IP6 - A Rising Star in the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer

News on some recent studies regarding IP6 - inositol hexaphosphate. I have taken an IP6 supplement - more so during my initial diagnosis - only occasionally now. It is made by Cell Forte - and can be purchased at LifeExtension's store for one source.

(NaturalNews) Three recent studies have confirmed the role of inositol hexaphosphate (IP6) in cancer prevention and control of experimental tumor growth. IP6 is a naturally occurring carbohydrate first identified in 1855. It can exist on its own or can be bound to various other minerals such as calcium, magnesium, iron or sodium. It's found in substantial amounts in whole grains, dried beans, nuts, seeds, rice, wheat germ and corn.

In addition to being found in plants, IP6 is contained within almost all mammalian cells, where it is important in regulating vital cellular functions such as signal transduction, cell proliferation, and differentiation. IP6 is also available in supplement form.

Studies and Results

As published in Oncology Research, February 2008, researchers reported that IP6 was shown to have significant inhibitory effects against a variety of primary tumors. They hypothesized that IP6 would inhibit the cell growth rate of Barrett's adenocarcinoma in vitro. Two Barrett's associated adenocarcinoma cell lines were treated with IP6. Reductions in cellular proliferation were observed in both cell lines. Apoptosis (necessary programmed cell death) of the adenocarcinoma cells was increased. Researchers concluded that IP6 decreased cellular growth of these cells by pro-apoptotic mechanisms.

As published in Journal of Surgical Research, June 2006, researchers reported that IP6 had previously been shown to have significant inhibitory effects against pancreatic cancer in vitro. They hypothesized that IP6 would significantly inhibit cell growth of cutaneous melanoma in vitro. Melanoma cell lines were cultured and treated with IP6. The findings were that IP6 significantly decreased cellular growth and increased late apoptosis in melanoma, suggesting its potential therapeutic value.

As published in Journal of Surgical Research, June 2005, researchers reported that IP6 has been found to have significant inhibitory effects against a variety of primary tumors including breast and colon. They hypothesized that IP6 would significantly inhibit cell growth and increase the apoptotic rate of pancreatic cancer in vitro. Two pancreatic cancer cell lines were cultured and treated with IP6. Researchers concluded that treatment of pancreatic cancer with IP6 significantly decreased cellular growth and increased apoptosis.

IP6 Offers Cancer Prevention and Cure, and Much More

In Dr. A.M. Shamsuddin's review of findings in Nutrition and Cancer vol. 55, he states that in addition to its role in cancer prevention and control of experimental tumor growth, progression and metastasis, IP6 possesses other significant benefits, such as the ability to enhance the immune system, function as a natural antioxidant, prevent calcification and kidney stone formation, lower elevated serum cholesterol, and reduce pathological platelet activity.

According to Dr. Shamsuddin, when IP6 is administered it is rapidly taken into the cells and dephosphorylated to lower inositol phosphates, which further affect signal transduction pathways. In addition to the arresting of cell proliferation, this process also induces the differentiation of malignant cells. As previous known, the more differentiated the malignant cells, the less aggressive and dangerous is the cancer. Enhanced immunity and antioxidant properties also contribute to tumor cell destruction.

In their book Too Good to be True?, Drs. Kim Vanderlinden and Ivana Vucenik describe what is presently known about how IP6 works to help normalize the rate of cell division, normalize cell physiology, enhance Natural Killer (NK) cells, increase tumor suppressor P53 gene activity, inhibit inflammation, and inhibit angiogenesis. The book also elaborates on other conditions shown to greatly benefit from IP6 including diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

Food Sources or Supplements?

There have been no clinical trials of IP6 as yet. In America, clinical trials are generally the province of drug companies, and little is done with substances which cannot be patented. In spite of this lack, IP6 is considered quite safe by all its investigators. As it is a naturally occurring substance already found in human cells, there are no side effects. So if you want the preventative or therapeutic benefits of IP6, the question becomes whether to try to get sufficient amounts from dietary sources or to supplement.

There are reasons to use IP6 in supplemental form. In food, IP6 is bound to protein. Before it can be absorbed it must first be freed from this protein. An enzyme called phytase that is present in both food and the intestinal tract performs this function. The problem is that the power of the phytase enzyme damages the IP6 itself, rendering much of it inactive and therefore less effective.

