糕是买商店里做的，我没办法控制防腐剂的添加，是细加工食品，所以改了我的早餐食谱

我喝的果汁应该都是天然的，没有人工化学品的添加啦，水果蔬菜成长过程中农民加的肥料除外啦，如果还要我来控制的话，我必须自己种啦，我没这能力

DDD888

lxk 发表于 2023-9-27 12:53
同事哭晕

我从2011年起在家工作，我是程序员，我从1994年开始工作写程序

我终于体会到在家工作的好处了，可以站着写程序八小时，可以选择自己吃的食物，基于你的回答，不影响同事的嗅觉

jennyxio

DDD888 发表于 2023-9-28 06:26
非常不舒服，要持续一小时不舒服，但我想我吃的东西都健康的水果和蔬菜，唯一和传统中国饮食的区别就是打 ...

添加剂那类是没了，但是这样会不会将胃吃出毛病了？

DDD888

jennyxio 发表于 2023-9-28 06:38
添加剂那类是没了，但是这样会不会将胃吃出毛病了？

我看了洋葱，网上说用油热炒其实会产生高温致癌物质，最好的就是生吃，大蒜中国人向来有人生吃，苹果，香蕉普通吃法也是生吃，我感觉不吃蔬菜，水果，胃才会有毛病

我只不过将几样都可以生吃的同时喝下去而已，现在没有腹泻，证明混合喝不会让几种食物相冲

我在现在回答你的帖子的时候，离我喝果汁已过去了一小时，我已没有了难受的感觉

hidec

加点芥末

DDD888

hidec 发表于 2023-9-28 07:11
加点芥末

谢谢

我以后再加，让我先适应我的配方，不然我可能根本不喝

harbridge

这个组合

清墨水

楼主对自己够狠，必成大器

澳洲火烧

果汁的升糖指数可以让大家很后悔 还是少喝为妙。

DDD888

澳洲火烧 发表于 2023-9-28 20:44
果汁的升糖指数可以让大家很后悔 还是少喝为妙。

我想苹果和香蕉，不打汁的话也是属于建议吃的水果的一种，我只不过是打汁喝而已，唯一的区别是集中在一个时刻喝

DDD888

清墨水 发表于 2023-9-28 10:50
楼主对自己够狠，必成大器

没办法啦，我是程序员，运动少啦，所以想吃面包米饭容易增加葡萄糖，所以换成水果蔬菜，我想健康的活啦

Evo

DDD888 发表于 2023-9-29 06:38
没办法啦，我是程序员，运动少啦，所以想吃面包米饭容易增加葡萄糖，所以换成水果蔬菜，我想健康的活啦 ...

香蕉含糖量不小，空腹吃香蕉对胃不好。

苹果打成汁，升糖会变快。

建议换成番茄和芹菜。

TGTG

DDD888 发表于 2023-9-28 05:51
我刚才又喝了一杯来替代早餐，闭着眼睛喝下去，极其难受，但今天早上我称了下体重，68公斤，三天前好像是72 ...

做点通下水的工作吧，一天不想吃饭，减的更快

espresso76

DDD888 发表于 2023-9-28 06:31
我从2011年起在家工作，我是程序员，我从1994年开始工作写程序

我终于体会到在家工作的好处了，可以站着 ...

前辈， 佩服

DDD888

espresso76 发表于 2023-9-29 20:09
前辈， 佩服

根据科学家的研究，关键是每小时运动下，不要在身体里累积葡萄糖

来源 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa3j40c8iAo

DDD888

DDD888 发表于 2023-10-1 04:31
根据科学家的研究，关键是每小时运动下，将身体里不要累积葡萄糖

来源 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v ...

