Can vegan diet and HIIT workouts move the needle?

An interesting explanation of Canola: https://gastropod.com/seed-oil-scare-the-curious-case-of-canola/

I Had 4+3 Gleason, unfavorable Intermediate, Grade group 3 and I chose Active Surveillance and after 2.5 years and diet & exercise, cut out all sugar, I am happy to report, my PSA went from a high of 7.21 spring 2024 to 3.59 last summer and now stabilized in the 4.40 range. I will be 73 in October and I am happy with my choice. You are fortunate to have only a 3+4 favorable, and with decipher of .46 I would think you would be an excellent candidate for AS. Of course each person has to make their own choice, but for me quality of life was number one, the medical industrial complex is geared to treat, radiation, surgery or focal therapy, thats the choice they give you.
I posted this below on this forum 3/12/24 almost 2 1/2 years ago

I am 70 years old ( as of October 23) my PSA had gone from 4.24 to 6.62 in 6 months so my urologist ordered a Parametric MRI and a 4K score blood test, MRI showed a 12mm lesion on the right side mid gland and came back Pirads 4, the 4K score was the maximum at 95% of clinically significant cancer. Sure enough the MRI Fusion perineal biopsy at Mayo Phoenix show 9 of 23 cores cancer, with 6 at 70% 4+3=7 and 3 cores 40% 3+4= 7 and 14 cores benign. I had the PSMA PET which confirmed the tumor on the right, but no other spread outside the prostate. I then had the Decipher test and it came back low risk at 0.38. I looked into surgery and met the Mayo surgeon, who said at my age and weight ( 250 lbs) I was not a good candidate for surgery and he reiterated that it was major surgery with serious life changing side effects and possible major complications. After learning all the details of the surgery, there is no way I would even consider it. My prostate was 50.4 cc about the size of a lemon, they cut the whole thing out and to make up the missing 2+ inches of the urethra they pull the bladder neck down and the urethra up shortening your penis 1-1.5 inches, the cancer returns in about 20 - 30% of surgeries and you need further treatment like radiation or God forbid ADT and hormones. Radiation also has serious side effects and Erectile Dysfunction in 20-40% of cases, plus possible bowel problems. I then looked into Focal Therapy, talked with my Mayo Urologist yesterday, was really depressed that even the focal therapies like Hifu have side effects, ED in 20% of cases, possible rectal fistula, urine leaking into the bowel and you need surgery and have to wear a bag, also you have to have a Foley catheter for 1-2 weeks. I am looking into the Tulsa Pro which they do in Rochester , not in Phoenix. Considering my relatively low PSA at 6.62, Low Risk Decipher score of 0.38, tumor grade T1c and small volume tumor less than 1cc or 2% of prostate volume, I am considering Active Surveillance, at 70 my PCa may never metastasize in the next 10 years and I would more than likely die from some other cause. The ProtecT study in the UK shows no difference in mortality with Intermedate Risk patients over 15 years . 1/3 had surgery, 1/3 had radiation and 1/3 Active surveillance. Quality of life is much more important to me than quantity,

@bluegill Wait, conspiracy theorists in the U.S. think canola oil is *bad* for you?!? That's a new one on me. Most people think it's the healthiest of the seed oils, though obviously not quite on par with olive oil.

Is this a rumour spread by corn (maize) growers to fight the competition? Utterly bizarre.

North, that's just the tip of the iceberg. We've been slandering scientists and farmers for years down here, and I have to confess that I also did it for years. Until I started taking plant science courses at the university and getting to know scientists on a personal level.

I Had 4+3 Gleason, unfavorable Intermediate, Grade group 3 and I chose Active Surveillance and after 2.5 years and diet & exercise, cut out all sugar, I am happy to report, my PSA went from a high of 7.21 spring 2024 to 3.59 last summer and now stabilized in the 4.40 range. I will be 73 in October and I am happy with my choice. You are fortunate to have only a 3+4 favorable, and with decipher of .46 I would think you would be an excellent candidate for AS. Of course each person has to make their own choice, but for me quality of life was number one, the medical industrial complex is geared to treat, radiation, surgery or focal therapy, thats the choice they give you.
I posted this below on this forum 3/12/24 almost 2 1/2 years ago

