What you’re getting yourself into
Laying out the fascinating science of how a ketogenic diet can be weaponised to treat cancer.
Picture this: cancer cells are essentially metabolic incompetents, stumbling through life like a pensioner who’s forgotten their glasses at the petrol station while trying to navigate a modern self-checkout.
While your body’s normal cells can switch between fuels with the ease of a Formula 1 pit crew, cancer cells have devolved into glucose-guzzling machines with mitochondria about as functional as a chocolate teapot.
This metabolic inflexibility might just be their Achilles’ heel, and the weapon of choice? A diet that flips the entire fuel supply on its head.
The History: From Warburg to Your Local Oncologist (Eventually)
The story begins in 1923 when German biochemist Otto Warburg noticed something peculiar about tumor tissues. They consumed obscene amounts of glucose and produced lactate even when oxygen was abundant, like a teenager ransacking the fridge despite having just eaten dinner. This “aerobic glycolysis” earned Warburg the 1931 Nobel Prize and planted a seed that wouldn’t properly sprout for another eight decades.
His theory that respiratory injury to mitochondria caused cancer became deeply unfashionable as genetic mutations claimed the spotlight. Meanwhile, the ketogenic diet emerged from a completely different direction. In 1921, Dr. Russell Wilder at the Mayo Clinic developed a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet that mimicked fasting for treating epilepsy. It worked brilliantly for seizures, but the advent of pharmaceutical anticonvulsants in the 1950s relegated dietary therapy to medicine’s dusty archives.
The modern renaissance arrived when Linda C. Nebeling published case reports in 1995 showing two pediatric brain cancer patients on ketogenic diets experienced a 21.8% decrease in tumor glucose uptake on PET scans after just eight weeks.
Enter Thomas Seyfried, the Boston College biologist who became the metabolic theory’s most vocal champion. His 2012 book “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease” argued persuasively that cancer is fundamentally a mitochondrial metabolic disease, with genetic mutations being downstream effects rather than primary causes.
By 2025, ketogenic diets have evolved from fringe theory to cautiously investigated adjuvant therapy, with multiple clinical trials ongoing and a growing body of mechanistic evidence explaining precisely how fat-based metabolism exploits cancer’s metabolic vulnerabilities.
The Biochemistry: How to Starve a Tumor Without Starving the Patient
The Warburg effect is cancer’s fundamental weakness. Normal cells generate about 88% of their ATP through oxidative phosphorylation in mitochondria, an efficient, clean-burning metabolic engine. Cancer cells, burdened with structurally and functionally damaged mitochondria, rely increasingly on fermentation: converting glucose to lactate even in oxygen-rich environments.
This produces far less ATP per glucose molecule, roughly 2 versus 36, so cancer cells compensate by consuming glucose at rates 10 to 100 times faster than normal cells. They’re metabolic gluttons driven by desperation, not efficiency.
Over 80% of breast cancer patients show severely reduced or entirely absent mitochondria in tumor cells. What mitochondria remain display dissolved inner membrane folds, abnormal structure, and fundamental energetic incompetence. These aren’t minor malfunctions; they represent catastrophic failure of the cellular power grid.
Enter ketone bodies: the selective poison. When you restrict carbohydrates and elevate fat intake, your liver produces three ketone bodies: beta-hydroxybutyrate, acetoacetate, and acetone. Normal cells equipped with functional mitochondria readily convert these into fuel, feeding the energy-producing machinery beautifully. Cancer cells cannot. They lack adequate expression of the enzymes required to metabolize ketones, and even when present, their broken mitochondria can’t efficiently process them.
Studies show acetoacetate directly inhibited proliferation in seven aggressive cancer cell lines while leaving healthy fibroblasts untouched. Ketone supplementation prolonged survival in mice with metastatic cancer by 51 to 69%.
This creates an elegant metabolic trap: restrict glucose while elevating ketones. Normal tissues adapt seamlessly; cancer cells face metabolic crisis.
