Dandruff or scalp irritation? Try BLOO.

    Bioenergetic Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Why starving cancer of glucose is a BAD idea

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Literature Review
    2 Posts 2 Posters 40 Views 3 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • H Offline
      haidut
      last edited by

      For years, mainstream oncology has been pushing the idea of “starving cancer” by depriving tumors of glucose. The logic seems simple: cancer cells consume a lot of glucose (the Warburg effect), so cut the glucose and the cancer dies. I have written extensively about why this is dangerously naive. What actually happens when you starve a cancer cell of glucose? It doesn’t necessarily die. It often enters a dormant, protected state that is highly resistant to therapy. The study below, using starved yeast cells, provides a stunning visual demonstration of this principle — and the implications for cancer treatment are profound.

      As the study below demonstrates, starved yeast cells (deprived of glucose) respond by coating their mitochondria with inactive ribosomes. This “shield” forms after protein synthesis halts, and it appears to protect the mitochondria from degradation while keeping essential machinery stored for rapid reactivation when glucose returns. The attachment is mediated by a specific protein tether, and the coating can occur even without mitochondrial fragmentation.

      This directly exposes the fatal flaw in “cancer starvation” therapies. When you deprive cancer cells of glucose, you are not necessarily killing them. You are forcing them into a dormant, therapy-resistant state — covered with protective structures, their metabolism downregulated, waiting for the glucose to return. This is why tumors often relapse aggressively after glucose-deprivation strategies (like ketogenic diets or glycolysis inhibitors). The dormant cells survive, and when nutrients become available again, they restart growth with a vengeance. I have said this for years: glucose is not the enemy. Supporting oxidative metabolism and reducing reductive stress is what actually kills cancer cells.

      The human-equivalent doses are not applicable here, as this was a mechanistic study in yeast. However, the lesson is clear for anyone considering glucose restriction as a cancer therapy: you may be creating dormant, shielded, therapy-resistant cells instead of killing them.

      https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-52911-4

      https://www.earth.com/news/starving-yeast-cells-wrap-power-plants-in-strange-shield-exposing-cancer-survival-trick/

      “…Here, we demonstrate that upon glucose depletion protein synthesis is halted.”

      “…Over several days without enough sugar, the same machinery locked onto mitochondria, the energy-producing structures inside living cells.”

      “…After several days without enough sugar, mitochondria broke into smaller pieces as starvation deepened and drew ribosomes across their outer surfaces… Those ribosomes sat in small groups of two to five, not as loose debris floating through the cell by chance. Their pattern suggested storage with a purpose.”

      “…Closer inspection showed that each attached ribosome held on through its small half, an unexpected contact point… Here, the reversed grip hints that starved cells were storing ribosomes, not using them for active protein production.”

      “…Cancer researchers care because some tumor cells survive treatment by entering dormancy, a reversible pause in growth… Dormant cells divide slowly or not at all, so treatments aimed at fast-growing cells can miss them… Low oxygen, scarce nutrients, and immune pressure can all push tumor cells toward this hard-to-treat state inside solid tumors.”

      “…The starved yeast experiment connects stalled protein building, mitochondria coverage, and cell dormancy into one survival sequence under prolonged hunger. If cancer cells use a related sequence, disrupting the ribosome shield during treatment could make stressed cells easier to expose.”

      Via: https://haidut.me/?p=3026

      lobotomizeL 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • lobotomizeL Offline
        lobotomize @haidut
        last edited by

        @haidut i have named my kids in your honor

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0

        Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

        Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

        With your input, this post could be even better 💗

        Register Login
        • 1 / 1
        • First post
          Last post