I am 70 years old ( as of October 23) my PSA had gone from 4.24 to 6.62 in 6 months so my urologist ordered a Parametric MRI and a 4K score blood test, MRI showed a 12mm lesion on the right side mid gland and came back Pirads 4, the 4K score was the maximum at 95% of clinically significant cancer. Sure enough the MRI Fusion perineal biopsy at Mayo Phoenix show 9 of 23 cores cancer, with 6 at 70% 4+3=7 and 3 cores 40% 3+4= 7 and 14 cores benign. I had the PSMA PET which confirmed the tumor on the right, but no other spread outside the prostate. I then had the Decipher test and it came back low risk at 0.38. I looked into surgery and met the Mayo surgeon, who said at my age and weight ( 250 lbs) I was not a good candidate for surgery and he reiterated that it was major surgery with serious life changing side effects and possible major complications. After learning all the details of the surgery, there is no way I would even consider it. My prostate was 50.4 cc about the size of a lemon, they cut the whole thing out and to make up the missing 2+ inches of the urethra they pull the bladder neck down and the urethra up shortening your penis 1-1.5 inches, the cancer returns in about 20 - 30% of surgeries and you need further treatment like radiation or God forbid ADT and hormones. Radiation also has serious side effects and Erectile Dysfunction in 20-40% of cases, plus possible bowel problems. I then looked into Focal Therapy, talked with my Mayo Urologist yesterday, was really depressed that even the focal therapies like Hifu have side effects, ED in 20% of cases, possible rectal fistula, urine leaking into the bowel and you need surgery and have to wear a bag, also you have to have a Foley catheter for 1-2 weeks. I am looking into the Tulsa Pro which they do in Rochester , not in Phoenix. Considering my relatively low PSA at 6.62, Low Risk Decipher score of 0.38, tumor grade T1c and small volume tumor less than 1cc or 2% of prostate volume, I am considering Active Surveillance, at 70 my PCa may never metastasize in the next 10 years and I would more than likely die from some other cause. The ProtecT study in the UK shows no difference in mortality with Intermedate Risk patients over 15 years . 1/3 had surgery, 1/3 had radiation and 1/3 Active surveillance. Quality of life is much more important to me than quantity,

@northoftheborder
It has nothing to do with conspiracy - Canola is bad for you. It is highly refined and processed oil. It was originally used only as industrial oil and than in 1970 scientists discovered that it can be "changed" and heavily processed to become "edible". There is no such thing as canola plant - Canola name is derived from "Canada" and "Oil" - Can-Ola . The oil is extracted form rapeseed and raw rapeseed is toxic and not only that - fields are sprayed with herbicides for easier collection and processing. If you go to @ turtbean new post about nutritionist consult you will find that that doctor told him not to use it. I stopped using it long time ago and was mad at cardiologist who suggested that crap of oil to my husband 20 yeas ago. I wonder to how many toxic chemicals my family was exposed to during consumption.
This is short version from AI:
Canola oil is produced through a multi-step industrial process that includes cleaning, heating and flaking, mechanical pressing, solvent extraction, and oil refining.
Bon appetit : (((

@surftohealth88 Industrial rapeseed oil comes from a different plant variety, which is high in erucic acid. The ultra-low-acid rapeseeds used for canola oil wouldn't be suitable for the industrial version, and vice-versa. It also contains half the saturated fat of olive oil (but I'm not claiming that olive oil is unhealthy; on the contrary, I also use it a lot).

In any case, you're welcome to use any cooking oil you want, of course. I was just surprised because, living in Canada, I was entirely unaware of the fierce anti-canola-oil rhetoric down in the U.S. For us, it's just the default cooking oil; being opposed to canola oil would be like claiming that the colour beige is overstimulating, Cheez Wiz is spicy, or vanilla ice cream has too strong a flavour — we don't expect it to arouse that level of passion. 🙂

p.s. I use olive oil for anything where the flavour is appropriate, including pizza dough, but I don't always want olive undertones in my food.

@northoftheborder
It has nothing to do with conspiracy - Canola is bad for you. It is highly refined and processed oil. It was originally used only as industrial oil and than in 1970 scientists discovered that it can be "changed" and heavily processed to become "edible". There is no such thing as canola plant - Canola name is derived from "Canada" and "Oil" - Can-Ola . The oil is extracted form rapeseed and raw rapeseed is toxic and not only that - fields are sprayed with herbicides for easier collection and processing. If you go to @ turtbean new post about nutritionist consult you will find that that doctor told him not to use it. I stopped using it long time ago and was mad at cardiologist who suggested that crap of oil to my husband 20 yeas ago. I wonder to how many toxic chemicals my family was exposed to during consumption.
This is short version from AI:
Canola oil is produced through a multi-step industrial process that includes cleaning, heating and flaking, mechanical pressing, solvent extraction, and oil refining.
Bon appetit : (((