transcript

So can you starve the tumor cell of theirfermentable fuels and kill them? And the answer is absolutely.It's an elegant, beautiful system. And when it's done it, you can't believe howwell it works.Problem is Sanjay. Nobody is doing that.Welcome to Target Cancer Podcast. My name is Dr. Sanjay Juneja, I'm an oncologistknown as the @theoncdoc on social media, andtoday I'm very excited to have Dr. ThomasSeyfried, who is basically a wizard when itcomes to metabolic stuff. And what does that mean? All this stuff that you hear about, are thereamino acids we can basically starve cancerswith? Or what does it do to have a, like a ketodiet? And does that help? He's got over 150 publications.He's extremely respected in the metabolicworld, and we're just so excited to have you. So thank you for being here, Dr. Seyfried.Thank you very much for having me on yourprogram here. Of course. So I'm just gonna get straight to it, usually.The first question I get on social media wherepeople really passionate, right? And caring about either themselves with theircancer or especially with a loved one.Ask the question, can I starve my cancer? And especially with limiting sugar and thingslike that is true and not, right?We always have to go back to energy. Without energy, nothing can survive or grow.So you say to yourself we breathe air.We exhale CO2, we produce CO2 and water fromthe foods that we eat.You and I are having a conversation. We're talking obviously there's energy goingon somewhere in our brains, in the rest ofour body and that allows us to do what wedo. Now, if you and I were to take a cup of cyanideand we would both drink it together, neitherof us would have much energy. We would both fall and collapse right in frontof the screens. Hey, let me put it another way.If you and I both had tumors growing in ourbody, And we were both drinking the cyanidetogether. And someone would say, whoa, what a catastrophe. These two guys that think they know what they'redoing just killed themselves, but they hadcancer. So we're gonna take the tumor out and we'regonna look at it, and the tumor cells wouldbe fine. The cyanide would not kill the tumor cells. We say, whoa, what's going on?How is it possible that the cyanide killedthese folks but it didn't kill their tumor?And the answer is, the tumor doesn't use enoxygen for energy. It uses fermentation for energy.So Warburg did those experiments years ago,given rats that had tumors, cyanide, and the rat died, but not the tumor and the, and itwas clear evidence that the tumors are notusing oxygen for their survival. So what are they? What are they living on?How are they growing and alive? If they're not using oxygen, and it turnsout that they use fermentation, so that fermentationis a form of energy that bipo bypasses oxygen. So that's interesting. They're fermenting, huh?What are the fuels that are driving theirfermentation metabolism? What are they using?And it's glucose. The sugar. Glucose and the amino acid glutamine.And those are the two fermentable fuels thatallow cell cancer cells to grow.So what the answer to your question is, yes,cancer cells live they and can you starve them?Okay? So if we know they're fermenting and we knowthat they can't live without fermentable fuelsand you know that they're only two fermentablefuels that are keeping them alive, then you target and take those two fermentable fuelsaway.And they die. So can you starve the tumor cell of theirfermentable fuels and kill them?And the answer is absolutely. And then your question is if that's so simple,how come no one's doing it?And the answer is because everybody thinkscancer's a genetic disease. They're not thinking about what's keepingthe cells alive.It's.. Right. It's not that complicated. So interesting. When you say, it's, it, this applies to reallyany kind of neoplastic tumor or is it justfor some in particular? I went through all the major cancers. I spent a lot of time in our, my eye sciencepaper, and I looked at every one of the majorcancers. But you have to go back and look at electronmicroscopy and you have to look at biochemistryand you have to ask what is the, do the mitochondrianumber and function and structure look normalor not? And every case, not. Respiratory systems, they're all like deficientand all these kinds of things.So what I just described to you would be commonto all the major cancers that we know of.Is it possible that the fermentation processis something that is physiologically adapted?Once you've broken a threshold of no longerbeing able to meet the requirements of proliferationand growth in a plastic, traditional, nonneoplastic cancer cell way, as in the stuffthat we are used to, blood flow and oxygen,is it something that possibly, is taking placein the environment of injury, which is whythey'd say, okay, now we need to propagate a different mechanism.
Or do you think it was something that originatedearly on into the pathogenesis, was that almosta required tool to even permit it to become into something that ends up being neoplastic or cancerous? Yeah. That goes back to the how you get how doesthis process happen in the first place?What is responsible for the dependency onfermentation?Because as Otto Warburg said, you can neverget a cancer cell that cannot transition fromrespiration to fermentation. And the evidence for that is we rarely, ifever see neoplastic cells in neurons of thebrain they just simply cannot sustain theycannot replace oxidative phosphorylation withfermentation. You see it in glial cells, of course. Which those cells can, we don't see cancersof cardiac muscle, rarely of skeletal muscle,because those kinds of cells cannot they can't,they'll die without oxid oxidative phosphorylation.Oh. So that, that observation in of itself promptsthe, the thing like why is that the case andsupports, exactly what you're saying. What are some of the things that. If you do deprive it of fermentation, wouldtake injury.Obviously we've just said unlikely, the centralnervous neurons and cardiac tissue, but is there something that may take an insult that'snot cancerous in your body if you've deprivedthose things? Oh, sure. If you go and try to knock out glucose andglutamine fermentation by itself yeah, you'regonna harm the rest of the body. However, what we do with the cancer patients,As we transition their whole body over toa ketotic state ketosis. So all the normal cells of the body, brain,cells, liver, cell, they all can burn fattyacids or ketone bodies. Once the patient is in therapeutic ketosis.Then you can lower blood sugars down to mivery, extremely low levels. 0.5, millimole, nine milligrams per deciliter.You can push blood sugars down to incrediblylow levels but as, but the brain and the restof the cells are protected because they canburn fatty acids and ketones and going back to fermentation, fatty acids and ketones bodiesare non fermentable.They cannot be fermented, so they become non-fuelfor the tumor cell. So obviously the answer to your question isyes, you can damage the body if you just simplytarget glucose and glutamine without firsttransitioning the body over to ketones. Once you do that, then the rest of the bodyis totally protected and the cancer cellsbecome marginalized and killed off withoutharming the rest of the body. And why is it that they can't use when yougo into ketosis, why they are unable to usethose to, to we know? You need a good mitochondria to burn ketonesand fatty acids. You need a good oxidative phosphorylationsystem.And the common phenotype of all major cancersis deficiency of oxidative phosphorylation.So it's, and from the structure in evolutionarybiology structure determines function.That's why when you look at the electron microscopeand ghost mitochondria, no Crista, dys, dysmorphic,mitochondria, they're not gonna be able togenerate energy through oxidative phosphor phosphorylation. They're gonna have to be de dependent on fermentation.Yeah. Very simple. Yeah. Not complicated. We pardon this interruption real quick. If you're enjoying this podcast or find itvaluable for what we discussed and the educationand how people see and think about cancerin general, we would very much appreciate a subscribe, and especially a share so wecan bring that information as maximally andbroadly as possible. Thank you so much for listening. So this is just, me thinking out loud, butwhen we use these things called for the, forpeople listening like VEGF inhibitors or endothelialor vascular.Basically growth factors where tumors arelike, ooh, like especially the kind of juicier tumors that want blood flow, like renal cellcarcinomas and cholangio and liver.Like a lot of that, a lot of those lung evenwant to be able to recruit blood vessels. Does that further inhibit the tumors, abilityand do you use them concurrently at all ordoes that. How is, why is that, why does that work inthese cancers? If it doesn't work, it doesn't work.That's why they threw out all the anti-angiogenicdrugs. Even Napoleone Ferrara who said, who was developedone of these says, this stuff doesn't work.Cancer cell doesn't need all that stuff. And don't forget Angiogenes, a downstreameffect of damage to oxidative phosphorylation.So when the cell can't res respir HIF-1alpha,which is a powerful transcription factor turnson glycolysis and runs vascular endothelialgrowth factor.So all that stuff is downstream. You don't have, that's why Avastin and allthese crazy things that a people are using,they don't work. They don't work because the damn tumor celldoesn't need it, as long as it, it has inthe microenvironment the necessary fuels. And that's why when you give brain cancerto a, I told, it's like malpractice that beattreats somebody with Avastin. And what it does is it forces the cells outinto this. Into the neural parenchyma.You can't see them on PET scans or MRI, CATscan or anything like this. Those damn cells can, and they're also phagocytic.So you gotta know that they can eat engulfstuff from the microenvironment, get glucoseand glutamine from the microenvironment.
Even if you, if even if you try to stop theblood vessels and things like this. None of that stuff works, man. You gotta realize, how do you know that wegot 1600, over 1600 people a day dying and.Dying from cancer. So obviously all that stuff is not workingand it doesn't work because it's not focusedon the essential proc issue that we're dealingwith fermentation. Yeah. They don't, they definitely don't like necessarilycure cancers, but at least for renal cells,we really have two groups that are seeminglymore immune sensitive and more, and that's,so we use a lot of the TKIs now in combinationor without, with immunotherapy in that setting.But you're correct. Eventually there's a statute of, expirationthere where it's no longer usually effective.So very interesting. And so that is a way that, it's almost likean agnostic treatment, tissue agnostic inthe sense that we've said before where whatI'm hearing is it doesn't matter what theorigin or the histopathology to some degreeis on where it originated. But really it's just a matter of, is it thisneoplastic thing that had to really know toexist without being able to use its mitochondriafunctionally, and therefore wherever it is,wherever it originated. It sounds like you have a high, degree ofsuccess. I guess if that's the right term.Just by putting yourself into that state. I think you have to recognize that we canuse diets to reduce glucose but we can't usediets to reduce glutamine. And glutamine is an essential amino acid forthe tumor cell.In fact, they call it a non-essential aminoacid. But really it's quite essential for our immunesystem, for our gut health for the urea cycle.We need glutamine and glutamine is abundant. It's the most abundant amino acid in our body. So we have a situation here where our normalcells of the immune system need.The same fuel used, the same fuel that theneoplastic tumor cell uses. So we have to, that's why we developed thepress pulse strategy for managing cancer.You can press glucose down consistently becauseyou're transitioned over to ketones. So we eliminate the glucose issue, but wepulse drug, we use drugs to pulse glutaminebecause if we're too aggressive, In targetingglutamine, we compromise our own immune system in its ability to pick up the dead cancercells after you kill them, otherwise leadingto infections and other kinds of adverse effects. So we use small doses of glutamine targetingdrugs.Once the patient is in therapeutic ketosis,so we put 'em on just for a short time, dosage, timing, and scheduling, and then we pull 'emoff and let the immune system and the gutand everything come back to a normalcy. But you've already slaughtered a significantnumber of tumor cells, and then the immunesystem, the, our immune cells aren't killedby de deprivation of glutamine.They're just stunned. They're alive, but they're just like paralyzed.But once you pull the glutamine drug backoff our immune system reactivates and goesin and picks up the dead corpses and we haveto have a time period. While this process is taking place, and ofcourse when you add the glutamine back ordon't remove the drug you will get the rescueof some of the tumor cells that might be there,but they're not coming back very fast becauseyou got the choke hold on, on the glucose.So they're there, but they're growing extremelyslowly. And then once our immune system comes backrecovers itself from the small dose of glutamineinhibitor then we hit 'em again. With another small dose of glutamine inhibitor,and we slowly degrade the tumor while therest of the cells in the body are generatingan excessive efficiency in health.So we're, the rest of the cells in the bodyare getting super healthy while you're degrading, slowly degrading the tumor cells that areabsolutely dependent on fermentation metabolism.It's an elegant, beautiful system. And when it's done It. You can't believe how well it works.Problem is Sanjay. Nobody is doing that. Yeah. I think that the first time I heard aboutit on a clinical setting was Dr. SiddharthaMukherjee. I think he's got a new project he's workingon for pancreatic cancer.I think more particularly for that, the glutamine,metabolic, starvation process.But gosh, that is really almost like gettinggoosebumps as a traditional, obviously medicaloncologist. It, it makes sense on a cellular level andI'm just like, part of me just wants to believe.If it's really fast replicating shouldn'twe sprinkle a little, cytotoxic chemotherapy just to accelerate the replication process?You can do that. Our colleagues in Turkey do that ul. They use the lowest possible doses of chemothat's allowable by the profession, right?So you're not so you're not out of compliance.

