> Currently, the most plausible theory emerging from her team’s research points to metabolism: Healthy and cancerous cells may process reactive oxygen species—unstable oxygen-containing molecules generated during radiation—in very different ways.

Reminds me of this which I (think) was linked here a while ago: https://www.nature.com/articles/s12276-020-0384-2

It really does feel like all these piecemeal cancer treatments are converging on something resembling a cure.

▲

hinkley 5 hours ago | parent [-]

There was also a study that showed that chemotherapy efficacy was enhanced by fasting before treatment.

It seems that when calories are scarce, healthy cells turtle up while cancer cells keep consuming, so fasting reduces absorption rates in healthy tissues and thus collateral damage.

▲

sl_convertible 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Healthy cells CAN turtle-up, whereas cancer cells engage in unregulated reproduction. Also, some cancer cells can only consume glucose. Which, in a fasted state, would mean that the majority of energy would be in ketones(if the individual were metabolically healthy), starving the cancer cells to death.

▲

arijun 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Why wouldn’t a strict keto diet not be a cure for those cancers?

	▲	nick__m 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Because the cancers cells adapt! (fast reproduction and high mutation rate of the cancerous cells make that process quicker than antibiotics resistance)

▲

cyberax 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There was a study that chemotherapy works best in the _morning_. Derek Lowe had an article about this: