Glycine is a precursor to Glutathione which is the master antioxidant that cancer uses to protect itself from high ROS. Cancer hijacks normal cells and uses the Redox system to its advantage. All cancers have a phenotype that determines how it feeds itself. Some are Glucose feeders, some are Fatty Acid feeders, some are Glutamine feeders. Many are all three. If you block one source it will redirect and use another source. Diet alone will not cure cancer. That's why repurposing drugs are now being used to fight cancer. Jane McLelland recently wrote a book "How to Starve Cancer" and put together a "Metro Map" identifying all of the cancer feed lines and the drugs and supplements that block those lines.
View attachment 13390
The Care Oncology Clinic has identified a cocktail of 4 repurposed drugs that are used to weaken cancer and block their fuel lines. They are Metformin, Atorvastatin, Doxycycline, and Medbendazole. Jane has identified other drugs and supplements to further block these lines. Some cancers follow the Warburg effect. Others follow the reverse Warburg effect. The metabolic approach is to starve the cancer of nutrients and then go for the kill via high ROS.
So far I have not seen any evidence that cancer can evade blocking FAO. All cancers overexpress FAS and beta-oxidation. A potent fatty acid oxidation inhibitor, either alone or combined with something like MB to take care of blocked cytochrome C oxidase by NO, is unlikely to fail. I once emailed Peat asking about this and his response was something along the lines of if the FAO is potent enough this combination will likely cure most cancers, or at the very least shrink them to the point where they do not pose a problem. The approach with creating ROS is OK but that is what chemotherapy does (in a very toxic way) and ultimately still amounts to trying to kill the "bad cells". There are no bad cells, just cells in an extremely metabolically stressed condition. As long as the approach is still some form of "kill, poison, burn" cancer will not be cured.
The problem is also that the ROS approach only takes care of existing semi-differentiated cancer cells but does not do anything for cancer stem cells. That's why the cancer almost always comes back after chemo/radiation/surgery. The metabolic approach stops the very process of "cancerization", which ultimately stems from environmental signals of stress manifesting metabolically. Oxidation of fat is one of the most potent such manifestations, high cortisol/serotonin are next. Hence the recent studies of treating cancer with cyproheptadine. Just search PubMed for it.
So, progress is being made, but the majority of doctors still view cancer as an alien life form that needs to be killed and that is what hinders progress the most. And since all of them are trying to make a ton of money in the process they break down the approach into a thousand of reductionist ideas such as restricting a single amino acid since patentable drugs can be developed to target that pathway. Nobody is (currently) interested in drugs that work at the very top of the cascade. My guess is that we will see another 20-30 years of reductionist, isolated "restriction" approach before the true metabolic cause is acknowledged and addressed. It is a BIG social problem as well. It would be hard to sell the idea in politics that our current lifestyle and environment kills. It would mean a ton of lawsuits and companies going under. Possibly even mass social unrest if enough people realize what they have been systemically subjected to for decades.
Last edited: