Breast Cancer Psychotherapist in the UK shares her own experience with breast cancer

It's stories like these that make me just want to scream what I have learned so that perhaps a few more women can be spared the trauma of "conventional" breast cancer treatments. In a few words, conventional treatments are BARBARIC and they DON'T WORK. In EXTREME cases, surgery or chemo might be necessary as a last resort but until then, the absolutely ideal thing to do is to BOOST YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM and that involves more than just taking vitamins or eating right, washing your hands more etc. It is an attitude change, a lifestyle change.. it is putting your own health first and taking care of your body like never before. There are tons of examples of natural cures for cancer. Not all of them work for everyone. But regardless, chemo and radiation are harmful and yes they might kill the cancer but not before they almost kill YOU.

Did you ever wonder why it seems the first course of action recommended in breast cancer is to see a BREAST SURGEON? Why not an oncologist? Do you know I never ONCE met with an oncologist during my stint with "conventional" cancer diagnosis and it was NEVER RECOMMENDED? By the time I might have been ready for that, I was already convinced an oncologist did not know much more than I did about cancer, so I skipped it and continued with my holistic healing path.

Breast cancer: therapist on the other side

Counseling women with breast cancer was Cordelia Galgut's speciality but she was unprepared for the strength of emotion when it was diagnosed in her

I didn’t have a diagnosis yet but I could see on the screen that I was in big trouble. The radiologist who was taking an ultrasound scan of my right breast looked deadpan. I asked: “Is it serious?” “At least it’s not lung cancer,” she replied. What? I presumed she was confirming indirectly that she thought it was cancer, but I was stunned by her comment.

Summoning up the courage to speak again, I asked what she could see. “Are you a medical doctor or a scientist?” she responded, as if that would answer my question, and then told me that I’d have to have a biopsy. When I said I wanted to know more, I was told that this was not possible.

These dreadful moments three years ago, when I first learnt, in my late-forties, that I had breast cancer, began a voyage of discovery. As a counsellor and psychotherapist helping women with breast cancer, I’d imagined that I could understand well enough what they were going through. In fact, I didn’t have a clue. Having breast cancer changed what I said to women with breast cancer for good.

Throughout my experiences over the past three years I’ve found my “trained psychologist brain” to be in conflict with my “breast cancer-sufferer brain” because the stuff I was taught about mental processes and my experiences as a cancer patient have often been contradictory.

After my biopsy, my doctor confirmed that the mass on the scan looked like cancer. “Am I going to die?” I asked. She looked blank and changed the subject. This made me feel I’d been wrong to ask her. It also made me panicky. I now realise that such questions are very common among women who have breast cancer diagnosed, so the doctor must have heard them plenty of times. Though nobody would have thought so from her reaction.

Things went from bad to worse. I phoned for the results of the biopsy and got a nurse, who avoided my questions several times until, reluctantly, she said: “Yes, it’s cancer.” That was actually a relief. Once I knew, I could start to face the future. After the surgery to remove the tumour, the surgeon told me that I had been “naughty” for asking questions, making a fuss and saying how I was feeling about what was happening to me.

I felt I wasn’t doing cancer “properly”

One of the key lessons I have learnt is that health professionals simply don’t accept extreme emotional reactions in the face of cancer. The vast majority of people I have met since my breast cancer was diagnosed struggle to realise that it is normal to respond emotionally, even negatively. I have had to put up with so many comments that have left me feeling very alone, such as: “You must be more positive, or your cancer will come back!” There’s no research evidence to back this up, by the way. Someone else said: “Don’t dwell on it; it’s not doing you any good.” I shouted back: “Well, you try it if you think it’s so bloody easy!”

Comments such as these make women feel they are not doing breast cancer “properly”. And it all adds to the distress and emotional fallout of what has happened.

As a psychotherapist supporting women with the disease, I realise that the fear of getting breast cancer had stopped me from really listening to what women were telling me about what they felt and what they were going through. Also, my psychological training had taught me that, after extreme trauma, people would go through a variety of stages, from shock to acceptance, in about a year or so.

It’s clear to me now that it is wrong to expect people with breast cancer to behave like people with other types of trauma.

There is a very complex emotional response in women, simply because the cancer affects the breasts, which are laden with sexual and other significances. One woman said to me: “I’ve had thyroid cancer and breast cancer, and it’s different. It affects you in a different way because your breasts are part of your femininity.”

Treatments for breast cancer are harsh and it has been easy for me to feel that my identity as a woman has been under attack.

In May 2004 I was told that I had one small hormone-sensitive tumour in my right breast. The following November I was told that I had something similar in the left breast. The second tumour had probably been there at the time of my first diagnosis, but my left breast had not been scanned at the time. So I had surgery on both breasts and have large scars on them, a constant reminder of what I have been through. So is the skin damage and loss of sensation I have suffered as a result of the two rounds of radiotherapy I had for 12 weeks after surgery.

Physically, it was hard, but I had expected that. It was my emotional response to the radiotherapy that knocked me sideways. Subsequently, a number of women have told me that they have found radiotherapy harder than chemotherapy. It perhaps stems from the vulnerable position you have to adopt on the treatment table; naked from the waist up.

After several weeks of radiotherapy, I remember joking that I was so used to exposing my breasts in public that I’d have to watch it in case I inadvertently got them out in Waitrose. The humour was self-protective, of course, belying a deep upset at what I was going through.

I can’t recapture my peace of mind

Three-and-a-half years on, I have a good prognosis, but I’m still suffering emotional fallout. Thankfully, I have had no recurrence of the disease to date, but I still dread the scans. People say: “Just get on with your life. Don’t think about it.” But I cannot recapture the peace of mind I had before cancer.

Knowing what I know now, I work very differently, as a psychotherapist, with women with breast cancer. I’m more open to what women are telling me and no longer pay much attention to what my training taught me about what women should be feeling at different stages.

If there’s one thing I wish people had said to me during my breast cancer experience, it is: “The way you’re feeling is perfectly normal. It’s not just going to go away. You’re not doing breast cancer wrong. Why wouldn’t you feel like this?” These words would have been enormously supportive. They’re the ones I try to offer my patients whenever I can.

Dr Cordelia Galgut is a senior accredited counsellor and psychotherapist

Breast cancer in numbers

Over 100 women a day in the UK are told that they have breast cancer

8 out of 10 survive beyond five years

One third of cancer patients (all types of cancer) develop significant problems coping with diagnosis and treatment

14% of cancer patients seek counselling or support groups after diagnosis

29% of breast cancer sufferers adopt a fighting spirit

22% of breast cancer sufferers are engulfed by feelings of hopelessness

Source: Cancer Research UK; The Lancet; Journal of the National Cancer Institute; Oncology Issues

New drug target to battle breast cancer: study

Interesting news about targeted treatments for breast cancer. Targeted is always better than some kind of systemic nuclear bomb kind of approach. The more you can target JUST the tumor, the better off all patients will be. Here is more info on angiogenesis

Interestingly enough, it has been found that megadoses of Vitamin C actually have an antiangiogenic effect and certainly is less toxic than just about any synthetic "drug". It may explain why large doses of Vitamin C seem to work in the fight against cancer. If I were currently fighting cancer, I would be taking large doses of Vitamin C or considering intravenous Vitamin C. I don't think it's recommended to remain on large doses of Vitamin C indefinitely however so you should find a naturopath or holistic practitioner who can guide you on this kind of treatment.

After some more digging, I found that there is one drug that one should avoid that are targeting angiogenesis and that drug is Avastin. Read more about why I say that here

Here is the lead article on limiting angiogenesis, which I believe is a good thing to do in fighting cancer. However I don't believe that only drugs can provide that solution. More on this after the article.

CHICAGO (AFP) — Researchers have identified a new target for drugs to help treat the most common form of breast cancer in the developing world, a study released Thursday said.

The target is a molecular "switch" in the protein-making machinery of the cancer cell that enables a tumor to aggressively develop its own blood supply.