DDD888

DDD888 发表于 2023-10-1 04:31
根据科学家的研究，关键是每小时运动下，将身体里不要累积葡萄糖

来源 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v ...

And once the body is in nutritional ketosis,these chemo drugs also you can use minor veryminimal dosages, and it just slaughters thesetumor cells and you've reduced the level of toxicity.My view is I'm not a against that becauseI have seen spectacular recoveries of somepeople doing this kind of a strategy. But, why would we ever want to put any levelof toxic material into our body when we really don't have to? Yeah. I'm not opposed to people who say, let meuse the lowest doses of chemo once I get mypatient into a nutritional state of ketosis. Because the toxicity levels are significantlyreduced and the therapeutic benefits are massivelyhigh. So this is why when we used our glutamineinhibitor 6-diazo-5-oxo-l-norleucine, whichwas considered too toxic when it was usedby itself with not targeting glucose.Oh, it's toxic, but it's never been as toxicas cisplatin, carboplatin, lustine, and allthese horrible drugs. But once you put the patient in ketosis youcan use very small, tiny doses of this stuff,and it's just like a whack man. You just swack those tumor cells because you,they don't, they're so vulnerable now.They're just like on the precipice, survival. And you hit 'em with another little bit ofa dumb, boom they're gone. The brittle.Yeah. Wow. Yeah, they're very susceptible. But you gotta put the body in the right statebefore you can use this kind of stuff.You just can't go in there like a bull ina china shop. You really need to know. The strategy of what we're talking about.So it's a graded process. Why we developed the press pulse therapeuticstrategy for managing cancer.It's a process and you have to know how touse the tool, the tools to you have are dietand drugs used in the appropriate way. So you can't use glutamine inhibitor by itself.You can't use glucose inhibitor by itself. You can't use the diet by itself, most ofthe time.You have to put the package together and knowhow all the components fit together so you have powerful synergy without toxicity.And in what sequence. And that's, I think we, the. Yeah.Dosage, timing and schedule. This is where we are right now. We're perfecting dosage, timing, and schedulingin our preclinical systems, and then we translateit directly into the patients with my colleagueswho have clinics that can do all this. That's amazing.It's a work in progress. We have a very singular goal. How long can we keep stage four cancer patientsregardless of what.Where, what or tissue of origin, how longcan we keep them alive with a high quality of life?If they die at 98 years old when they hadcancer at 38 years old, they were obviouslycured with no recurrence. But you can't know that. When you say, oh, you can cure, I don't knowif I can cure cancer.All I know is we.. All I know is if you can live far longer thanyou were expected to live with a higher qualityof life, that's good in itself. And if you live to be 90 because you managethis when you were 30, then then you can consideryourself very fortunate. But the goal is, how do we keep cancer paid?All these guys, oh, stage four, lung, brain,colon, and they're all out. Many of them are out there doing well.Are they cured? I have no idea. But they're still alive longer than they would'vebeen predicted to me. That is something else.So I'm sure a lot of people are thinking thisand myself included.Is it conceivably correct if somebody said,if they are constantly in a state of ketosis,the likelihood of having a neoplastic or cancerouspopulation of cells spawn in a constantlyketosis state is low. Yes, absolutely. And how do we know that?We know that from historical records and aboriginalpeoples, and we know that from our closestrelative the chimpanzee, which are gene, he's,the chimps are 98% similar to us in gene andprotein sequences. And the aboriginal. Tribes that existed have been examined atlength.The Inuits from the Alaska and Canada regions,the African tribes, the rainforest people,the ab Australian Aborigines. These folks never had cancer.And they're always in a semi-state of ketosisbecause they're natural diets are very low in carbohydrates.So when you're very low in carbohydrates andyou have a significant amount of exercise, you're always in a low state of ketosis.You might have two you might have 0.5.Millimolar ketones circulating your bloodglucoses are low and it's very hard to generatea cancer if you have a very healthy mitochondria. The only way you can get cancer is damageto the oxidative phosphorylation in the mitochondria.So whether that comes from drugs, diets, orwhatever. If you're in a state of ketosis, you're enhancingthe health and vitality of your mitochondria.It makes it very rare. That's why Albert Schweitzer, the great humanitarianphysician, looked at 40,000 people in theAfrican. He never saw cancer in any of these patients. So he said, wait, no. What's going on?Why these Africans don't get cancer? Why the Inuits never? Now the problem is the Inuits are loaded withcancer type two diabetes, cardio cardiovasculardisease. As soon as the western diet comes in high,highly processed carbohydrate foods, put yourin a state of inflammation. Inflammation damages, respiration. So chronic inflammation can damage respirationin a population of cells in some tissue.Eliciting cancer. We have an obesity epidemic.
In fact, obesity is now replacing smokingas the number, a number one risk factor forcancer. So what's going on with all that? Diet and lifestyle. It's all diet and lifestyle. You're not exercising, you're eating horriblefoods, putting yourself in obesity, inflammationand that puts you at risk for all kinds ofdifferent cancers. And you're saying the inflammation, when Ialways said it, Basically invites chancesof error and inflammation obviously decreasesyour good immune cells to be able to clear an area.You're saying in addition to that, if not,almost most importantly it's that inflammationallows an environment for the mitochondrialinjury or dysfunction to occur. Yeah. And then what hap then what happens?So you put.. That's a chronic, it's chronic, it doesn'thappen overnight, obviously, right? It takes sometimes years.For that constant inflammatory insult, whetherit's intermittent hypoxia, chronic inflammation,all these, and then you combine that withsome low dose of carcinogens that might be in your body, and you put all that together.And then gradually ox oxidative phosphorylationis replaced by fermentation. During that process and when the oxphos becomesdysfunctional, it throws out reactive oxygenspecies. ROS. ROS are carcinogenic and mutagenic.So the mutations that you see in the nucleus,all those somatic mutations are all downstreameffects of the ROS produced by the damagechronically injured mitochondria.So the cancer field, for the most part, arechasing the tail. They're chasing effects. They're not focusing on the real issue.So you're looking at how many different kindsof somatic mutations people have in their different cancers, which is largely irrelevant.All that stuff is largely irrelevant. The National Cancer Institute says canceris a genetic disease and nothing could befurther from the truth. It's not a genetic, it's a metabolic disease. So why is everybody focusing on all thesecrazy mutations when they're all downstreameffects? You don't get the mutations until the mitochondriabecome defect dysfunctional. So you put carcinogen, you can see the mitochondriabecome damaged.They bio luminesce actually, and you can seethem throwing out ROS already. So it's a staged chronic process.It's very hard for the human body to get cancer. You can't believe how tough it is to get. We evolved to be completely resistant to cancer.So in order for us to get