For one thing, I suggested it only as a last recourse, which I made pretty clear, and do not wish bivic to need it at all.
Secondly, cancer induces cachexia on its own and does not need fasting to take its toll. Of course a cancer patient should be cautious of such things.
Reply to ‘Fasting in oncology: a word of caution’
"Considering all clinical trials on fasting or FMDs in patients with cancer so far, at least 200 patients have undergone multiple cycles of fasting or FMDs in combination with cancer treatment and there is no evidence of severe adverse events in terms of malnutrition or of weight loss. Still, should the FMD be found to promote sarcopenia or excessive weight loss in certain patients, these effects will have to be weighed against the extent to which the FMD influences cancer progression and/or adverse events of the standard therapy."
PS: I think the hypothesis in this paper is not complete (read the other thread) but interesting nonetheless: Cell hydration as the primary factor in carcinogenesis: A unifying concept. - PubMed - NCBI
"From a clinical perspective, the abnormally high water content of cancer cells permits the use of microwave technology for tumor detection and treatment. Also of considerable therapeutic significance is the increased sensitivity if cancer cells to desiccation, postulated to result from genetic changes induced by increased hydration. This may well be the achilles heel of cancer, and recent investigations indicate that it may be exploited very effectively in the treatment of the disease."
It's the same logic as to why Ray has suggested Urea in the past.