Women with what is called locally advanced breast cancer can develop tumors that grow anywhere from 2 centimeters to 10 centimeters in diameter.

The tumors are unusually large in many cases -- they are often the size of a plum by the time they are diagnosed -- due to the extremely dense network of blood vessels feeding them oxygen and nutrients.

"Our study shows that an unusual molecular switch occurs that is essential for the development of these large tumors. We think that this switch could be a target for new therapies," said Robert Schneider, professor of molecular pathogenesis at New York University School of Medicine.

In a paper in the journal Molecular Cell, Schneider and colleagues at New York University School of Medicine describe how two proteins (4E-BP1 and eIF4G) which are present at elevated levels in locally advanced breast cancer cells selectively increase the action of certain messenger, or mRNA, molecules.

The effect of that process is to increase several fold the production of certain growth factors that drive tumor angiogenesis -- the formation of the tumor's own blood vessels.

"The switch gives us the ability to shut off production of growth factors in the tumor at their source," said Schneider.

He said several experimental drugs were in development that would target the "switch," with a view to curbing its growth.

If the drugs are shown to be successful in clinical trials, they could eventually be combined with a cocktail of chemotherapy drugs to eliminate the malignancy.

"This research opens new avenues for the development of targeted approaches in the treatment of one of the most common lethal forms of breast cancer worldwide," said Silvia Formenti, a co-author and professor of radiation oncology at NYU School of Medicine.

The researchers are also hopeful that the two proteins that are over-expressed or super abundant in locally advanced breast cancer cells could serve as a biomarker for this type of cancer, making it easier to screen for.

Early indications are that it is a reliable guide to the presence of this cancer 85 percent of the time, Schneider said.

Locally advanced breast cancer accounts for about 50 percent of breast cancer cases in developing nations. Patients often have a high level of treatment failure because the cancer is so far advanced by the time it is detected.

Here is an excerpt from the News Target article on angiogenesis:

Let me lay this to you straight: you can get far more powerful anti-angiogenesis "drugs" by simply drinking broccoli juice. If you need something more powerful, take graviola tincture, which has been shown to be 10,000 times more effective than chemotherapy at shrinking tumors. If that's still not enough, eat ten grams of chlorella and spirulina each day.

And here is more from my favorite health nut, Mike Adams, in the same article above, explaining why I am suspicious and critical of the mainstream Cancer docs and drugs:

Want to know what kind of corruption really goes on in the cancer industry and the FDA? Read Questioning Chemotherapy by Ralph Moss. Still not convinced? Check out Innocent Casualties by Elaine Feuer.

Be informed as much as possible if you find yourself in the grips of the "cancer industry". I find myself in that position now, not for myself, but for my mother, who it is believed has a version of Pancoast's Apical Lung Cancer. Tests are still being conducted but you better believe I'm trying to steer her AWAY from the mainstream treatments as much as possible. The hard part is getting to the place where she has faith in me and my advice.. After all, I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who successfully fought breast cancer without chemo, radiation or surgery...

Woman Claims Doctor 'Spilled' Cancerous Tissue into Stomach

It's nice to see that this kind of information is getting out to the public. It's a known fact that MOST cancer surgeries involve "tumor spill" but you never hear about it from your doctors unless you really press them on it. With that being said - surgery is NEVER without risk although tumor removal is portrayed as some kind of "answer" to the problem. This is also why they often treat the surgical site with radiation after surgery because they KNOW the chance is very high that some cancer cells were "spilled" into the area during removal.

THIS is why I did not choose surgery from my breast cancer lump. I prefer to let my body handle the problem. There are cases when surgery is the ONLY option though and to anyone who is in that situation I would advise being honest with yourself about the spill problem and don't treat the surgery as a neat and clean cancer removal operation.

Any time you are dealing with cancerous tumors you *must* improve your immune system to fight it and you as healer are the most important factor in your healing - not some doctor with a scalpel. Improving your immune system involves more than just taking vitamins. It is a LIFESTYLE change and one that puts your health above all else. It involves listening to your body and giving it what it needs in the way of sleep, exercise, play, food etc...