cancer, you haveto have a long-term self-abuse of your bodyby exposure to all these kinds of things. Because the aboriginal tribes and the chimpanzeestell us how hard it is to get cancer.It's, it's just, yeah. It's hard to, we're just so deviated fromour stuff, it's just wow.It's so interesting hearing you say that isinteresting in a sense that I always say whenpeople ask, frequently, What can I do to reducemy chance of cancer and what causes cancer? And I basically spit a rally off a line ofthings and I'm like, basically the same stuffthat they recommend to do for cardiovascularhealth and to not do for cardiovascular health.They pretty much like overlap entirely. Am I hearing that? Possibly because of what's called, when wesay vasculopathy or basically inflamed arterialdisease. If you smoke, if you have diabetes, gly oscillation,all the stuff that makes maybe impaired vascularflow. Is that in some way a super imposition ofwhy people get cancers?Because the delivery of oxygen and then theincrease of ROS.Are the things that are propagating or invitingcancers, is that a fair statement? Yes.That's crazy. I think it's very fair. It's a very fair statement. And so that is why there's such an overlap,is because of the mitochondrial injury thatoccurs to the impaired, blood flow becauseof, again, diabetes, smoking, lack of cardiovascularhealth. Yeah. So what when you said, processed foods, obviouslyI spent that off on the list as well as oneof the reasons that can cause cancer. But say somebody was keto. But ate processed foods, like what is it aboutthe processed part itself that invites themitochondrial injury? Which you're saying is the, like you're saying,it is an absolute necessity, correct?To turn into a neoplastic, cancerous, malignantcell. Like you have to have that is like the limitingreagent. Okay.So yeah. That's the origin. That's the origin of cancer. And so. This damage to oxid, chronic damage to oxidativephosphorylation is the origin of cancer, whichcan happen by any number of provocative agents. What, when you say highly processed, whatis highly process?So the issue, of course, is that these arefoods that are high in glucose, high in sugar,and they have no nutritional value. They're with minimal nutritional value, buthigh in sugar.Now, don't forget, we evolved.
As a strave species, our whole existence onthe planet has been trying to survive famine,trying to... we move around. We, we had to bring tools with us to to getthe food that, that we needed.Our physiology and our genome is ultimatelydriven to store energy.Because we're always starving now, we putourselves. Within the last 50, 7500 years into a stateof massive amounts of carbohydrates that haveno nutritional value. And that puts, that again, causes your inflammation,your obesity, your type two diabetes, your cardiovascular disease. So you're absolutely right, Sanjay. This is all part of a continuum.And when we. In our metabolic approach to cancer managementand the folks that are following our instructions,many of these folks come in with cardiovasculardisease, type two diabetes, hypertension, and all these other kinds of things.And by the way, that all goes away along withtheir cancer.You're talking about a very dangerous situationhere. You're talking and point in fact was the recentpaper that came out on the Mediterranean Diet,reducing cancer, dementia and cardiovasculardisease. And it's not the Mediterranean diet, it'sthe absence of highly processed carbohydratefoods, which are not part of the Mediterraneandiet. And all of those not.Not complicated. Not complicated. So it's not the olive oils and all that stuffas much? No. Yeah.It's the absence of the highly processed carbohydrates. You wanna neutralize a Mediterranean diet,go out and eat a big subway sandwich or aeat a couple of dunking Donuts and you canneutralize all the therapeutic benefits ofa Mediterranean diet real quick. That's too funny. And it's so true. Cause.Again, it's just why is it a coincidence thatit's always the stuff that helps, reduce chancesof heart attacks and strokes and they havegood cardiovascular health. Oh, and also they have like less cancer like,like I love that we're actually really somewhatpegging. Bro, it's not just a coincidence there's areason. Those things almost always, yeah.Align or superimposed, I'll tell you, nobody really cares.Unless it's really pointed out like I justdid, and I tell you why, nobody cares because we have an obesity epidemic.If people really cared about preventing cancer,we would not have an obesity epidemic. Yeah. Yeah.That's hard. I, you know what I think is just, Those thingsare so distant. Like the concerns, which is, which hopefullythings like this and hearing this, I'm moremotivated right now to be healthier and eatless, less processed foods, than I've been probably in a long time, like just hearingall this.Cuz now when you understand and hear it, you'rejust like, I feel like. Again, that's why we're doing this, is thatit makes you now empowered instead of hearingoh, your risk will be higher. It's this is what's happening. This is where you have the, potential formitochondrial damage.This is why this is your arteries gettingall clogged up from X, Y, and Z, and then all these sugars or whatever. Now it's No, I'm doubting my lunch now.Yeah. But the other, the problem is, of course,we have fast food stores on almost every cornerin every place in the United States. It's so convenient and not only that, we'resaying, wow, geez, do you ever eat this stuff?Do you ever eat that subway sandwich? It's absolutely delicious. Yeah. It's, you ever have McDonald's hamburgers? I.All right. This stuff is like so good. A Taco Bell. Are you kidding me?Papa John's Pizza. These things are really tasty. They've been designed to make you want toeat this stuff.They should put a skull and crossbones ona lot of that stuff, just to let you know every now and then you shouldn't. Just if you do it all the time, I'm not sayingwe should purge our society of this stuffbecause I enjoy it myself too, occasionally. But the problem is I think so many folks inour society are just like, they don't know.That if you do that, if you're not, if you'reeating poorly processed, and it's not only that, it's our lifestyle.We're not as active as we were. Those aboriginal tribes that I spoke about. Those guys are out working in the fields.They're doing stuff all the time. They're not sitting in traffic listening tothe books on tape or sitting in front of acomputer, chowing down a big blueberry muffin. It's our, it's a combination of the foodsthat we eat, the lack of exercise, the mentaland emotional stress that we have in the society. All of these things impact together to damagethe mitochondria in some population of cellsin some tissue, putting you at risk for eitherdiabetes, cancer, dementia, let's go on todementia thing. It's all part of the same process. Yeah. And we're paying the price.We're paying the price for tasty foods andconvenience. Yeah. And that.That people need to know. And it's a it's almost like it's not our faultbecause we were made to ha like a pensionfor those things because we needed to knowwhen we were, absent brained and stumbled across some whatever on the field.Like we needed to know that this was a highcalorie thing so that we wanted more of it. So it's like a bottleneck effect over evolution.That's now. We.. That's why they say with intelligence andgreatness comes demise potentially or concernedfor such. We're still stuck with the things that weneeded when we were very ambulatory and desperate.But the availability is of abundant. I like what you said about tying in reallythe concept of having to move around and belike more physically active. It's not so much that we're saying like, oh,be active to lose weight.

