← Return to A couple of notes on diet and cancer

Discussion
northoftheborder avatar

A couple of notes on diet and cancer

Prostate Cancer | Last Active: 1 day ago | Replies (24)

Comment receiving replies
Profile picture for northoftheborder @northoftheborder

@dmccarthy104 That's fair. I'm just suggesting not reading too much into correlation studies, at least not until they've been reproduced frequently in different contexts. Otherwise, you'll end up chasing mainly noise rather than signal.

That said, if you want to cut something out of your diet anyway, and a correlation study makes you feel a bit better about that, go for it! As you say, we all have our own journeys.

But before people get carried away with enthusiasm and overhype a few isolated studies here in the forum, please consider how they might affect the silent, vulnerable, newly-diagnosed patients. They'll see exaggerated posts about eggs, sugar, dairy, or what-have-you and maybe start blaming themselves for their cancer, which a) is the last thing they need right now, and b) is going to be wrong the majority of the time anyway. We have to make sure our own journeys don't make other people's harder.

Cheers!

Jump to this post


Replies to "@dmccarthy104 That's fair. I'm just suggesting not reading too much into correlation studies, at least not..."

@northoftheborder

Sensible comment but do note that a UCLA and European study have both shown the higher death rate because of inadequate PSA testing. The reason for the reduced testing was the theory that false positive PSA's would result in unneeded biopsies which have some risk of injury and infection. However today we can do less dangerous MRI and PET scans rather than a biopsy. The 16-member government group that made the decision had no urologists or doctors familiar with prostate cancer.