Low Fat Diet Helps Prevent Breast Cancer Recurrence

[Nutri_Nut]

Just read an article in the paper about a study that shows that a low-fat diet helps prevent a recurrence of breast cancer. I am a 10-year survivor of breast cancer, so this is of great concern to me. This also poses a problem for those who want to follow the Atkins WOE.

This is not the first study to suggest a link between high-fat diets and cancer. For this reason, I will no longer be following the Atkins WOE. I believe the South Beach Diet is fairly low-carb; however, fat is also restricted. I may alter my eating habits to conform more to that WOE. But I definitely need to restrict my fat intake, which means "bye-bye" to Atkins.

Thanks for all the advice and encouragement. I wish you all good health!

[penelope]

The percentages in the study are not great enough to be conclusive. One in 10 as opposed to 1 in 8 women. Maybe some more research into the matter would give you a better perspective. These kinds of articles use numbers to try and prove a point but they can go either way. Anyhow. It is obviously your decision but I wouldn't change my lifestyle based on one article.

"Breast cancer patients who follow diets low in fat may reduce the chance that their tumors will return, scientists reported yesterday. It was, they said, the first time that a large, rigorous study showed that diet could have any impact on any cancer."

"Women in the study who were assigned to follow a low-fat diet had more than a 20 percent reduction in their rate of recurrence over five years, the investigators found. Of 975 women assigned to a low-fat diet, 96, or 9.8 percent, had recurrences. But 181 of 1,462 women, or 12.4 percent, who were assigned to maintain their usual diet had their cancer return."

[MotherOfGizmo]

There have also been studies done that link cancer cells rapid growth to sugar comsumption, so be careful w/ that "low-fat" diet, it may just be "high sugar" since most "low fat" foods add sugar to make up for the lack of taste.

here's an article that may interest you

http://www.mercola.com/2000/oct/8/sugar_cancer.htm

another

http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/nutrition/sugar.htm

[Bren]

I find this interesting. But.... I also have to say that after over 2 years on Atkins WOE, I have progressed up the OWL ladder and find I am lower fat now then I was before I started this WOE. I eat fats, but healthier fats etc. That is why I think it is SSSOOO important to do this WOE the way the Dr. suggested. Climb the rungs of the ladder as written and it is a natural progression that you will lower your fat consumption. But of course that is just my opinion!

[Isabeau]

I haven't read the article so it's probably unfair for me to comment. I'm curious though, did they differentiate between types of fats? (ie trans fats, lard, vegetable fats, etc.)

[penelope]

the article from NY Times

Study of Breast Cancer Patients Finds Benefit in Low-Fat Diets
By GINA KOLATA
and LAWRENCE K. ALTMAN
Breast cancer patients who follow diets low in fat may reduce the chance that their tumors will return, scientists reported yesterday. It was, they said, the first time that a large, rigorous study showed that diet could have any impact on any cancer.

Women in the study who were assigned to follow a low-fat diet had more than a 20 percent reduction in their rate of recurrence over five years, the investigators found. Of 975 women assigned to a low-fat diet, 96, or 9.8 percent, had recurrences. But 181 of 1,462 women, or 12.4 percent, who were assigned to maintain their usual diet had their cancer return.

The study's principal investigator, Dr. Rowan T. Chlebowski of the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute in Torrance, Calif., described the data yesterday at a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in Orlando, Fla.

In a telephone interview, Dr. Chlebowski explained that the women already had had the standard medical treatment - lumpectomy or mastectomy followed by radiation and then hormonal therapy or chemotherapy when appropriate. Although the treatments varied, the two groups were equivalent because the women were assigned at random to follow a low-fat diet. The additional benefit from diet, Dr. Chlebowski said, was equivalent to adding a new drug to their regimen.

"This is the first randomized clinical trial showing that diet may have an impact on breast cancer outcome, or any cancer outcome, for that matter," Dr. Chlebowski said.

But he and independent experts at the meeting and elsewhere said the study's findings, which were only marginally statistically significant, must be confirmed before recommending that women with breast cancer follow such a diet.

"This is potentially very good news," said Dr. David Hunter, a professor of cancer prevention at the Harvard School of Public Health. "Anything that could be done about reducing breast cancer recurrence would be enormously valuable."