DDD888

DDD888 发表于 2023-10-1 04:31
根据科学家的研究，关键是每小时运动下，将身体里不要累积葡萄糖

来源 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v ...

We're saying that it's that activity thatreally, burns things and burns fuels and makes you, I love that angle on explanation, on saying don't just do it to lose weight orbe healthy. It's the actual process. And one thing that I remember reading whenI used to, be a work, a junky kind of person,was that the best kind of cardiovascular healthyou could have? And decrease your chance of heart attack andstroke is even less than 60 to 80 minutesof cardio in a day is doing 10 minutes everyhour, every other hour of getting your heart rate up.And that goes into that concept of constantburning it up and making you have to break into some of these chains and stuff to thatis the thing that, that protects your body,as ideally as regularly as possible. Absolutely. You're... you're making your mitochondriahealthy.You're giving them the oxygen they need. You're increasing the blood flow. You're just generally making yourself healthier.I wouldn't Yeah, I agree with you a hundredpercent. I don't think it's just to lose weight. I think it's just to keep healthy.Yeah. Walking swimming, whatever you're capableof doing. Make your body need to make energy.Like at a moment make it dynamic. Make it, we are, yeah, we are very mobilespecies.We would cover great distances looking forfood. It's, in the paleolithic period of our existencebefore the cultivation of grains and the developmentof civilizations. Think about how hard it was to get somethingto eat. You had to track down some animal.That was oftentimes bigger than you with inteam effort and drag its ass back and chopit up and eat it. And there's a lot of energy that goes intothis. Imagine, the reward too.And you're gonna, yeah. And then you're gonna gather what a few ripeberries when they're in seasoned and you're gonna gorge yourself on those things, andbut that was our, and we survived.We actually survived in these products cuzwe learned how to use certain tools. We learned how to kill animals in a betterway.Now we can farm them, or they put 'em outon a pasture and stuff like this. But we survived because we have Rick Pottsof the of the Smithsonian put it pretty clearly.We have this capability of adjusting to theenvironment better than most other animalspecies have, and our genome and our physiologyis all geared into survival under extremeconditions. And now we put ourselves in a new environmentcompletely different from the environmentwe evolved in. And we have all of these chronic, differentkinds of chronic diseases, cancer included.So it's not that mysterious when you put everythinginto the e concept of biological evolution.No. And that becomes very clear what the situationis. So rather, and then we spend billions of dollarstrying to put a bandaid, on type two diabetes,try to put a bandaid on cardiovascular diseaseand all, and cancer and all these kinds ofthings when we just have to keep our mitochondriahealthy and we won't have to deal with these issues in the first place.Yeah, that was very beautifully said. It's it makes sense on just a macroscopiclogic level.The more you like, get distant. From the very cellular and behavioral, adaptationswe've made to exist as a human race over hundredsand thousands of years. What the things we had to get selected forthe things that died off if they couldn't store their fats well enough or didn't havethe taste for fats and said, oh, I don't likefats. You're dead. Because that's that's the thing that's gonnamake you like the most likely to live. The fact that we had all of this, it's almostirreverent.And then to say, let's go ahead and now livea life that is very like, Divergent or likedistant from exactly what this very, I meanthat the sharpest blade that you sharpened. Yeah, no, you're absolutely right.And now you don't even, you can just dri,you don't even have to unask the car. You can just drive up and they hand you thefood right through the window.Yeah. You don't even have to get out of the car. Rather than walking in to get, do a donutor something, oh no, I gotta drive aroundand wait in this car line, and then some guyof hand comes out of the window. And puts a load of food into your lap.Thomas, I want it in my mouth. I don't want to take the wrapper off, takeit off and put it in my mouth.Then they wonder why we have obesity and cancer. What the hell's going on here?Oh, and, but again, one, the flip side, thedefender could say it's like we're the tragic hero or the anti-hero because it's like we'realso at the mercy of our own adaptations.I know you're oh yeah. That's called being an adult or being matureand not being a mammal. It's, We are having to fight the very thing.That we are hardwired over time okay. I have, yes, I have one question though thatI had heard when it relates to ketosis andit blew my mind and talking about shortcutsright in society and as we are, especially in this country, I hear that there are waysthat you could consume things and temporarily,so it won't give you a sustained ketosis,but like a maybe a four to six hour ketosisor is there such a product that if I took. Six hours that I can have a ketosis withouthaving to do the upfront leg work because like I said, I want the burger in my mouthlike physically. Is there a way I can achieve that withoutthe two and a half days of supposedly a headachebefore I get ketosis? Listen no. The issue of course is yeah, we were talk,we in the, I worked in the epilepsy fieldfor years.
And everybody's talking about can we get aketogenic diet or ketosis and a pill?Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That was the big thing, right? So you really want that. Okay.You take one pill for breakfast, wash it downwith water, one pill for lunch, wash it down with water. Did you do that for three days? One pill for dinner? Yeah.And you do that for a week. That's hilarious. That is the holy rail of like marketing scheme.Cause it's true and you're not doing anything. But more seriously when you say can I getinto it, it's the sustained condition of beingin some level of moderate ketosis that's reallythe most healthy for your body and we're learningnow from a lot of folks that are measuringtheir, I we developed here at Boston College,the Glucose Ketone Index, which was for thecancer patient to know when their blood sugarwas low and their blood ketones were elevatedand they then become at the perfect conditionfor low dose chemo or target and glucose andglutamine.And we built that. But now we realize that, you can stay intothose zones with a carnivore consuming ofcarnivore, with Mediterranean diets, withvegetable vegetarian diets, as long as youdon't eat too much and the foods that youeat are very low glycemic you can get intothese states of ketosis with not too muchdifficulty. The only difficulty would be the restrictionof highly processed carbohydrates, and forsome people, who happen to be addicted tothose kinds of things, because glucose isa powerful, addictive fuel. It's like cocaine. It's like opium. It's like nicotine.It can be very powerful on the brain, butyou're.. We evolved not to have very much glucose inour diets.So we will fall back. Our bodies will recognize that we are backin a semi paleolithic state, but we can getinto these zones of ketosis. So we now, my colleague Dominic D'Augustinofrom University of South Florida, and he'smade ketone ester's solutions where you cantake that and jack your, just like you saidbut it goes away. It goes away. It's, you really want to get it to be sustainedand sustained Ketosis with low glucose isvery therapeutic. And people can do this. At first we were saying, oh, you gotta dowater only fasting.Yeah, that doesn't go over real well. Nobody after a couple of days, you're outtathat. Hell, I'm. I'm gone from this, but with a carnivore diet,with certain kinds of low-glycemic vegetablesand things you can get into these and youuse the GKI to know whether you're not, whether you're there or not.So we we did it for the cancer patients, butnow we see all these young, healthy folksnot cancerous, not cardiovascular, none ofthese chronic diseases, they're all doing the GKI because they know that if they'rein this zone their mitochondria gonna be atthe healthiest state. So they're using it as a prevention, as ahealth benefit for their body.I want to use it, but yeah, GKI, Glucose KetoneIndex. You get it from the Keto Mojo and, and whenwe made it, we had to ask people because youget blood sugar in milligram per deciliter,and you get ketones and millimolar.So you have to divide the glucose by 18 andthen divide that number by the millimolarof ketones. Yeah. Wow. Yeah, it is too little, too much. The Keto Mojo guys made a little chip in themeter, so all you have to do is get the bloodvalue and the, and you do the glucose stripand then the ketones strip, and you push thebutton on the metering. Gives you the voila. You get the GKI right there. You don't even have to do the admin arithmeticanymore.Dr. Seyfried, you were amazing. I would love to have you back. This has been so edifying and now I almosthave anxiety that I've been slacking for 35years. But I, you definitely have catalyzed my thinkingon this, especially with young kids.And and I'm excited to do some digging, butwe appreciate you and and yeah, the, so wherecan people find you if they wanna read moreon your material? We've published our papers in peer reviewjournals.Cureus is one of them, for our case reports. But anybody can look my name up and see thepublications that we've written on PubMed,publication of Library of Medicine.Hi. Thank you so much.