Pure IP6 from a supplement is absorbed intact providing us with its complete medicinal properties. Research has shown just that: when fiber from All Bran was added to the diet of rats with mammary cancer, it was much less effective than the equivalent amount of IP6 added to their drinking water. This is like the situation of lycopene which must be freed from tomatoes by cooking to achieve its potential.

Supplementing with Inositol+Cal-Mag IP6

When taken alone, IP6 has the potential to bind with minerals, to act as a chelator. This is evidenced by its ability to prevent kidney stones. This leads to the question of high amounts of IP6 contributing to osteoporosis. To prevent this, IP6 is bound to atoms of calcium and magnesium. When supplemented in this form, IP6 will be delivered to the body along with substantial amounts of highly absorbable calcium and magnesium.

Inositol then becomes the first half of the Inositol+Cal Mag IP6. It provides the base structure for the Cal Mag IP6. A number of research studies have shown that when combined in this formula, the effect is complimentary and augmentative. Most IP6 for supplementation comes from rice extract and is formulated as Inositol+Cal Mag IP6.

Inositol+Cal Mag IP6 is available as 'Inocell' from Natural Factors, as 'Cellular Forte' from Phytopharmica, and as 'Cell Forte' from Enzymatic Therapeutics. The formulations of each are identical. The prices are quite different. It is available as capsules which provide a preventative or a maintenance dosage of 2 capsules twice a day. It is also available as powder for therapeutic dosages which range from one scoop daily up to several scoops twice daily.

About the author

Barbara Minton is a school psychologist by trade, a published author in the area of personal finance, a breast cancer survivor using "alternative" treatments, a born existentialist, and a student of nature and all things natural.

Report Links Increased Cancer Risk to CT Scans

Well this is not a surprise. I have seen this with my own eyes. The doctors and hospitals will push getting a "CT Scan" on people and if you choose not to, you feel you are taking a big risk by not knowing something important. I myself have never had one but I have gotten WAY too many chest x-rays. Apparently, CT Scans are even more dangerous than regular x-rays.

Millions of Americans, especially children, are needlessly getting dangerous radiation from “super X-rays” that raise the risk of cancer and are increasingly used to diagnose medical problems, a new report warns. In a few decades, as many as 2 percent of cancers in the United States may be due to radiation from CT scans given now, according to the report.

The risk from a single CT, or computed tomography, scan to an individual is small. But “we are very concerned about the built-up public health risk over a long period of time,” said Eric J. Hall, who wrote the report with David J. Brenner, a fellow Columbia University medical physicist.

It was published in The New England Journal of Medicine today, and the study was paid for by federal grants. Some experts say that estimate is overly alarming. But they agree with the need to curb these tests particularly in children, who are more susceptible to radiation and more likely to develop cancer from it.

Full article

Here is some information on what a CT Scan is from the people who promote the use of CT Scans because ultimately, it benefits the bottom line of the people at the top of their organizations. This is from a medical site that is part of the medical "complex". Oh here it is - emedicinehealth is owned by WebMD and here is the background on WebMd:

Another theme Baron likes is healthcare. One name he favors is Emdeon Corp., the New Jersey-based company that owns WebMD. That medical website provides a service for corporate employees, answering their health questions as they take over more responsibility for their own medical care from employers burdened by skyrocketing insurance costs. Emdeon is also well poised to capture pharmaceutical dollars as more drug companies start to advertise online, Baron predicts. Emdeon was one of Baron Growth's biggest purchases in the first quarter of 2007.

and this:
The WebMD Health Network reaches more than 40 million visitors a month
through its leading owned and operated health sites that include WebMD Health,
Medscape, MedicineNet, eMedicine, eMedicine Health, RxList and theHeart.org.
SOURCE WebMD

Here is their pro-CT Scan blurb:

CT has revolutionized medicine because it allows doctors to see diseases that, in the past, could often only be found at surgery or at autopsy. CT is noninvasive, safe, and well-tolerated. It provides a highly detailed look at many different parts of the body.

If you are looking at a standard x-ray image or radiograph (such as a chest x-ray), it appears as if you are looking through the body. CT and MRI are similar to each other, but provide a different view of the body than an x-ray does. CT and MRI produce cross-sectional images that appear to open the body up, allowing the doctor to look at it from the inside. MRI uses a magnetic field and radio waves to produce images, while CT uses x-rays to produce images. Plain x-rays are an inexpensive, quick exam and are accurate at diagnosing things such as pneumonia, arthritis, and fractures. CT and MRI better evaluate soft tissues such as the brain, liver, and abdominal organs, as well as look for subtle abnormalities that may not be apparent on regular x-rays.

