Fructose Increases Cancer Cell Proliferation

  • Context: Medical 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Xnn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cancer Cell
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the potential link between fructose consumption and cancer cell proliferation, particularly in the context of dietary habits and health implications. Participants explore various aspects of carbohydrate metabolism, the effects of fructose compared to glucose, and the broader implications for public health and dietary recommendations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that increased refined carbohydrate consumption, particularly fructose, adversely affects cancer survival and suggests that fructose may induce pancreatic cancer cell proliferation through distinct metabolic pathways.
  • Another participant notes that there are types of brain cancer that may respond favorably to ketogenic diets, indicating variability in cancer responses to dietary changes.
  • A different participant challenges the notion that fructose is uniquely harmful, stating that glucose can also be metabolized in ways that support cancer growth and emphasizing the complexity of biological systems beyond in vitro studies.
  • Some participants express concern about the implications of fructose consumption, particularly from soft drinks, while others argue that the health benefits of whole fruits may outweigh the negatives associated with fructose.
  • One participant highlights the trend of extrapolating in vitro findings to in vivo situations as problematic, suggesting it leads to poor scientific assumptions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the health implications of fructose, with some asserting its dangers while others defend the consumption of fruit and question the validity of extrapolating lab results to real-world scenarios. No consensus is reached on the overall impact of fructose on health.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects a variety of perspectives on the metabolism of fructose and glucose, the complexity of cancer biology, and the implications of dietary choices. Limitations include the reliance on specific studies and the challenge of applying in vitro findings to living organisms.

Xnn
Messages
554
Reaction score
0
One more reason to avoid/minimize consumption of soft drinks and the like:

Carbohydrate metabolism via glycolysis and the tricarboxylic acid cycle is pivotal for cancer growth, and increased refined carbohydrate consumption adversely affects cancer survival. Traditionally, glucose and fructose have been considered as interchangeable monosaccharide substrates that are similarly metabolized, and little attention has been given to sugars other than glucose. However, fructose intake has increased dramatically in recent decades and cellular uptake of glucose and fructose uses distinct transporters. Here, we report that fructose provides an alternative substrate to induce pancreatic cancer cell proliferation. Importantly, fructose and glucose metabolism are quite different; in comparison with glucose, fructose induces thiamine-dependent transketolase flux and is preferentially metabolized via the nonoxidative pentose phosphate pathway to synthesize nucleic acids and increase uric acid production. These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation. They have major significance for cancer patients given dietary refined fructose consumption, and indicate that efforts to reduce refined fructose intake or inhibit fructose-mediated actions may disrupt cancer growth. Cancer Res; 70(15); 6368–76. ©2010 AACR.

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/70/15/6368.abstract

Notice that the above study examined only pancreatic cancer cells. However, the mechanism could easily apply to numerous other types of cancers. Hopefully, more studies will follow and a clearer picture will emerge which could be used to quantify the health risks.

Too bad the government doesn't see fit to issue relevant public health warnings to counter all of the pro-fructose commercials being aired.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
there is at least one type of brain cancer that responds favorably to ketogenic diets. unfortunately, there's a lot of types of cancer, even in the same tissue.
 
Xnn said:
One more reason to avoid/minimize consumption of soft drinks and the like:



http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/70/15/6368.abstract

Notice that the above study examined only pancreatic cancer cells. However, the mechanism could easily apply to numerous other types of cancers. Hopefully, more studies will follow and a clearer picture will emerge which could be used to quantify the health risks.

Too bad the government doesn't see fit to issue relevant public health warnings to counter all of the pro-fructose commercials being aired.


The abstract neglects to mention that glucose can just as easily be sent through the oxidative steps of the HMP (pentose phosphate) then through the non-oxidative steps to make purines for DNA synthesis.

I see their argument in principle (quickly dividing cells such as cancer need lots of purines etc), but it doesn't take into the complexity of a living individual, only a sheet of cells. Your sperm love fructose and cannot function without it--Hows that for anecdotal evidence for fructose consumption?


There seems to be rather scary trend as of late to really be pushing extrapolating in vitro studies to in situ/in vivo situations. Which not only makes for bad assumptions, but bad science in general. I have no idea what this trend seems to be increasing, but it something I have noted over the last 2 decades--Methinks we are finally feeling the effects of scientific illiteracy permeate academia from the greater society.
 
Only another reason to not eat fruit!
 
Blenton said:
Only another reason to not eat fruit!

No; this maybe what the other poster was trying to get at about bad science.
For a variety of reasons, we know that fructose is not the healthiest sugar.
Its link to obesity is the primary problem, but there may be others as well such as cancer.

While it is common in many natural foods such as fruit, it's also an very cheap
product that is becoming an increasingly large portion of societies daily caloric intake.
While the positive benefits of fruit appear to outweigh all the negatives, there is
no reason to believe that this is true of soda pop and gummy bears.

Studies have found positive health benefits from consumption of fruit, despite their level of fructose.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K