DDD888

DDD888 发表于 2023-10-1 04:31
根据科学家的研究，关键是每小时运动下，将身体里不要累积葡萄糖

来源 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v ...

中文

癌症是一种涉及细胞失控增长的疾病。在正常情况下，身体的细胞生长、分裂和自然死亡是有序的过程。然而，在癌症出现的情况下，这一平衡被破坏，导致细胞过度生长和不正常分裂。这些异常细胞可以形成肿瘤，并有可能侵犯周围组织或通过血液和淋巴系统扩散到身体其他部位。

癌症可分为多种类型，通常按其起源细胞或组织来分类。例如，来源于肺部的癌症被称为肺癌，来源于乳腺组织的癌症被称为乳腺癌。每种癌症都有其独特的生物学特性、临床表现和治疗方案。

癌症的发生因素多种多样，包括遗传、环境暴露（如烟草烟、紫外线、化学物质等）、某些病毒或细菌感染、不健康的生活习惯（如高脂饮食、缺乏锻炼）以及一些激素和免疫系统因素。

目前，癌症的主要治疗手段包括手术、化疗、放射治疗、靶向治疗和免疫治疗等。治疗方案通常会根据癌症的类型、阶段、位置以及患者的总体健康状况来定制。

早期诊断和治疗通常会提高患者的生存率和生活质量。因此，定期进行癌症筛查和风险评估是非常重要的。
——————————————————————————
那么，你能否剥夺肿瘤细胞的可发酵燃料并杀死它们？答案是，毫无疑问，可以。这是一个高效的系统，提供了显著的结果。然而，很少有人实施这种方法。

欢迎来到“目标癌症”播客。我是Sanjay Juneja医生，我是一名肿瘤学家，在社交媒体上被称为@theoncdoc。今天，我很高兴能欢迎代谢研究权威Thomas Seyfried医生。Seyfried医生已经发表了150多篇研究论文，并在他的领域内受到高度重视。感谢您加入我们，Seyfried医生。

在社交媒体上经常出现的核心问题是：人们能否通过特别是限制糖和类似物质来饿死癌症？理解这一点的关键在于能量的概念。没有能量，没有生物系统能够正常运作。人类依赖氧气进行其代谢过程，但肿瘤细胞则不然。相反，它们使用发酵来获取能量。Warburg多年前的开创性实验表明，当暴露于氰化物时，带有肿瘤的老鼠死了，而它们的肿瘤却没有。这是明确的证据，表明肿瘤不依赖氧气来生存，而是依赖发酵。

驱动这种发酵代谢的主要燃料是葡萄糖和氨基酸谷氨酸。因此，关于饿死癌细胞的问题：如果人们针对并消除这两种可发酵燃料，癌细胞将会死亡。这种策略之所以没有广泛采用，是因为普遍的观点是癌症是一种遗传性疾病，而不是代谢性疾病。

为了回答您的第二个问题，这种策略适用于所有主要类型的肿瘤性肿瘤。在我广泛的研究中，我发现这些肿瘤中的线粒体的结构和功能都是不正常的，表明存在受损的呼吸系统。

最后，关于您是否发酵过程可能是受伤环境中的适应机制的问题，这当然是一个可能性。然而，重点应该是支持癌细胞生长和存活的基础生物化学。

您认为肿瘤对发酵的依赖性是在病理发生的早期就建立的吗？这是肿瘤变成肿瘤或癌症的必要条件吗？这让我们回到了一个基本问题：这种代谢转变最初是如何发生的？是什么让这些细胞依赖于发酵？

正如奥托·瓦伯（Otto Warburg）所提出的，几乎不可能找到不能从细胞呼吸转变为发酵的癌细胞。支持这一说法的是，大脑中的神经元很少出现肿瘤细胞，因为这些细胞不能用发酵替代氧化磷酸化。然而，我们确实在胶质细胞中观察到这种现象，这些细胞有能力进行这种代谢灵活性。

仅这一观察就提出了一个问题：为什么会发生这种代谢转变？这似乎与您的论点完全一致。剥夺癌细胞可发酵燃料的后果是什么？虽然不太可能影响中枢神经系统和心脏组织中的神经元，但如果剥夺了这些燃料，还有哪些细胞类型可能会受到损害？

如果不加区分地抑制葡萄糖和谷氨酰胺的发酵，无疑会伤害身体的其他部分。然而，在我们对癌症治疗的方法中，我们将患者整个身体转变为治疗性酮症状态。在这种状态下，正常细胞——如大脑和肝脏细胞——可以为能量代谢脂肪酸或酮体。一旦患者达到治疗性酮症，就可以在不冒险损害正常细胞的情况下安全地将血糖水平降低到极低水平。重要的是，脂肪酸和酮体不是可发酵的燃料，因此不能维持肿瘤细胞。

癌细胞在酮症状态下不能利用酮体或脂肪酸作为能量的原因是，这些细胞通常具有缺乏的氧化磷酸化系统。在结构上，它们的线粒体通常表现出异常，使其无法通过氧化磷酸化产生能量，并依赖于发酵。

如果您觉得这个播客有价值，特别是在它如何教育听众有关癌症的方面，我们会很感激您的订阅并分享这些信息，以便尽可能多地接触到人们。

现在，回到抗血管生成药物如VEGF抑制剂：为什么它们在治疗某些癌症中有限的疗效？原因在于它们的下游作用。抑制血管生成并没有解决癌症的根本原因，即细胞依赖于发酵作为能量来源。因此，这些药物通常不会产生期望的治疗效果

"即使您尝试抑制血管并采用类似策略，这些方法也是无效的。每天有超过1600人死于癌症，这一事实就是明证。这些方法之所以不成功，是因为它们没有针对手头的基本问题：肿瘤细胞依赖发酵作为能量来源。

对于肾细胞，我们有两组更具免疫敏感性的细胞，因此我们经常使用酪氨酸激酶抑制剂（TKIs），无论是与免疫疗法结合使用还是单独使用。然而，这些治疗的有效性最终会随着时间的推移而减弱。

有趣的是，重要的不是癌症的起源或组织病理学，而是它在没有功能性线粒体的情况下能否存活。这可以看作是一种组织不特异性的治疗方法。

重要的是要明白，尽管饮食可以降低葡萄糖水平，但它们不能降低谷氨酰胺水平，这是肿瘤细胞所必需的一种氨基酸。尽管被归类为非必需氨基酸，谷氨酰胺对我们的免疫系统、肠道健康和尿素周期至关重要。它也是我们体内最丰富的氨基酸。这就产生了一个难题，因为我们的免疫系统细胞需要与肿瘤细胞一样的燃料。这就是为什么我们开发了一种用于管理癌症的“压-脉冲”策略。

通过转向酮体，我们可以持续降低葡萄糖水平。为了针对谷氨酰胺，我们脉冲式地使用药物。过度使用药物可能会损害我们的免疫系统，因此我们谨慎地使用它们。一旦患者处于治疗性酮症状态，我们会短时间内给予少量的针对谷氨酰胺的药物，然后停止使用，让免疫系统恢复并清除死亡的癌细胞。

体内其余细胞变得越来越健康，而依赖发酵代谢的肿瘤细胞则逐渐降解。尽管其有效性很高，但这种方法并没有得到广泛应用。Siddhartha Mukherjee博士是少数几个正在针对胰腺癌患者的谷氨酰胺代谢过程开展项目的人之一。

可以添加低剂量的细胞毒性化疗药物以加速这一过程，正如我们在土耳其的一些同事所做的那样，以符合专业指导方针。"

一旦身体达到营养性酮症状态，便可以以非常微小的剂量施用这些化疗药物。这显著减小了肿瘤细胞，同时降低了毒性水平。在我看来，这种策略是可接受的，因为我已经观察到了一些显著的康复。

然而，人们可能会质疑在我们可能避免的情况下将任何水平的有毒物质引入我们的身体的必要性。我不反对在病人处于营养性酮症状态后使用化疗的最低有效剂量。在这些条件下，毒性水平显著降低，治疗效果大大增强。

这就是为什么我们使用了一种名为6-叠氮-5-酮-L-诺氨酸的谷氨酰胺抑制剂，该抑制剂最初被认为单独使用太有毒。然而，与cisplatin，carboplatin和lomustine等常用化疗药物相比，特别是当患者处于酮症状态时，其毒性要小得多。在这些条件下，肿瘤细胞变得极度脆弱，从而允许其有效地根除。

了解这些治疗背后的战略过程是至关重要的。我们可用的工具包括饮食和药物，这些必须以协同的方式使用，以最大限度地提高疗效，同时最小化毒性。适当的剂量，时间和调度是这一策略的基本组成部分，我们当前正在预临床系统中对其进行微调，然后将其直接转化为病人治疗方案。

我们的首要目标是延长四期癌症患者的寿命，并提高他们的生活质量，无论他们的癌症来源于何处。如果我们能够实现这一目标，那么即使我们不能明确地声称“治愈”癌症，我们也正在取得重大进展。

来自土著人和我们最近的基因亲属黑猩猩的历史记录表明，持续的酮症状态显著降低了患癌症的可能性。这可能是因为酮症增强了细胞线粒体的健康和活力，使癌症难以生根。然而，需要注意的是，饮食、炎症和其他健康状况等因素可能影响癌症风险。

"事实上，肥胖现在正在取代吸烟，成为癌症的头号风险因素。那么，这一变化的根本原因是什么呢？答案在于饮食和生活方式。缺乏运动和不良的饮食选择导致肥胖和炎症，增加了患各种类型癌症的风险。

你提到，炎症基本上创造了出错的机会，削弱了免疫系统清除受影响区域的能力。此外，炎症创造了一个有利于线粒体损伤或功能障碍的环境。这是一个慢性过程，不会一夜之间发生。可能需要连续多年的炎症侵害，可能还会因间歇性低氧和慢性炎症而恶化，才能表现出来。

