1. Community
  2. Men's health
  3. Prostate Problems

What should men eat ??? Prostate cancer

Posted , 4 users are following.

hank1953
hank1953

For years my wife and I avoided eggs due to their bad rep of raising cholesterol. We were so happy when eggs were exonerated last year of the bad rep so we embarked on 'an egg a day program'. We love eggs because they taste good, easy to prepare, and are full of nutrients. We were even happier when our blood test results this year showed that our bad LDL cholesterol and triglycerides went down and our good HDL cholesterol went up significantly. What a vindication. Then darn it, I ran across an article associating egg consumption with prostate cancer.

As I continued my search of wisdom, articles after articles mentioning that not just eggs, chicken (our daily consumption), turkey, red meat (of course, no surprise here), and even fish (OMG), and what else ... increase risk of prostate cancer.

Click here to view image

Also, should we believe the accuracies of those studies ? Anyone with a personal story that would confirm or disavow them ? Would this thread change what you eat ?

Hank

0 likes, 48 replies

48 Replies

Prev
  • jimjames
    jimjames hank1953

    Posted

    Dairy has been mentioned several times, and in fact "The China Study" outlines basically a vegan, non dairy diet. This diet here has been adopted by Dr. Dr esselstyn, for his heart disease reversal diet which is Vegan.

    But is it the dairy or is the culprit the fat in dairy? Nathan Pritkin, a real pioneer in diet, allows a couple of servings of non fat dairy a day. So does the Dash diet. 

    I've studied and been on many different types of diet, mostly for reasons of preventing coronary disease. Currently on a diet somewhere between Prikiin and Dash.

    I will say this, if there's one field where more contradictory information exists, I never encountered it. 

    Jim

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Thanks Jim for the input. I agree that there are contradictions. But both Pritkin and DASH diets are well known and proven to help losing weight and heart disease, if one can follow it. Hank

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      FWIW, looking back into my PSA readings of year past, I noticed that there was a big jump betweeen 2009 and 2010 (from 1.5 to 3.0 - after that, it stayed about the same around 3.0). So I looked at my food diary and found that in 2009, thanks to free buffet offers from a local casino, I consume almost daily large amount of cheese danishes and yogurt parfaits. These foods contain milk, fat, sugar, and bread. I think they contribute to my jump is PSAs, which probably also means prostate enlargement, or even worse, prostate cancer. Hank
    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      My numbers (cholesterol and bp) were the best on the original Pritikin diet from the late 70's. It has been modified quite a bit since then to I suppose make it more palatable. Also did OK on the Zone diet and even better on "Phase 1" of the South Beach Diet. All these diets contradict each other somewhat signficantly. But probably not fair to compare how my body reacted thirty years ago to a diet to how it does today. Wel'll see how my new revised plan goes. The good thing about my new diet -- unlimited complex carbs -- is that I can make my own chips, but hold the salt!!!

      Speaking of diets, another interesting Robert Haas's "Eat to Win" also I think from the 70's. If I can't find the book, I'll try and find a used copy online. 

      Jim

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Milk, fat, sugar and bread (white bread?) are generally not a great eating pyramid plan. Hard to say how it effects your prostate but can't help. Did I mention the book "The China Study". Dr. Essensytn based his vegan heart disease regression diet partly on that book. I tried the diet but gave up when my numbers (chol and bp) didn't fall as far as I thought they should. But again, maybe at my age, my body will not react as well as it did 30 years ago. But it does seem to be reacting well in terms of a bp drop but I'm more sensitive to sodium than most.

      Jim

  • paul96555
    paul96555 hank1953

    Posted

    Well, I have read a good deal about this.  There was a very good article in THE TIMES, a british newspaper, 19th april 2016; in an earlier post I posted a summary of it.  Yes, avoid chicken and dairy (a bit) and red meat and eggs (a lot).  But I do not understand your reference to fish, as I never saw any claim that fish exacerbated the growth rate of P Ca.  You did not mention orange or red peppers (very good), almonds and almond milk (good) or any nuts (good) or cruciferous veg (good).  I now use raw peppers as a snack like crisps.  Avoid sugar and minimise starches.  There is much controversy over coconut oil lately, as it causes a spike in bad cholesterol and is worse for heart attacks than the worst animal fat; people used to imagine it to be good as a general cancer suppressant, but that now seems disproven (apparently it was never proven in any study).  I am avoiding coconut oil but it is neither here nor there as far as P Ca is concerned. 
    • hank1953
      hank1953 paul96555

      Posted

      Thanks Paul for listing those good foods. I overlooked them due to my main concern at the time was what is bad. Re fish as bad for PCs, I did find them in some articles by googling, but not as often as others. Hank

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Let me plug the good starches like peas, corn, beans, whole grains and baked potato. Well, baked potato maybe not as good as chips, but that's the closest I've come lately!