But then, I find this info:

News Target

New research indicates whole body medical imaging scans (like CT scans) offer little in the way of long-term health benefits and may actually jeopardize patient care. The study indicated that whole-body scans added only about six days of life expectancy for the average 50-year-old male patient. The scans also have a high risk of false-positive findings, offering “absolutely no benefit to the patient,” said researcher Dr. G. Scott Gazelle of Harvard Medical School.

The Budwig Diet for the Cure and Prevention of Cancer

Somehow, in all my research, I never noticed this very simple "cure" discovered by a German physicist in the 50's.. The FIFITES! How is it that this information has been kept from people?? Just so you know, I came across this buried information in the Kevin Trudeau book - "More Natural Cures Revealed" which is a VERY interesting read.

I plan to start consuming this cottage cheese and flaxseed oil mixture every day as recommended by Dr Budwig. She also has some guidelines for eating that would be good to try to follow, for as long as you can. This morning, I mixed some organic flaxseed oil with some organic yogurt and added some stevia for sweetening. I then mixed in some Heritage cereal. It was VERY good! Heritage cereal has quinoa and flaxseed in it. This just might become my daily breakfast for a while!

Click here to view the original article on NaturalNews.com (formerly News Target)

(NewsTarget) Do you think the cure for cancer is yet to be discovered? That’s what the pharmaceutical industry and the pink ribbon folks would like you to think. But this is far from the truth.

One of the least known well-documented cures for cancer was created by a German biochemist and physicist named Johanna Budwig in the 1950’s. Dr. Budwig was a leading authority on fats, oils and nutrition. She believed that cancer, as well as the vast majority of illnesses, was primarily caused by the improper processing of foods and oils, particularly the overheating or boiling of oils. Her patients were those so terminally ill that traditional medical practitioners had given up on them, with many having been given only days or hours to live. She treated these patients with a simple diet based on a combination of flaxseed oil and sulphurated protein.

While studying the blood samples of cancer patients and healthy persons, Dr. Budwig concluded that those with cancer had gross deficiencies of phosphatides and lipoproteins, while those without cancer did not. This deficiency resulted in a reduced oxygen level in the cells. It is well known that cancer cells can thrive only in an anaerobic environment. Her task was then to create a method by which cells could be re-oxygenated. Noting that saturated fats lacked the necessary pi-electron shells necessary to provide the high energy levels needed to effect oxygen transport, she discovered that unsaturated fats were the key in obtaining these pi-electrons. Flaxseed oil provides linoleic and linolenic fatty acids, both rich in high energy producing pi-electron. These fatty acids render the body able to assimilate and transfer immense amounts of oxygen into the cells, allowing for oxidation and detoxification of cellular waste. They also enable the restoration of the lipid membrane of cells so essential to intra and extra cellular balances.

Another significant aspect of Dr. Budwig’s work is her acknowledgement of the connection between the human body and the sun. She demonstrated that when the body is nourished with health giving oils and proteins, the pi-electrons serve as a resonance system for the sun’s energy.

As you can see, the Budwig diet is not really a method of curing cancer in and of itself. It simply helps correct an omega 3 deficiency that, when corrected, allows the body to heal itself. The benefits of this diet are not confined to those battling cancer, but extends to the healing of those with liver dysfunction, diabetes, arthritis, heart disease, stomach ulcers, eczema, immune deficiencies, MS, IBS and other diseases. Its value as a preventative cannot be overstated.

There are thousands of documented cases of recovery from cancer with the Budwig diet. For her research and practice, Dr. Budwig was nominated for six Nobel Prizes. She was also subjected to endless vilification and harassment by the orthodox medical establishment, and the German pharmaceutical industry. Publication of her clinical studies and research papers was refused. However, her books are now widely available and can be purchased from Amazon.com and other book sellers. Johanna Budwig lived to be 95 years old.

Ironically, in 2001 Duke University announced a new pilot study they were conducting that suggested that flaxseed oil and a low fat diet can help those with cancer.

The Budwig Diet consists of a flaxseed spread; and a mayonnaise made from flaxseed oil, low fat cottage cheese or yogurt with perhaps the addition of honey, fruit, garlic, cayenne, herbs, fresh squeezed fruit juice, ground flaxseeds, or a little water. One of these mixtures is taken 2 or 3 times daily. Meals consist of nutritionally dense whole foods.