DES MOINES, Iowa — A woman is suing her gynecologist for allegedly not telling her that he accidentally cut open a tumor he removed from her ovary, spilling cancerous tissue in her abdomen and causing her cancer to spread.

The lawsuit, filed in Polk County District Court by Lavonne Schroeter, alleges that Dr. Curtis Hoegh's negligence during and after the operation "will cause her premature death." The lawsuit also names his employer, Iowa Health Physicians and Clinics, as a defendant.

The 53-year-old Schroeter says the Des Moines doctor removed her tumor in 2002, but he never mentioned it was cancerous or discussed any mishaps during surgery. However, Hoegh had Schroeter undergo an electronic scan after a blood test raised concerns three years later, and more growths were found.

Another surgeon removed several cancerous tumors and prescribed medication, but the cancer continued to spread, the lawsuit states. Last year, a doctor at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., told her that Hoegh had accidentally cut into her tumor and caused the spread of the cancer, which is terminal but treatable, according to the lawsuit.

Schroeter's lawyer, Roxanne Conlin of Des Moines, says the Mayo doctor found out about the mistake by reading her client's medical records.

Hoegh's "negligence was a proximate cause of injuries and damages to (Schroeter)," the lawsuit states.

Dr. Mark Barnhill, the group's medical director, says Hoegh and the clinic had not been served with the legal papers and could not comment on the allegations.

In a brief statement, Barnhill called Hoegh "a competent and caring physician who has served our community for 20 years."

Health update!

It's been about five months since I got the good news on my last MRI stating that the lump was "scar tissue" and no longer considered a threat. I have loosened some of my health regimens a bit as a result of feeling that I have beaten the threat, although I still rarely eat fast food or desserts or add sugar to things in general.

I wanted to share some other things that I did that I did not post on, during my battle to fight breast cancer. I got behind in posting updates about different things I tried so I'll try to catch up here so that others might be able to benefit.

I will never know which thing worked, perhaps all of them are necessary. If faced with cancer again, I would employ the same methods.

Some of the more recent "therapies" I tried were:

Far Infrared Mineral Lamp

Here are some of the effects of the lamp

• Raises the temperature in tissues
• Expands capillary vessels vRejuvenates cells
• Promotes blood circulation
• Helps move toxins from cells
• Improves Lymphatic system functions

I used it primarily because I learned that cancer cells cannot dissipate heat so I decided that this lamp might actually cause cell death for the cancer cells by heating them - this lamp penetrates very deeply. I used visualization while lying under the lamp as well - I pictured the heat killing the cancer cells. I used this lamp for about 20 minutes a day at least three times a week.

Therapeutic Massage

I also started visiting a holistic massage therapist in December of 2006 on a regular basis - at least twice a month. I also met with her in between the massages to help assess my lifestyle also and among some of the changes she helped me make (although I continue to work on these) were getting more sleep and sleeping earlier. I am a night owl so I constantly fight against staying up till the wee hours and then sleeping till mid morning. For a month or two, I actually got to bed before midnight on most nights. She helped me make it more of a habit to eat vegetables because even though I knew I *should* eat more vegetables, I often did not and instead relied on Juice Plus to tide me over. Ultimately, Juice Plus is great but not a total substitute for eating vegetables and the closer to raw the better.

Mini Trampouline aka Rebounding

I purchased a Needak mini trampouline also and started using it about three times a week. I used it simply although there are some fancy moves you can make and the one I bought provided a manual for those. I simply put on dance music and basically jogged to the music on it and occasionally did some dancing on it. I added hand and leg weights at times. The benefits of jumping on a mini trampouline are as follows:

From HealingDaily.com

The rebounding motion stimulates all internal organs, moves the cerebral-spinal fluid, and is beneficial for the intestines. Many immune cells such as T-lymphocytes and macrophages are self-propelled through amebic action. These cells contain molecules identical to those in muscle tissue. All cells in the body become stronger in response to the increased "G force" during rebounding, and this cellular exercise results in the self-propelled immune cells being up to 5 times more active. These immune cells are responsible for eating viruses, bacteria and even cancer cells, so it is good that they be active. Jumping on a mini-trampoline directly strengthens the immune system, so it's a big deal!