Dr. Larry Norton, a breast cancer expert at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, one of the centers participating in the study, said the results made him change his advice to women.

"Before this I was saying there's no reason not to eat a low-fat diet," he said. He replaced the statement with a more affirmative one. "Now I am saying there is a reason to eat a low-fat diet."

Dr. Norton said that since he knew of no drawback to a low-fat diet, "I don't see why you have to do a corroborating study."

The findings follow a report last week that women under 50 with an early stage of breast cancer who have chemotherapy and hormone treatment can halve their risk of death from breast cancer for at least 15 years.

The low-fat diet in the latest study was not easy, said one of the participants, Mary Ann Napier of Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif. Ms. Napier, 57, was diagnosed with breast cancer five and a half years ago and joined the study about a year later, and was assigned to the low-fat diet.

She had always loved bacon, Ms. Napier said, "and I slathered my sandwiches with mayonnaise." No more. She also stopped eating the hazelnut bread that is her husband's favorite and now eats only baguettes, which are fat-free. She makes her own salad dressing - a teaspoon of oil in a cruet of dressing - and takes it along when she goes out to eat. She loves cheese, but now she shaves just a few slivers onto her sandwiches to get the flavor.

"In the beginning, there were times I felt a little resentful," Ms. Napier said. "But I got over it." And, she adds, she lost 10 pounds and her cancer has not returned.

"I am still on the diet," she said.

But Dr. Hunter and other scientists tempered their enthusiasm over the study's results with questions about the findings and what they meant.

It is not clear, they said, what made the difference. It could be the small amount of fat the women ate or it could be that they lost weight. Other studies have found that breast cancer is less likely to recur in women who lose weight after their initial treatment. Or the effect could be due to some other dietary change that occurred when the women found foods to substitute for fats.

"That's the issue with diet studies in general," said Dr. Barnett Kramer, the associate director of the office of disease prevention at the National Institutes of Health. "No matter what you think is the culprit in the diet, dietary change can be very complex."

Researchers also asked whether the effects were valid.

The problem, said Dr. Hunter and statisticians who also had no involvement with the study, was that the reduction in risk, while statistically significant, was only marginally so.

"It's suggestive but definitely not a slam dunk in terms of statistical certainty," said Dr. Steven Goodman, a professor of oncology and biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine.

Dr. Donald Berry, chairman of the department of biostatistics at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said that had the study involved a drug, he would question whether the evidence was strong enough for it to be used. But a diet, he said, is different; patients have little to lose with low-fat diets. "If I were a cancer patient, I would certainly take it seriously," Dr. Berry said.

And Dr. Hunter cautions that even if diet can lower the risk that a cancer will return, the study does not mean that a low-fat diet prevents breast cancer.

"The factors that cause recurrence and death are often very different from the factors that cause disease," he said. For example, with breast cancer, age at menarche, age at first birth, and the number of children a woman bears affect her risk of getting breast cancer but not her chance of surviving it.

The national study had a long and thorny path. There had been hints that women on low-fat diets might have better survival rates. Japanese women, for example, not only have a lower risk of getting breast cancer but also have better survival rates than Americans have. But other studies that followed women after their diagnoses found no effect of diet on cancer recurrence.

And it was not clear why fat in the diet should matter, Dr. Chlebowski said, adding that there is no theory to explain why the fat a woman eats would lead to the recurrence of cancer in her breast.

The best way to find out whether fat in the diet makes a difference would be to randomly assign thousands of cancer patients to follow, or not follow, a low-fat diet. But many investigators questioned whether it would even be possible to do such a study. Would women really adhere to their assigned diet for years on end and, in particular, would they stay with a diet so low in fat?

Starting in 1983, the cancer institute began pilot studies asking whether a diet study was even feasible. They found that women would adhere to a low-fat diet and the formal randomized study began in 1994.

It enrolled 2,437 postmenopausal women with early stage breast cancer. Of them, 975 were assigned to a diet so low in fat that, Dr. Chlebowski said, it was about as low as possible without being a vegetarian diet. They consumed on average 33.3 grams of fat a day. The 1,462 women in the control group, who were instructed to follow their usual diet, consumed 51.3 grams of fat a day.