此外，你强调了致癌物（尽管剂量低）与其他因素结合，扰乱氧化磷酸化正常过程的作用。这导致活性氧（ROS）的增加，它们既是致癌的，也是诱变的。随后出现的突变是ROS由慢性受损线粒体产生的下游效应。

批评人士认为，目前癌症领域的重点是误导的。虽然许多人关注于识别不同癌症中的各种类型的体细胞突变，但这在很大程度上是不相关的。国家癌症研究所声称癌症是一种遗传性疾病，这与事实相去甚远；实际上，它是一种代谢性疾病。

你质疑为什么要关注突变，当它们只是下游效应。突变不会发生，直到线粒体变得功能障碍。因此，线粒体损伤是导致癌症的一系列事件中的初始步骤。

从生活方式的选择来看，人体自然而然地发展成癌症是很有挑战性的。我们的进化使我们对它有了抵抗力，这一事实得到了对土著部落和黑猩猩的研究的证实。不良的生活方式选择创造了我们的祖先没有的脆弱性。

你还在癌症和心血管健康之间找到了相似之处。两者都可能受到炎性动脉疾病的影响，这是由吸烟和糖尿病等因素加剧的。这种受损的血流进一步导致线粒体损伤，证实了癌症和心血管健康的推荐经常重叠的原因。

最后，你提出了一个关于生酮饮食中加工食品的问题。加工食品含有高糖，营养价值最小。这种高糖含量可能有助于线粒体损伤，而如你所述，这是发展成癌症的先决条件。"

"作为一个以生存斗争为驱动的物种，我们在这个星球上的整个存在都是为了克服饥荒。为了维持自己，我们四处移动，并带着工具获取我们所需的食物。因此，我们的生理和基因组都是为了储存能量而设置的。

在过去的5000至7500年里，我们用缺乏营养价值的碳水化合物淹没了自己。这导致了炎症、肥胖、2型糖尿病和心血管疾病。你说得非常对，Sanjay，这一切都是一个连续体。

在我们对癌症管理的代谢方法中，我们经常遇到也患有心血管疾病、2型糖尿病和高血压的患者。值得注意的是，随着他们癌症的改善，这些病症也得到了改善。关于地中海饮食的最近研究表明，它可以减少癌症、痴呆症和心血管疾病的风险。然而，关键不是饮食本身，而是没有高度加工的碳水化合物食物。

这些问题不是无关或巧合的。有原因的是那些有助于减少心脏病发和中风的措施也会导致较低的癌症率。然而，尽管有这些知识，我们的社会面临着肥胖流行。如果真正关心预防癌症，这是不可能发生的。

此外，我们当前的生活方式也在加剧这些问题。快餐店随处可见，提供方便但不健康的选择。与祖先长期活动的生活方式相比，现代生活涉及更少的体肧行为，进一步加剧了问题。缺乏锻炼，再加上不健康的饮食选择和情感压力，协同作用损害某些细胞群体中的线粒体，增加了患糖尿病、癌症和痴呆症的风险。

重要的是要认识到，我们的进化需求与当前的富饶状况不一致。我们在稀缺时代发展出来的基因倾向，现在在过度时代反而对我们不利。"

"我们在说，正是这种活动真正地燃烧东西并为你提供动力。我很赞赏这种观点，即这不仅仅是为了减肥或保持健康，而是关于实际过程。我记得读到，达到最佳心血管健康的方法不是每天做60到80分钟的有氧运动，而是每隔一个小时将心率提高10分钟。这与不断燃烧和代谢调节以尽可能持续地保护你的身体的想法相符。

绝对的，你正在使你的线粒体健康。你为它们提供所需的氧气，增加血流，总体上提高了你的健康。我百分之百地同意；这不仅仅是为了减肥而是为了维持整体健康。无论是走路、游泳还是其他任何活动，都是为了使你的身体动态地利用能量。

在旧石器时代，我们穿越很远的距离寻找食物。追踪一只动物并为食用做准备所需的努力是巨大的，我们适应各种环境的能力是我们生存的关键。然而，我们现代的生活方式，充满了便利和不活动，导致了慢性疾病（包括癌症）的增加。

与其花费数十亿用于治疗2型糖尿病或心血管疾病，不如专注于保持健康的线粒体以防止这些问题首先出现。当你通过生物学演化的视角来看，情况变得更加清晰。

此外，尽管我们有生存的进化硬线，我们却创造了一个与我们自然行为如此不同的社会。便利已经达到了一个程度，你甚至不必离开你的车就可以获得食物，这也有助于肥胖和癌症危机。

关于酮症，可能有声称能诱导临时酮症状态的产品，但这些不能替代通过饮食和生活方式改变达到的生理状态。我可以确认，因为我曾多年在癫痫领域工作，没有实现真正、持续酮症的捷径。"

"大家都在讨论通过药丸实现生酮饮食或生酮状态。这已成为一个重要的讨论点。这个想法是早餐时服用一颗药丸并用水冲下去，然后午餐时再服用一颗，晚餐时再服用一颗。这样会持续一个星期。虽然这种方法可能看似是最终的营销方案，但它不是一个可持续的解决方案。真正的好处在于持续地保持适度的生酮状态。

我们在波士顿学院开发了葡萄糖酮指数（GKI），最初是为了帮助癌症患者监测他们的血糖低和血酮高时的状态。这将表明低剂量化疗或靶向葡萄糖和谷氨酰胺治疗的最佳条件。然而，我们现在意识到，通过各种饮食，如食肉、地中海或素食，只要限制高血糖食物的摄入，就可以实现生酮状态。

唯一的挑战是避免高度加工的碳水化合物，这对于那些沉迷于高葡萄糖食物的人来说可能是困难的，因为葡萄糖可能是一种高度上瘾的物质。

我在佛罗里达大学的同事多米尼克·达戈斯蒂诺（Dominic D'Agostino）已经创建了酮酯解决方案，可以暂时提高酮体水平。然而，效果是短暂的。持续的生酮状态与低葡萄糖水平是最具治疗效果的。最初，仅用水断食被认为是最有效的方法，但这对大多数人来说并不实用。

人们现在不仅用GKI来治疗癌症，还用它来维护整体健康。Keto Mojo 设备简化了GKI的计算，使人们更容易在没有复杂算术的情况下监测他们的水平。

塞弗里德博士，您的贡献是无价的。我感谢您提供的见解，这些见解已经显著影响了我的观点，尤其是作为一名家长。对于那些有兴趣阅读有关您工作的更多信息的人，它在Cureus等同行评审的期刊中是可用的，也可以在PubMed上找到。"