When the outer coating of cancer cells has been dissolved by the enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin, the immune cells attack the cancer cells. Therefore, supplementing one's healing diet with enzymes, combined with rebound exercise are a useful way to combat cancer.

More proof Vitamin D is essential to fighting cancer

I know I haven't updated this blog as much lately but now and then I find articles like this one that I absolutely feel I must post about because it is so important! Personally, I now take 2000 IU of Vitamin D3 every day and I try to get a dose of sunshine when I can without sunblock. I will not be using sunblock ever again. I will just use shade or an umbrella to reduce my doses of sun so that I don't get burned. I also take a Calcium Magnesium supplement in the 1000 - 500 mg ratio. I believe it is Calcium Citrate as well..

New research shows vitamin D slashes risk of cancers by 77 percent; cancer industry refuses to support cancer prevention

Exciting new research conducted at the Creighton University School of Medicine in Nebraska has revealed that supplementing with vitamin D and calcium can reduce your risk of cancer by an astonishing 77 percent. This includes breast cancer, colon cancer, skin cancer and other forms of cancer. This research provides strong new evidence that vitamin D is the single most effective medicine against cancer, far outpacing the benefits of any cancer drug known to modern science.

The study involved 1,179 healthy women from rural Nebraska. One group of women was given calcium (around 1500 mg daily) and vitamin D (1100 IU daily) while another group was given placebo. Over four year, the group receiving the calcium and vitamin D supplements showed a 60 percent decrease in cancers. Considering just the last three years of the study reveals an impressive 77 percent reduction in cancer due to supplementation. (The full press release of this study is included below. It provides more details about the findings.)

Note that these astonishing effects were achieved on what many nutritionists consider to be a low dose of vitamin D. Exposure to sunlight, which creates even more vitamin D in the body, was not tested or considered, and the quality of the calcium supplements was likely not as high as it could have been (it was probably calcium carbonate and not high-grade calcium malate, aspartate or similar forms). What does all this mean? It means that if you take high-quality calcium supplements and get lots of natural sunlight exposure or take premium vitamin D supplements (such as those made from fish oil), you could easily have a greater reduction than the 77 percent reduction recorded in this study.

Please go here to view the full article - well worth it!

American College of Physicians warns women in their 40s about dangers of mammograms

Well.. it's nice to see the conventional medical community FINALLY coming out and saying what most ALTERNATIVE doctors have been saying all along about mammograms. I try to correct EVERYONE I talk to about the dangers of annual mammograms - so many have been brainwashed for years that this is what women should do. I have never felt an annual dose of radiation was a good thing but I thought EVEN LESS of it once I found out they only detect calcifications and in MY case I did not have calcifications so it gave ZERO info about my particular breast lump, which a later MRI indicated was something to worry about. Now that I have been "cleared" and they are saying it is scar tissue, one has to wonder whether I ever had anything to worry about.. but I guess I'll never know and that is fine.

The statistics have been that women who get an annual mammogram INCREASE their cancer risk by 2% each year so after 10 years an obedient woman who got her annual mammograms has increased her risk for getting cancer by 20%. No thanks!

Many alternatives are now available - from the AMAS blood test to Thermography and other forms of light testing, a Breast MRI (which all insurance SHOULD allow but don't for annual purposes) etc.

The article:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The American College of Physicians has recommended women in their 40s consult with their doctors before undergoing routine annual mammography screening. An expert panel from the American College of Physicians (ACP), which represents 120,000 internists, made this recommendation in the April 3rd issue of the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

After reviewing 117 studies conducted between 1966 and 2005, the panel found the data on mammography screening for women in their 40s are so unclear that the effectiveness of reducing breast cancer death could be either 15 percent or "...nearly zero."

The panel pointed out that benefits must be weighed against the harmful effects of mammograms, including exposure to radiation and unnecessary biopsies, surgery, and chemotherapy.

