I can assure you that my wife and I received orders of magnitude more nonsense from friends, family, colleagues and random assholes in the mall that saw her headscarf. The amount of unsolicited packages and potions we received at our doorstep from anonymous people over the course of her treatment puts anything that I brought to her doctor to shame.
>I'm sure in the modern era, when they are just trying what they know is the best researched, best chance they know for a successful path for you or your loved ones, they are beyond sick of hearing your alternative theses assembled from mommy blogs and witch doctors.
I get it. I really do as I personally was asked repeatedly to 'just try this' random bullshit for my wife all the time. There's a huge gap between sprinkling lion's mane mushroom on your eggs and seeking treatment for my wife's hyperglycemia that put her solidly in the diabetic category. Endocrinology wouldn't treat it because she didn't show elevated A1C, but I had nobody in my wife's corner to explain why A1C isn't a good signal when you're severely anemic and getting transfusions every other week. Google 'hyperglycemia cancer progression' with a 'site:gov' to keep it from NIH and other government agencies. There's a GIANT FUCKING SIGNAL that elevated blood glucose increases cancer progression, but I couldn't find a single doctor to even listen. To them it's all equivalent bullshit.
Maybe it's not fear then. Maybe it's apathy. I'm not sure that's better.
Today everyone, even doctors, knows that high blood sugar levels increase the odds of cancer AND diabetes. That's why everyone and his dog is taking metformin and why that drug is almost always the first ingredient included in "life extension" cocktail drug tests.
But: High glucose levels do not cause diabetes. Diabetes causes high glucose levels. Once they go up you need treatment as you either have no insulin or are producing not enough and need to mediate that. Both are diabetes.
Ding ding ding. My wife's blood glucose levels went from normal 90's range to averaging around 120 over the summer to averaging close to 200 last December. Her liver had a heavy disease burden, and my understanding based on my own research (because none of her doctors would address it) is that this can affect insulin sensitivity, which in turn can cause elevated blood sugar. This does not seem to be a dominant effect, however, and can go the other way as well.
When it does create hyperglycemia though, it also creates an unfortunate feedback loop in that the elevated blood sugar levels can increase the cancer progression, compounding the effect.
But guess what, nobody will bite. I had to go to some weird third party service to get a prescription and spend weeks going back and forth with oncology and endocrinology to get anyone to comment on it. Oncology said NFW with zero rationale and endo said a small starter dose with regular monitoring for lactic acidosis due to compromised liver function.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07857-9
Reducing blood glucose and A1c levels may be a good idea for other reasons, but it won't cure cancer.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07857-9#Sec9
There is good work in there for sure, but they studied HFSC's which are a completely distinct from ovarian cancer or the lung cancer study mentioned in the article. They mention a few caveats right in the discussion. To somehow act like this single investigation debunks any and all relationship between blood glucose and tumorigenesis and progression is reckless.
Obviously it's not going to cure cancer. Nothing available today cures ovarian cancer once you are in a recurrent setting, all you can hope for is to stay ahead of it while medicine progresses. This weird boner for monotherapies in cancer treatment seems to distract everyone from developing a broader spectrum approach that attacks the disease on as many fronts as possible.
In other words, I suspect the emotions you're detecting are probably exhaustion and annoyance, and any genuine fear is most likely going to be that they fear for your outcome should you deviate from what they believe to be the best course of action.