mpbser wrote: ... Therefore, lifestyle habits have the highest impact on cure. In other words, when it is estimated that 47% of colorectal cancers could be prevented by appropriate lifestyles, it stands to reason that CRC could be reversed by extremely healthy lifestyles.
Reversal of a pre-cancerous cellular condition is quite different from one or multiple cancer cell lines with multiply transformed metabolism, genetics, and biome. With cancer, basically we're sniping at different cells, colonies and locations with various tools and phenomena. Science oriented alternative medicine is typically looking for
milder molecular answers that often have health benefits to normal cells and organ function, but go far beyond "healthy lifestyles".
Some of the biomarkers in essence reflect the degree of transformation
and tumor load, and the lower likelihood of simple immune and metabolic resolution even with "curative surgery". With mCRC residuals, I don't think any forum members have gotten more than partial responses to natural and alternatives without using some chemo. Btw, "partial response" may seem to understate to us, the laymen, the heroic dimension of some great but non curative responses.
The question is, which alternatives ? Some of the most basic ones are driven by various predictive blood measurements, others by measured improvements. Standard medicine simply ignores much of its own technical literature on these without mounds of marketing and technical support but naturopaths and CAM practitioners typically underdose what actually achieved a desired effect, as published.
There's some overlap between natural cardiac formulas and cancer formulas, where often one is choosing between the higher recommendation level of either or some degree of addition, subject to any upper limits or conflicts.