Do Not Lightly Believe or Accept Extreme Anti-Cancer Views

Two days ago a triple-negative breast cancer patient came for a follow-up. In conversation she mentioned that over the past half year she had been using high-dose vitamin C to boost her immunity and fight cancer. During the talk I gave only a small reminder: to be careful of kidney stones when taking high-dose vitamin C.

The patient was taken aback, because she had recently developed kidney problems from kidney stones for no apparent reason; she had not known the cause before, and our conversation revealed it. She had originally been excited to discuss vitamin C anticancer therapy with me, but wilted upon hearing this.

Using high-dose vitamin C to fight cancer was a view vigorously promoted during his lifetime by the late Nobel laureate Dr. Linus Pauling. Dr. Pauling himself was not a medical doctor but a chemist. After he himself developed cancer he believed in vitamin C therapy, and so strongly urged other cancer patients to use it. To date there is no strong evidence that vitamin C can fight cancer. Yet among cancer patients, thanks to Dr. Pauling's endorsement, the vitamin-C anticancer view has become very popular.

From my own direct observation, many cancer patients who take high-dose vitamin C get little help in stopping their cancer from progressing, but quite a few develop kidney stones or even more serious kidney damage from overdosing on it.

In earlier years people embraced the idea that alkaline foods fight cancer; some merchants even seized the trend to launch various alkaline drinks and alkaline foods. The alkaline food said to be most anticancer was water caltrop (ling jiao), and sellers on Taobao sprang up advertising their products on this basis.

Later, Robert O. Young, the originator of the alkaline-food anticancer idea, was convicted of fraud by a San Diego, California court, which ordered him to pay a cancer patient 105 million US dollars in compensation. Only then did everyone discover that his claimed degrees and medical background were entirely fabricated; exploiting cancer patients' desperation and herd mentality, he had manufactured the 'alkaline body' anticancer myth and made a fortune. Yet even today, many newly diagnosed cancer patients who do not know better are still misled by the fallacy that alkaline bodies and alkaline foods fight cancer.

I have also seen many cancer patients fads such as 'sweet potato fights cancer' and 'garlic soaked in vinegar fights cancer,' and some exaggerate the anticancer effective rate of herbs like Oldenlandia (Baihua Shebancao) and dandelion (Pugongying) to over 90%.

Generally, rational people find it hard to believe that anyone could be duped by such extreme views, but anyone who has looked deeply into the cancer-patient community finds that many patients and families are indeed misled by such ideas.

If these things were merely ineffective, that would be one thing; the key is that many are not only ineffective but harmful.

Long-term consumption of water caltrop has brought digestive problems to some patients; long-term vitamin C use causes kidney stones; overeating green vegetables induces thrombosis; patients drinking raw potato juice for cancer suffer food poisoning; and cases of liver failure from folk remedies like Baihua Shebancao and Banzhilian are common enough to demand attention.

Patients often ask me whether all sorts of these 'anticancer legends' are reliable; my answer is that none of them are. I hope everyone will treat such extreme views rationally and not lightly use our own bodies as test subjects for them.

A phrase I often tell my patients is to follow the 'three fives' principle in eating: 'a wide variety of foods, many colors, and more than five kinds.'

'A wide variety' means the diet should be broad, not limited to one food; relying on diet therapy to fight cancer is unrealistic, the body needs diverse vitamins and trace elements, and we must ensure dietary variety. All foods, meat and vegetable, should be eaten together. The American Institute for Cancer Research recommends a meat-to-plant ratio of 1:4, holding that over 80% of daily food should come from plants. Data from Russian health authorities show that eating more than 100 g of meat a day raises cancer risk by 17%. So although one should mix meat and vegetables, the proportion of meat should not be large.

'Many colors' means eating foods of all colors. Some vegetarians eat only leafy greens, which is problematic; such patients are prone to stroke. Leafy greens are high in vitamin K, and eating too many makes the blood prone to clotting and thrombosis. When eating vegetables and fruit, be sure to include vegetables of various colors.

'More than five kinds' means eating no fewer than five kinds of vegetables and fruit each day, to avoid the harm of a picky diet. Some patients who believe sweet potato or raw potato juice fights cancer eat it almost daily as their staple food. Leaving aside that sweet potato easily causes obesity, this bad dietary habit alone brings many problems.

Over long evolution, humans have discovered a great variety of foods, and the nutrients in each are what our bodies need. Blindly believing that some element or food fights cancer only brings other problems to the body.

Anthropologists found that the !Kung people of Africa, still in the hunter-gatherer era, gathered and hunted as many as 500-plus kinds of food from nature, yet their bodies have fewer problems than modern people. Our modern diet has already become quite narrow; if, because of some extreme view, we further narrow it, our bodies will truly be lacking this and that.

Also, do not believe in the existence of that bizarre creature called a 'miracle doctor.' Doctors are ordinary people; results depend only on the doctor's talent and personal effort. There are no godlike 'miracle doctors'; only overweening megalomaniacs, or deliberate or accidental frauds, like being crowned with the title 'miracle doctor.'

Any doctor who tries to deify himself—deep down I doubt his intentions, and I intensely dislike being deified myself. Many extreme views come from exactly these 'divine men' who need no data as evidence and dare to make assertions on a whim.