Now, here’s where things get interesting. Cancer cells don’t rely solely on glucose. They’re also glutamine addicts, using this amino acid as a secondary fuel source and building block for rapid proliferation. Glutamine feeds into the TCA cycle through a different entry point than glucose, providing both energy and the raw materials for making new cellular components. This raises an obvious question: if we’re eating a protein-rich carnivore ketogenic diet, aren’t we feeding the tumor glutamine?
The answer is surprisingly reassuring. First, glutamine metabolism still requires reasonably functional mitochondria to be efficiently utilised, and cancer’s mitochondria are spectacularly incompetent at this task. Second, the body maintains blood glutamine levels within a tight homeostatic range regardless of dietary intake. Unlike glucose, which spikes dramatically after a carbohydrate meal, glutamine concentrations remain relatively stable. Third, and most critically, cancer cells synthesise much of their own glutamine from other amino acids through the enzyme glutamine synthetase. Restricting dietary glutamine doesn’t significantly impact tumor glutamine availability because the tumor simply makes its own. Meanwhile, cancer patients desperately need adequate protein to prevent muscle wasting, maintain immune function, and support tissue repair during treatment. The metabolic stress from glucose restriction remains the primary mechanism of action, and the benefits of adequate protein far outweigh any theoretical concerns about glutamine fueling tumors.
The insulin and IGF-1 axis provides additional leverage. Carbohydrate restriction dramatically reduces circulating insulin and insulin-like growth factor-1. A 2024 meta-analysis found ketogenic diets reduced IGF-1 by 20% and fasting insulin by 29%. This matters profoundly because cancer cells are heavily dependent on these growth signals for proliferation. Lower insulin and IGF-1 means less growth signaling, reduced blood vessel formation to tumors, and enhanced programmed cell death.
Ketogenic diets wage multi-front metabolic war. Beyond fuel manipulation, ketosis suppresses inflammation through multiple mechanisms. Beta-hydroxybutyrate inhibits inflammatory pathways and reduces pro-inflammatory molecules. In mouse models, ketogenic diets dramatically reduced tumor blood vessel formation, essentially cutting off the tumor’s supply lines. The ability of cancer cells to invade and spread decreased significantly.
Clinical Evidence: Promise Meets Reality
Preclinical studies paint an impressive picture. A 2021 meta-analysis of 17 animal studies found ketogenic diets significantly prolonged survival time and reduced both tumor weight and volume. The strongest evidence comes from brain cancer models, where ketogenic diets combined synergistically with radiation therapy and chemotherapy. In pancreatic cancer, a 2024 study showed combining a ketogenic diet with a specific drug caused tumors to shrink dramatically.
Specific cancer types in Human studies show encouraging signals. Glioblastoma has the strongest clinical evidence. Multiple pilot studies demonstrated feasibility, with patients maintaining consistent ketosis throughout six months of treatment. A 2020 randomized controlled trial with 80 patients found those on ketogenic diets had higher quality of life and physical activity at six weeks, with significantly reduced tumor markers.
The safety profile is generally favorable. Across studies, mild to moderate side effects predominate: constipation, initial fatigue, nausea, and weight loss. Crucially, no serious adverse events or organ toxicity emerged. Metabolic markers typically improved: reduced insulin, better glucose control, maintained liver and kidney function.
The emerging consensus positions ketogenic diets as a potent adjuvant therapy. The most compelling evidence comes from combination studies: A 2022 study showed ketogenic diets tripled the survival benefits of chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer models. The diet appears to sensitise cancer cells to conventional treatments while potentially reducing treatment side effects.
Yet major cancer organisations universally decline to recommend ketogenic diets for cancer prevention or treatment as of 2025.
The Inconvenient Economics of Eating Less Bread
Here’s an uncomfortable truth that rarely makes it into polite medical discourse: there’s absolutely no money in telling cancer patients to stop eating carbohydrates. You can’t patent “eat fewer potatoes.” No pharmaceutical company stands to gain billions by recommending ribeye steaks instead of radiotherapy. The entire incentive structure of modern cancer treatment is built around expensive interventions: chemotherapy drugs costing thousands of pounds per dose, targeted biologics with six-figure annual price tags, surgical procedures, radiation equipment, immunotherapy infusions. The profit margins on these interventions fund the clinical trials, the conferences, the research positions, the hospital wings.