Dr. Amir Qaseem, lead author of the ACP guidelines, stated "It is important to tailor the decision of screening mammography by discussing the benefits and risks with a woman, addressing her concerns, and making it a joint decision between her and her physician." The ACP noted cancer risk varies from woman to woman, and decisions about annual mammography screenings are best made on a case-by-case basis.

The ACP pointed out for women who have a known high risk of breast cancer (family history or early menarche, for example) annual screenings are appropriate.

The group is not opposed to mammography, but rather questions the efficacy of annual mammography exams commencing at age 40. "We agree that mammography can save lives," said Douglas K. Owens of Stanford University, who chaired the committee that wrote the guidelines, "But there are also potential harms. We don't think the evidence supports a blanket recommendation."

The dangers of mammography are recognized in the medical field. According to Dr. Samuel Epstein of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, "Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer for pre-menopausal women. The routine practice of taking four films of each breast annually results in approximately 1 rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray. The pre-menopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade's screening. These risks are even greater for younger women subject to 'baseline screening.'"

The coalition reports women who carry the A-T gene are especially prone to risk from early mammography screening: "Radiation risks are some four-fold greater for the 1 to 2 percent of women who are silent carriers of the A-T (ataxia-telangiectasia) gene; by some estimates this accounts for up to 20 percent of all breast cancers diagnosed annually."

"Mammography is used primarily as a tool to recruit new patients into conventional cancer treatments, regardless of whether they would actually benefit from such treatments," said Mike Adams, author of Natural Health Solutions and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing About Them. "The breast cancer industry harms ten women for every one it helps. It is an industry of greed, profits, and scare tactics," Adams added.

At the heart of the current blanket recommendations to begin annual mammography exams at age 40 is the American Cancer Society (ACS). Robert A. Smith, director of cancer screening at the ACS, responded to the new recommendations stating, "The danger here is that some women will elect not to get screened. Mammography is the single most effective way of finding breast cancer early, and when we find breast cancer early, women have the greatest chance of successful treatment." Just last month the ACS advised women who are at a perceived "high risk" of breast cancer to also undergo annual MRIs.

Resources: http://www.preventcancer.com/patients/mammography/dangers.htm

Another reason not to get sentinel node lymph biopsy

An alternative to the sentinel node lymph biopsy is to get a PEM (Pet Scan Mammogram) and I am so thankful that I did NOT get the lymph biopsy that they assured me was very low risk for edema. Hmmmph

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine beating breast cancer only to find out you're health problems may have just begun.That's exactly what many women are dealing with, but there is good news.A new study has found a majority of those survivors face a new battle with lymph edema, which they'll fight it the rest of their lives.

When Lori Elgin finally beat breast cancer, she dreamed of carefree times with her family.She said she never thought dealing with the lymph edema that followed would be an even more challenging experience than the cancer."There's no cure for the lymph edema," said Elgin. "I mean, you're stuck with it. You just have to learn to manage it as well as possible."For Elgin, that means wearing a compression sleeve and glove on her right arm to help manage the constant and painful swelling,

The problem is often caused during surgery or radiation. Wherever lymph nodes are removed, lymphatic fluid can't drain. It accumulates and causes swelling. A new three-year study published in the Journal of Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention revealed how big the lymph edema problem really is."Over half of the women had experienced swelling sometime during the three years," said author Dr. Electra Paskett.

That's nearly seven times as many women as shown in some previous studies.Paskett, a breast cancer survivor, said she knows firsthand how debilitating the swelling can be."We're not supposed to lift anything very heavy," said Paskett. "Should avoid any repetitive action, repetitive motion like cleaning your house, vacuuming, things like that. So a lot of these things really affect a woman's life."Even more troubling is the psychological impact. There is no cure for lymph edema, only sleeves and medicines for pain and swelling.Besides compression sleeves and medications, many women get regular arm and hand massages to help ease their swelling. But Paskett said something more needs to be done.With so many women surviving breast cancer, she'd like to see more insurance companies pay for such therapy. And she hopes more scientists will focus on developing cures for the condition to preserve a better quality of life for cancer survivors.
----------------------------------------------------------------
In my opinion - the risk of edema is not an acceptable risk. I don't even care if cancer IS found in the lymph nodes. Treat it with boosting your immune system, changing your diet by eliminating chemicals and processed sweets and foods and as a LAST resort using radiation or chemo after surgery when possible.