      Jim

    • hank1953
      hank1953 paul96555

      Posted

      This is the title of one article. I can not give you the link cause the post will be blocked. Hank

      "High intake of omega-3 fats linked to increased prostate cancer risk"

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      "High intake of omega-3 fats linked to increased prostate cancer risk"

      -------------------------

      Whoops. Just ordered a dozen cans of sardines from Amazon! 

      Jim

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      How do canned sardines fit into your low sodium diet ? Hank
    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Sardines packed in water, no salt added. 82mg sodium per serving. "Season" brand.

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      How many chips in that 180 mg of sodium serving? And that's a lot of fat!

      BTW now on a low sodium, very low fat (fat calories less than 10% of total calories), low protein diet, and have slept through the night all week!  And do I miss the chips? Yes!

      Well, off to eat my second baked potato today (0 mg sodium, 0 mg fat).

      Jim

    • jimjames
      jimjames

      Posted

      Actually cheating a little. Using something called "Butter Buds". Has no fat but does have a little sodium.

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Very good. Those sardines are really low sodium. When I think canned fish, I think much higher sodium. Hank

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Was it the low salt that made you choose sardines over tuna ? Hank
    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Prefer fresh fish, preferably "wild", but I eat tuna, salmon, and sardines from the can. They all are available packed in water without any added sodium, and are "wild" as opposed to farm raised. 

      Jim

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Aha, so most canned fish are wild caught ? Thanks. Hank
    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Not all. Like Atlantic Salmon may not be. Sockeye would be wild. The "Seasons Brand" sardines are labled "Wild". Got to check label. 

      Jim

    • jimjames
      jimjames

      Posted

      Also a good value. For example, canned wild Sockeye Salmon sells from half to a third of fresh wild salmon that has not been previously frozen.

       

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Hin Jim,

      Click here to view image

      Question: What Pritikin program are you following ? The 1970s version or the new, improved current version which is more relaxed ? With few minor deviations, I think my diet is also Pritikin and I think it did bring my BP down subsantially. Hank

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Click here to view image

      Excellent question regarding Pritikin. The 1970 version is much stricter than the newer version, probbly to make it more paltable and competitive with other diet programs. The 1970's version eliminated all added oil and nuts, etc.  Also, much more strict with protein, so no egg whites and even  a limitation on beans which are freely offered on the new Pritkin program. 

      And I don't believe the old Pritkin diet was favorable on salmon and sardines -- too much fat. 

      Right now, I'm probably somewhere inbetween the old and the new. My bp has already decreased substantially, but I haven't yet done any lipid tests. And that is the bottom line for me, to drive down ldl cholesterol. I got it down to 130-140 (total cholesterol)  thirty years ago on the old Pritikin diet alone (not statins) but not sure my older body will react as well this time, plus I'm not quite as strict.  We will see.

      Jim

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      Pritikin talked about that in the 1970's. He was such a visionary. His point was that if total cholesterol (TC) was below (I think 150 or 130) then the HDL component was irrelevant. In other words, the whole modern HDL/LDL thing is only relevant with higher TC numbers. To back it up, he had historical data from I believe New Guinea Natives who had very low TC, very low HDL, yet almost no coronary disease. I remember going to the medical library (remember before Google?) to read some of the full-text studies and it was all there. 

      Click here to view image

      Jim

    • hank1953
      hank1953 jimjames

      Posted

      Did you find Fitbit useful, or just one of those keep-up-with-the-Joneses gadget ? Hank

    • jimjames
      jimjames hank1953

      Posted

      I got it to help kick start my back to the gym program. Almost returned it after the first day but it's growing on me. I been using heart rate monitors for working out since probably the late 70's. This one has certain limitations over the dedicated monitors, but I like the fact you don't have to wear a chest strap, plus everything gets simultaneouly logged onto both your iphone and your account on the Fitbit website. The sleep function is sort of interesting and logs light, deep and REM sleep. Found out I'm not sleeping as much as I thought. You can also log your weight, food and fluid intake and a bunch of other stuff I probably will never do. Yesterday, I walked 7,093 steps, more than Monday but down from 11,381 on Saturday. 

      Jim

Back to top
Prev

Report or request deletion

Thanks for your help!

We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.