A ketogenic diet, particularly an animal-based one, costs roughly what people already spend on food: perhaps less if you’re eliminating processed rubbish and dining out. There’s no recurring revenue stream, no patent protection, no exclusive licensing agreements. The financial incentive to research this approach is essentially nil compared to developing the next checkpoint inhibitor that might extend survival by three months at a cost of £150,000.
This creates a profound structural bias. Clinical trials are monumentally expensive, typically requiring tens of millions of pounds for adequately powered Phase III studies. These trials are overwhelmingly funded by entities with financial stakes in positive outcomes: pharmaceutical companies, biotech firms, medical device manufacturers. Who’s going to fund a £50 million trial comparing standard chemotherapy against standard chemotherapy plus a carnivore ketogenic diet? The beef industry? They’re not exactly flush with research budgets comparable to Pfizer or Roche.
The result is a evidence paradox. We have extensive data on drugs that cost fortunes because companies had fortunes to spend proving they work (or at least, proving they work slightly better than placebo in carefully selected populations). We have comparatively threadbare data on dietary interventions because there’s no billion-pound incentive to generate that data. Then we point to the lack of large randomized controlled trials as justification for not recommending the dietary approach, while ignoring that the absence of evidence largely reflects the absence of funding, which reflects the absence of profit motive.
None of this is a conspiracy: it’s simply how incentive structures work. Oncologists aren’t villains; they’re working within a system that rewards pharmaceutical interventions and provides essentially no infrastructure or reimbursement for intensive dietary counseling. Insurance companies will pay for chemotherapy but won’t pay for a registered dietitian to spend two hours teaching a patient how to implement therapeutic ketosis. Hospitals make money from procedures and drug administration, not from telling people to avoid the carbohydrate-heavy meals being served in their own cafeterias.
The irony is thick enough to cut with a scalpel. We’ll spend hundreds of thousands attempting to extend a stage IV cancer patient’s life by months while the hospital continues serving them cornflakes for breakfast, sandwiches for lunch, and pasta for dinner: all of which spike their blood glucose and insulin, potentially fueling the very tumors we’re trying to poison with expensive drugs. The metabolic approach isn’t rejected because it doesn’t work; it’s under-researched because it doesn’t generate revenue.
The Omega-6 Problem: Why Most Keto Diets Fight With One Hand Tied
The Western diet contains approximately 1,000 times more linoleic acid than our ancestors consumed, primarily from seed oils: soybean, corn, safflower, sunflower, cottonseed. The optimal omega-6 to omega-3 ratio hovers around 1 to 2:1; the modern Western ratio ranges from 15 to 20:1. Many standard ketogenic diets maintain this problematic ratio despite eliminating carbohydrates, because achieving high fat intake with “heart-healthy” seed oils has been the default recommendation for decades.
Linoleic acid directly activates cancer growth pathways. A landmark 2025 study from Weill Cornell Medicine identified the mechanism: linoleic acid binds to a specific protein overexpressed in triple-negative breast cancer, directly activating a master regulator of cell metabolism and cancer proliferation. This was the first study establishing a specific molecular pathway by which this common dietary ingredient influences disease. Triple-negative breast cancer patients with higher levels showed enhanced tumor growth.
The evidence for omega-6 promoting cancer aggressiveness extends across cancer types. A 2022 study fed mice with lung cancer either a balanced diet or an omega-6 rich diet. The omega-6 group developed poorly differentiated tumors with 2.8 times higher proliferation rates, decreased cell death, enhanced blood vessel formation, and elevated inflammatory markers. A 2024 meta-analysis of 787,490 participants found each 1g per day increase in dietary linoleic acid associated with 15% increased colorectal cancer risk.
The biochemical explanation involves oxidised lipid metabolites. Omega-6 fatty acids metabolize into pro-inflammatory compounds that are potent drivers of inflammation, proliferation, blood vessel formation, and invasion. These compounds don’t just correlate with cancer; they actively promote it. Polyunsaturated fatty acids are oxidatively unstable, containing multiple double bonds that make them highly prone to generating toxic compounds that damage DNA, proteins, and cellular structures.
Animal fats solve multiple problems simultaneously. Saturated fats like stearic acid, abundant in beef tallow, contain no double bonds and cannot undergo this damaging oxidation. Monounsaturated fats like oleic acid in beef fat and lard have a single double bond with minimal oxidation susceptibility. Neither generates the pro-inflammatory cascade. A 2024 meta-analysis reviewing 55 studies found associations between saturated fat and cancer were mixed and inconclusive, while a 2021 study found diets high in polyunsaturated fat associated with higher cancer mortality.
Animal-based ketogenic approaches offer additional advantages beyond fat quality. Cancer patients require 1.2 to 1.5g protein per kilogram body weight daily, higher than healthy individuals, with recommendations that at least 65% of total protein intake should be from animal-based foods. Animal proteins provide all essential amino acids in optimal ratios with superior bioavailability. The micronutrient density is unmatched: preformed vitamin A, highly bioavailable heme iron, vitamin B12 exclusively from animal sources, superior zinc, and compounds like choline, creatine, and taurine found predominantly in animal foods.
The case for carnivore ketogenic in cancer boils down to eliminating the pro-tumoral omega-6 cascade while maximizing nutrient density. No seed oils means no excess linoleic acid, no activation of cancer growth pathways, no pro-inflammatory compounds, and dramatically reduced oxidative stress. The omega-6 to omega-3 ratio naturally approaches the ancestral 1 to 2:1 range. The metabolically stable saturated and monounsaturated fats don’t generate toxic products. You achieve “clean ketosis”: metabolic benefits of carbohydrate restriction without inflammatory oils potentially offsetting those benefits.
The Path Forward: Caution, Hope, and a Large Helping of Ground Beef
Evidence suggests ketogenic diets work best as adjuvant therapy during active treatment, where synergistic effects appear strongest. Never abandon evidence-based cancer treatment in favor of dietary therapy alone; that’s how people die. The ketogenic diet amplifies conventional treatment effectiveness while potentially reducing side effects, but it’s enhancement, not replacement.
The mindset shift is equally important. For a century, cancer has been viewed primarily as a genetic disease requiring genetic solutions. The metabolic theory reframes cancer as a disease of damaged cellular energy metabolism with genetic instability as downstream consequence. This perspective opens therapeutic avenues targeting vulnerabilities that exist regardless of the specific genetic mutations: glucose dependence, mitochondrial dysfunction, ketone intolerance. It’s treating cancer not by trying to fix thousands of potential mutations, but by exploiting the few universal metabolic defects that unite them.
For carefully selected cancer patients, particularly those with glioblastoma, working with experienced medical teams, combining with standard treatments, monitoring rigorously, and adopting animal-based fat sources to eliminate the omega-6 problem, ketogenic metabolic therapy represents a biologically rational, generally safe, and potentially powerful adjuvant approach that finally exploits the metabolic dysfunction at cancer’s core.
Sometimes the most powerful medicine isn’t a drug at all. Sometimes it’s remembering that before genes, before signaling pathways, before immunotherapy and targeted therapy, there was metabolism. And cancer’s metabolism is rubbish. That’s the vulnerability. That’s the target. And a well-formulated, animal-based ketogenic diet might just be the oldest, simplest, and most elegant way to exploit it.
Read My Previous Article – Carnivore For Menopause
If you want to figure out the best way to set up your own metabolic revival, reach out to me on Twitter, Instagram, or sign up to my coaching programme below for customised hypertrophy programmes and carnivore nutrition plans that will ditch all the unnecessary fluff and send you hurtling towards your physique goals.
