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.
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.