So as the basic information in the classroom is halfway done, on what other compound shall I focus to go into deep research on? Asked differently: Which compound do you think will bring the most "bang for your buck" when curing cancer? If available, post some research on the substrate, humans studies in vivo would of course would be best, although they won't be without soc / will not have been made with the patients in ketosis, I guess. So, what is your favorite? :-p

I am a little bit curious: We Germans have the impression that only very few US Americans have health insurance, and one of my friends sais, because of that, they can simply choose metabolic therapy or classoc standarc of care: The costs are more or less the same. But I doubt that I think that plenty of US guys have a health insurance. So my question simply is: Hoe many of you guys do have a health insurance? And does/ would it cover your SOC expenses?

Getting insane with this exercise-glutamine stuff, studies contradict each other. But exercise does something, can't yet formulate a proper hypothesis. At least do 1 hour of brisk walking a day, accompanied by 30 minutes of basic full body weight training 3 times a week, if possible. It seems the trained muscles wanna keep their glutamine, thus leaving less for the tumor, also probably because of increased insulin sensitivity. (Let's call it the "Battle for glutamine"- hypothesis: The trained muscles win. It also seems that low twitch endurance fibers are more important) Either way, here is a general interesting part of this glutamine overview paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6266414/ TLDR: Lung cancer, in vivo, more glucose dependent. Gliomas: Glucose Prostate: More glutamine dependent. "Glutamine metabolism and supplementation in cancer has also raised many concerns among the scientific community, and deserve some comments. It is well established that cancer cells are extremely dependent of glutamine metabolism and availability, however, the role played by glutamine in cancer/tumours cells in vivo is still controversial, and thus the effects of the supplementation. Cancer cells take advantage of aerobic glycolysis (also known as the Warburg effect), and therefore glucose to maintain the supraphysiological survival and growth [185,186]. On the other hand, there is an increasing evidence of the role of oncogenes and tumour suppressors in the regulation of nutrient metabolism [187]. Aberrant mutations in these genes lead to altered nutrient metabolism, and can significantly contribute to the development and/or progression of cancer cells [186]. For instance, glucose, glutamine, lipids, and acetate can be utilized as carbon and energy sources [25].

https://youtu.be/TUEwRZORU4Y?si=GR8wD23bEJoe5BFd

Welcome to the group, Zainab Alalawi ! I hope you will find support and knowledge within this community!🥳👍