There is no diet that will even intervene with cancer, unless the patient dies.

Cancer is the patient's own cell that has mutated to a point beyond apoptosis and adapted to be able to draw nutrients from cells around it. It started from just one cell. It has already evaded dietary fluctuations and adapted.

EDIT: the reason I'm a spaz about this is I feel too many people focus on diet as the focus of cancer. While it might be good for some prevention, it will not stop it, and I want people to focus on real treatments.

I'm with you on this: Anyone that rejects clinically studied treatments in favor of "alternative" treatments is an idiot.

That said, the keto diet is being studied clinically and preliminary research does seem to indicate that it has an effect. So it may be an "in addition to" treatment. That said, the news isn't entirely good:

https://www.cancer.columbia.edu/news/study-finds-keto-diet-c...

The bottom line is ask your oncologist. They're probably paying attention to these keto studies and they know more about your cancer than HN does.

Are you sure about this? There is data to back it up in The China Study https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study and mentioned in the Forks over Knives documentary. That's more about prevention, but it has a measurable impact on cancer rates, I don't see how that could be classified as no impact.

I don't understand unreasonable positions like this.

Nobody is saying that people should stop "real" treatments or that diet must be the primary or sole focus for treatment. But given that a change of diet (a) costs nothing, (b) has no downsides, (c) potentially may work it seems strange not to do it.