I am living proof that you don't have to burn, cut or poison to treat breast cancer. You just have to heed your body's call to change up a lot of what you are doing in your daily life and do it for good....

Best news in two years!

Just received the official report back from my recent MRI on March 30th, 2007 and it said "No change in the appearance of the spiculated mass in the medial aspect of the right breast when compared to the prior studies from 2006" and then this most important sentence:

"The mass and its spiculation are compatible with the presence of a neoplasm but lack of interval growth and the progressive bright enhancement pattern favor SCAR TISSUE. There are no other suspicious finding seen in either breast"

To say that I had an emotional release from 2 years of holding my breath over this lump is an understatement. I actually received the voicemail message last night from my doctor saying "no problems at all" and of course I was surprised and shocked and happy to hear that but I had seen the MRI myself and I saw the lump still there.. it did not appear larger which I thought was good but I figured.. well it's still there...

So.. for me.. this is a victory of huge proportions and should be encouraging for all who are told they have cancer. You don't always have to take the toxic treatments. I will not stop with my new diet and lifestyle EVER because this proves that my body can handle cancer and can recover from cancer (if it ever WAS cancer in the first place)

My health regimen basically included mostly whole foods, no microwaving, no teflon, no processed food (canned or frozen) unless it is 100% organic such as Amy's. I take Juice Plus and many other whole food supplements. I take 1200 iu Vitamin D3 per day. I have been taking Artemisinin and also Laetrile but not large amounts in any way.. just regular intake. I really think the loss of 20 pounds of excess weight was a big factor and the diet that got me there is also one that discourages cancer - less meat, practically NO sugar unless from sweet vegetables. Only the very occasional desert and a small amount when I need to eat a birthday cake. I refuse most candy or deserts, never add sugar to anything and use Stevia instead.

I recently added Olive Leaf Extract which is a terrific natural antibiotic and natural anti-viral.

So ... hoping my story can encourage others to take control of their own health and don't blindly trust the conventional medicine. They have their place but it is not always the place to go FIRST. Improve your health FIRST - then if you still need help then conventional medicine may be the next step. Never choose the toxic treatments FIRST. Become educated about your health - you are your best doctor.

Stopping Breast Cancer Tumors from Spreading

I find this study very interesting indeed - especially the part about standard treatments doing more harm than good.. umm.. YEAH.. we need to see more info on that get to the public at large. I believe chemo and/or radiation should only be used as a last resort but instead we see both being used ROUTINELY and that is the travesty in modern cancer treatment. First treatment option should ALWAYS be to correct the underlying imbalance through nutrition and stress reduction - lifestyle changes.


Stopping Breast Cancer Tumors From Spreading
Ivanhoe Newswire

By Betsy Lievense, Ivanhoe Health Correspondent

ORLANDO, Fla. (Ivanhoe Newswire) -- Previous studies have shown chemotherapy and radiation can sometimes do more harm than good for cancer patients as treatments have been linked to tumor spread. Now, researchers at Vanderbilt University are working hard to develop neutralizing antibodies that could stop treatment-induced tumors in their tracks.

In order to determine the relationship between anti-cancer treatments and tumor spread, researchers at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., studied the effects of radiation and a chemotherapeutic drug called doxorubicin on mice. Study authors report both of these treatments led to two-fold increases in transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta levels as well as an increase in cancer cell proliferation and lung metastases. In subsequent trials, researchers administered a TGF-beta-neutralizing antibody into mice prior to radiation. They found irradiated mice treated with TGF-beta antibodies had fewer tumors after therapy than their antibody-free counterparts, which means TGF-beta could play a key role in tumor spread.

