working at present on a comprehensive review of dietary approaches to the management of cancer. i've been getting up to speed on the swirl of criticisms coming forward against the ketogenic diet, which is fairly easy to dismantle as most people are at a loss as to how to really implement it correctly for best results.
notwithstanding, having listened to the objections of Dr. Nicholas Gonzales, a world-famous physician working out of NYC who uses completely individualized dietary protocols to heal cancer according to the compelling evidence gathered by a rogue dentist, Dr. Kelley (deceased), who in turn based his work on that of a turn-of-the-century Scottish doctor who had great results treating cancer with megadoses of pancreatic enzymes, i acknowledge that there have been many cases of individuals who have been able to use things like daily and large quantities of carrot juice, rich in natural sugars, and diets that included substantial amounts of complex carbohydrates, still bringing their cancers into remission and going on to thrive for many decades in health. this of course flies in the face of the suggested perilous role played by glucose in cancer proliferation.
personally, i'm not convinced these exceptions disprove the ketogenic rule, as Dr. Gonzales has offered, nor do they dismiss any question of evident negative influence from high blood sugar values in cancer cases. what's becoming more apparent to me is that rules are really the exception. yes, its essential to maintain an open, investigatory mind at the ready to incorporate new information as it presents, but within a global, not local, arena. its one of the many flaws of current scientific practice that it compartmentalizes what is actually connected, and dissects what is indivisible.
someone who has systemic candidiasis, or diabetes, for example, could not possibly thrive on a diet rich in natural sugars or carbs, but what's more, isolating dietary success rates on their own and out of context fails to take into account a host of other factors that contribute to healing and recovery which have very little to do with what you put into your mouth. toxic attitudes, reluctance to take personal inventory or make necessary changes in one's life that go beyond diet are actually far more critical to the metamorphosis of active healing and this is something that has been anecdotally demonstrated time and again. as carolyn myss, the medical intuitive, has repeatedly pointed out, if one's approach to personal transformation is hindered by fixed and unresponsive attitudes borne of past experiences as opposed to current circumstances, no amount of dietary intercession is likely to help. yet when a patient puts forward the courage necessary to make changes and to listen to the embodied voice of disease as it efforts to bring us into balance and unity with spirit, we can, as she put it, eat cat food. healing will come, or not, as an extension of attitudes and beliefs.
over the next few days i'll be completing a set of general guidelines based on common sense, individualization, and the great strides in our understanding of the metabolic basis of cancer. no one can be relieved of the obligation to use and consult every day with one's bodily intuitions as to right path, right approach. there is no one size fits all diet for cancer, but much of our collective experiences over the last century in particular can be synthesized into a foundation of understanding that can be of benefit to many who wish to take active responsibility and a participatory role in their own disease management and recovery.