Ask HN: A friend has brain cancer: any bio hacks that worked?

Hacker News Discussion ↗

Standard Treatments & Prognosis

  • GBM is described as highly lethal; typical survival 12–24 months even with current best care.
  • Common “state of the art” components: surgery (often awake craniotomy), radiation, temozolomide chemotherapy, Tumor Treating Fields/Optune devices, monoclonal antibodies; some mention high‑dose vitamin C and melatonin as possible adjuncts.
  • Several posters stress that no existing regimen is curative; treatments are probabilistic and mainly extend or improve quality of life.
  • Some warn against overtreatment and emphasize trade‑offs: more months vs more disability and side effects.
  • Multiple people urge focusing on clinical trials (immunotherapy, CAR‑T, vaccines, ultrasound BBB opening, mRNA and dendritic cell vaccines), genetic sequencing of tumors, and major cancer centers.

Diet, Fasting & Metabolic Approaches

  • Many highlight ketogenic or very low‑carb diets, intermittent fasting, and prolonged fasting, citing:
    • Hypothesis that many cancers are glucose‑dependent.
    • Preclinical and early clinical work on keto, caloric restriction, autophagy, and “press‑pulse” metabolic strategies.
  • Others push back:
    • Body maintains glucose even in ketosis; “starving” cancer via diet alone is doubted.
    • Some research suggests keto might promote metastasis in some contexts.
    • Consensus in thread: diet may support treatment and tolerance to chemo/radiation but is unlikely to “stop” cancer by itself.
  • Fasting is discussed as potentially making chemo more tolerable and modulating immunity, but need for more controlled trials is repeated.

Fringe / Alternative / Experimental Ideas

  • Mentioned: ivermectin/fenbendazole, bloodroot/black salve, large herbal protocols, high‑dose supplements, cannabis, hyperthermia, rotating magnets/oscillating magnetic fields, bacterial and viral therapies (including Zika), Hymecromone, mTOR/rapamycin, psychedelics, ayurvedic and yogic regimens.
  • Some posters share personal or family anecdotes of benefit; others share anecdotes of no effect or harm.
  • There is strong skepticism and anger around ivermectin, bloodroot, and non‑evidence‑based claims; several call them misinformation or dangerous.
  • Recurrent theme: if such methods clearly worked, they’d likely already be in standard oncology; most cited papers are preclinical, small, or “promising but unproven.”

Quality of Life, Agency & Ethics of Advice

  • Many emphasize that the most reliable “hack” is to be present: help with logistics, reduce stress, enable vacations or bucket‑list experiences, support addiction risks, and consider end‑of‑life psychological support (including supervised psychedelic therapy).
  • Heated debate over “false hope” vs respecting patient agency:
    • One camp argues sharing unproven hacks burdens patients and delays acceptance.
    • The other argues that, in a terminal setting, low‑cost moonshots plus clear expectations are reasonable, as long as standard care and oncologists guide decisions.
  • Repeated advice: any nonstandard intervention should be discussed with the treating oncologist.