Sugar is forbidden on the diet. This is because the cell takes up glucose (sugar) and gives off lactic acid which creates an acidic environment in the body. Cancer needs an acidic environment to flourish and cannot survive in an alkaline environment. Also forbidden are animal fats, all salad oils including commercial mayonnaise, meats containing chemicals and hormones, margarine, and anything containing preservative (preservative blocks the metabolism of flaxseed oil). Sweetening may be accomplished through the use of fruit juice or honey. Warm tea made of peppermint or rose hips is recommended. Black tea may be taken in the form of one cup per day.

The specifics of the complete Budwig diet may be easily researched online. For people wishing to fit the Budwig approach into today’s lifestyle, particularly as a preventative, it may be easily done by blending ¼ to ½ cup of low fat organic cottage cheese with 2 to 3 tablespoons of high quality flaxseed oil. Stir this mixture quickly until the oil and cheese are well blended and no pools of oil can be seen. Blending is accomplished when you can hold a spoonful upside down for a few moments and the mixture does not fall out. Eat it once or twice a day. Although this may sound unappetizing, it is really easy to get used to. Addition of cumin or dillweed with cayenne pepper makes is yummy.

Here are some other links to follow on this topic:

How to Fight Cancer & Win
Dr Budwig's Healing Protocol (recommended!)
Dr Johanna Budwig

Here is a description of how to use the flaxseed oil and cottage cheese (or yogurt) found on the last link above which is based on the Johanna Budwig protocol:

The following is not meant as medical advice. I am just sharing my own experience for your information.

Here is the experiment that I tried: Get a bottle of flax seed oil that is produced with organic flax seeds, and pressed with the Omegaflo or similar process that protects the oil from oxygen and light. They come in black plastic bottles. The black plastic protects the oil from light and is made so that it will not leach into the oil. The following companies are ones that I know of, but there may be others who make the same quality oil: Barlean's, Arrowhead Mills, Jarrow, Spectrum Natural and Flora.

Every day, use a mixture of Flax seed oil and yogurt or cottage cheese at a ratio of 1 tablespoon of flax seed oil to 4 tablespoons of the yogurt or cottage cheese. You can also use skim milk, (whole milk is even better). The important thing is to use a high quality protein with the oil and mix the yogurt, etc. and flax seed oil very thoroughly because the flax seed oil contains Omega 3 oils, which ninety percent of us are deficient in and our bodies cannot assimilate it properly unless it is first mixed with a high quality protein like milk, cottage cheese, yogurt. or quark, (which is difficult to find in the U.S.).

In the beginning, one should use at least 4 tablespoons of flax seed oil, at the 1-4 ratio, if one is healthy and more if one is not well. In the beginning, I took about six or eight tablespoons. Later, as your body's supply of Omega 3 oil is brought up to par, you should bring it down to a maintenance dose. Most of the sources I've read have recommended maintenance doses of about 1-2 tblspns. per day for women and about 2-4 tablespoons per day for men. But, they all agree that everyone is different so in the final analysis, everyone has to figure it out for oneself.

Omega 3 oil is called an essential oil, because the body can't manufacture it and needs to get it from an outside source. There is another essential oil, Omega 6, which most of us get in abundance, but, after a couple of weeks, one should also take oils that contain Omega 6, which is contained in Safflower oil, pumpkin seed oil and others. Unfortunately, most of the oils you buy, even in health food stores are not made properly and will hurt you more than help you. Get only oils from the companies mentioned above, if you want to play safe.

After you take this oil-protein combination for a day or two, try to get in the sun for at least a half hour or an hour a day and you will feel such a healing effect from the sun that you will be amazed. For the scientific basis of this experiment, read the books of Dr. Johanna Budwig, John Finnegan, Udo Erasmus and others which are listed in the bibliography. I am most impressed by the work of Dr. Johanna Budwig who has used the oil-protein formula as an important element in her methods to cure patients from cancer, heart disease and arthritis. Also, she places her discoveries in a cosmic context which is very inspiring.

The above mentioned experiment is based on sound scientific principles and since they are natural foods which belong in anyone's diet, they are perfectly safe to take. Of course, if you are seriously ill, you should consult a health expert.

Abnormal Proteins In Saliva Identify Breast Cancer, Benign Tumor Cells, Study Finds

Wonderful news! Where do I sign up? This means freedom for all women from the degrading torture test called a "mammogram" that was surely invented by Machiavelli. Not that mammograms have really ever been worth the risks with their high false positive AND false negative rates.