Not only was there a reduction in recurrence rates with the low-fat diet but also, to their surprise, the investigators noticed that women whose tumors were not fueled by estrogen appeared to have a better response to the diet than those whose tumors were fueled by estrogen. But statisticians questioned whether the difference between the two groups was not significant.

Nonetheless, said Dr. Kramer, the result was "biologically important" because it indicated that diet could make a difference in cancer recurrence and that if it did, it affected both groups of women about the same. That meant its effect, if real, had nothing to do with estrogen, raising questions of why it occurred.

[MotherOfGizmo]

Well, this line in the article stood out the most to me

But he and independent experts at the meeting and elsewhere said the study's findings, which were only marginally statistically significant, must be confirmed before recommending that women with breast cancer follow such a diet

[Perry]

It is not clear, they said, what made the difference. It could be the small amount of fat the women ate or it could be that they lost weight. Other studies have found that breast cancer is less likely to recur in women who lose weight after their initial treatment. Or the effect could be due to some other dietary change that occurred when the women found foods to substitute for fats.

[MotherOfGizmo]

It is not clear, they said, what made the difference. It could be the small amount of fat the women ate or it could be that they lost weight. Other studies have found that breast cancer is less likely to recur in women who lose weight after their initial treatment. Or the effect could be due to some other dietary change that occurred when the women found foods to substitute for fats.

Yep Perry! You will see alot of information out there that indicates obesity contributes to cancer as well. So it would make alot of sense that by eating low fat they lost weight and that was why their recurrance rate was lower as well.

[Nutri_Nut]

You all make very good points. My ideal way of eating would be to include lean meats, veggies, some fruits (I only like strawberries!), and whole grains. I'm trying to find something that I can LIVE with forever, that is healthy and REALISTIC. When I can figure that out, I will have it made!! :nod

[MotherOfGizmo]

You all make very good points. My ideal way of eating would be to include lean meats, veggies, some fruits (I only like strawberries!), and whole grains. I'm trying to find something that I can LIVE with forever, that is healthy and REALISTIC. When I can figure that out, I will have it made!! :nod

Then you have already found it! Follow the steps of Atkins and when you get to the top of the ladder you will be following exactly what you said your ideal way of eating is!

Have you read thru the whole book yet? If not you should do so, you will see that that is where this leads to!

[ttdriver]

You all make very good points. My ideal way of eating would be to include lean meats, veggies, some fruits (I only like strawberries!), and whole grains. I'm trying to find something that I can LIVE with forever, that is healthy and REALISTIC. When I can figure that out, I will have it made!! :nod

Then you have already found it! Follow the steps of Atkins and when you get to the top of the ladder you will be following exactly what you said your ideal way of eating is!

Have you read thru the whole book yet? If not you should do so, you will see that that is where this leads to!

Absolutely true! You can do lean meats, veggies, berries and whole grains on Atkins which is what you should be doing anyway!!

SUGAR FEEDS CANCER. Its absolutely been proven. To advocate a low-fat diet (including low-fat processed foods packed with sugar and starch is asking for trouble.

Keep it pure with whole foods and you'll be fine.

Betty

[fawn]

Betty is absolutely right. By not eating refined sugars and flours, they have found that a tumor will literally starve without it.

The natural progression of this woe does cut down on fats I believe after the first 6 months. This is how I have progressed and have watched others as well.

Do some research because unfortunately, people group ALL fats together. And all fats are NOT created equal.
JMHO

[Nutri_Nut]

Yes, I have read the book AND I stayed on the Atkins WOE for over a year, although I stopped losing weight after five months. I tried to start and stay on Atkins three times in the past four months, but this WOE is unrealistic, restrictive, and boring to me. We enjoy Mexican food, and I got tired of eating taco salads with no lettuce every time we went out to a Mexican restaurant. Well, I did not intend to get on a soap box. The bottom line is that strictly following this WOE is not for me.

[cleochatra]

Well, best of luck to you, nutri nut!

I'm sorry you never took the time to read the book, or you'd know lettuce is definitely acceptable on this way of eating. In fact, it's encouraged, in the form of 2-3 cups per day (acceptable induction veg. fare).

No wonder you were bored!

Take care.