"In my opinion, the overwhelming evidence is in established tumors, tumors we can see in an X-ray, TGF-beta is, in general, a tumor promoter," Carlos Arteaga, M.D., a professor of medicine and cancer biology and the director of the breast cancer program at the Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center in Nashville, Tenn., told Ivanhoe. "Before a cell turns into a cancer cell, TGF-beta is probably a heck of a tumor suppressor, but we're talking about patients with established tumors or cancers. TGF beta and other growth factors may act as a survival factor to [pre-established] tumor cells and inadvertently protect them."

Dr. Arteaga said TGF-beta inhibitors could represent a promising solution to tumor metastases, but more clinical research is necessary to determine the toxicity, dosage and potential combinations of TGF-beta antibodies. "TGF-beta inhibitors are currently in a very early phase of development, not in therapeutic studies," he said. Dr. Arteaga also said he hopes the results of this study will lead to alternative treatment options for cancer patients.

This article was reported by Ivanhoe.com, which offers Medical Alerts by e-mail every day of the week. To subscribe, click on: http://www.ivanhoe.com/newsalert/.

SOURCE: Ivanhoe interview with Carlos Arteaga, M.D.; The Journal of Clinical Investigation, published online April 5, 2007

Non-patented chemotherapy alternative drug may provide cheap chemical cure for cancer

From News Target.. this is pretty exciting news.. and I will keep a close eye on developments

A cheap, simple and safe drug currently being used to treat rare metabolic disorders may be the golden ticket to fighting certain cancers, a Canadian study says. Since it is non-patented, it could be produced on a mass scale by multiple suppliers.

The drug is called Dichloroacetate, or DCA, and it can repair damage to mitochondria affected by cancer, creating large decreases in cancerous tumors. Positive results from the drug were shown in both animal model tests and test tubes. It also has been tested on genetically cultured human cells.

Most importantly, it can kill cancerous cells, including the often unstoppable lung cancer, without affecting other healthy cells and tissues, which differs DCA from many chemotherapies.

Researchers at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada did the tests, finding that in addition to fighting lung cancer, DCA can also decimate brain and breast cancer.

DCA utilizes the way cancer cells energize themselves and uses that to work against the cancerous growth. A cancer cell will often eat sugars in the cell, using a process called glycolysis. Previous consensus among scientists was that cancer cells use glycolysis to stay alive because the mitochondria had been damaged beyond functioning levels.

The researchers in Edmonton found that DCA reawakens mitochondria, which holds a secondary function: the ability to tell abnormal cells to self-destruct. Without this self-destruct mode being active, abnormal cancerous cells have the ability to be “immortal,” and increase over time because they are not dying like regular cells. Initial studies show that DCA reverses this.

The next move for the study is to do clinical tests using DCA in patients with cancer, reported the Chinese web site People’s Daily Online. These tests may need to be paid for by charities, universities and government agencies, as pharmaceutical are not likely to support an unpatented medicine because they cannot profit from it, the magazine New Scientist reported in its January issue.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information on DCA can be found here

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Update on my health - I have lost 17 pounds since starting on my healthier diet in late July and by avoiding artificial sweeteners or anything artificial in my food for that matter. I continue to drink a good amount of water as well. This week my blood was sent to a Florida laboratory where Dr Schandl will give it the full cancer profile review. Info about the lab is here

I also asked them to do a breast cancer marker test. I hope to have the results in a day or so.

The lump is still palpable but my health is great otherwise. I will be going for a new MRI in the next month to see if the size has changed at all.

I have been seeing a holistic counselor who is helping me adopt some healthier habits and be more regular with my sleeping and eating.. getting to bed earlier etc. I also get therapeutic massages every other week now.

I have signed onto the Quantum Prayer System at http://energeticbalancing.us
and got my first "analysis" this week which was pretty amazing and seemed extremely accurate as far as pinpointing the top 12 stressors in my life according to energy balance. It pinpointed areas such as my right shoulder that have been causing me trouble for several months... not sure how they did it but I was quite pleasantly surprised at how accurate it seemed. Something on the chart called "reproductive canceroid" was on that list. I did not give them any health history - just name, address, birthdate, place of birth and photo of my face only.