Protein markers in saliva can distinguish women with breast cancer from those with benign tumors and those with healthy cells, according to a study published online in the journal Cancer Investigation, the Houston Chronicle reports. According to the Houston Chronicle, the findings potentially could enable dentists and physicians to detect breast cancer during routine office visits.

For the study, Charles Streckfus, professor of diagnostic sciences at the University of Texas Health Science Center, and colleagues analyzed saliva samples from 30 women -- 10 with benign tumors, 10 with malignant tumors and 10 without tumors. The researchers found 49 proteins that differentiated between the women with tumors and those without. In previous research, Streckfus was able to identify 85% of malignancies with one differing breast cancer protein, a rate he estimates could approach 95% with if additional proteins are analyzed. (Ackerman, Houston Chronicle, 1/10). According to Streckfus, the researchers with additional analysis were able to distinguish between benign and malignant tumors. He added that the extra analysis could help eliminate "false positive results" and allow doctors to determine the next treatment options for women with breast cancer (Taylor, Globe and Mail, 1/11).

Streckfus said he hopes to seek federal approval of a test within five years but acknowledged further research must be conducted, such as validating the study results in hundreds of saliva samples he has collected. He said that he hopes to launch a large, multicenter trial in about two years at the UT M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and the UT Dental Branch. According to the Chronicle, the test will be conducted on a gold-plated chip or lab dish. A laser will then be used to distinguish protein markers in the saliva applied to the chip. According to Streckfus, such a test would be used in conjunction with other tools, including mammograms. There are no blood tests for detecting breast cancer.

Comments

"This will be a noninvasive, quick means of detection," Streckfus said, adding, "With it, dentists will be able to catch cancers before a woman can feel a lump." Streckfus noted that the test could be useful for breast cancer survivors who need to be monitored regularly and also in developing countries were mammography centers are lacking. William Dubinsky -- a biochemist at UT Medical School, who also worked on the study -- said saliva offers tremendous advantages over blood beyond the fact that it is easier to obtain.

Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer for American Cancer Society, said the research is clearly in the preliminary stages but added that a saliva test would be a "terrific advance" (Houston Chronicle, 1/10). Damien Walmsley, scientific adviser at the British Dental Association, said, "The mouth itself is a good indicator of an individual's overall health," adding, "In the case of breast cancer, saliva analysis has been used to monitor patient response to chemotherapy or surgical treatment of the disease" (Moss, Scotsman, 1/11).

Henry Scowcroft of the Cancer Research UK said that the finding "is one of many early 'proof-of-principle' results that are published every year" but that the "research only looked at samples from a very small number of people." He added that the "technique might not prove reliable when more people are studied, and there's no data on how effective it might be in practice. So there's a lot more work to be done to find out if this method could ever be used routinely" (BBC News, 1/10).

An abstract of the study is available online.

Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.

Study Links Dense Breast Tissue To A Higher Risk of Breast Cancer

Once again - misinformation from the allopathic cancer doctors and their handlers. They leave out probably the *most* important piece of information and that is NOT that the dense breasts are what leads to cancer but the fact that because of the dense breasts, they get more mammograms recommended and given, in the relentless quest by the cancer machine to find the cancer that they know is lurking there. The dirty little secret they DON'T want you to know is that the repeated radiation and compression of the breasts will eventually find cancer BECAUSE THEY CREATED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Monday, January 07, 2008 by: Cindie Leonard, MA

(NewsTarget) Nearly 40% of pre-menopausal women experience the symptoms of fibrocystic breast syndrome (this author refuses to label the condition a disease!) A recent study published in the September 1, 2007 issue of Cancer Research, reported findings suggesting a link between dense breast tissue and a higher risk of breast cancer. Studies of this nature produce a great deal of anxiety and alarm for women with fibrocystic breasts.

The study offered complex, scientific explanations supporting the link between dense breast tissue and a higher rate of breast cancer. Yet, the "gene hunters" at the Mayo Clinic overlooked one highly important confound: Women with dense breasts, on average, receive an absurd amount of radiation! An average diagnostic mammogram is not one x-ray, but a series of x-rays, usually two per breast. If a suspicious lump is discovered, there is no limit to the number of repeat x-rays. If a biopsy is performed, most likely there will be follow-up x-rays, or possibly x-rays as part of the biopsy (such as during the procedure of a needle localization). Each view can expose breast tissue to as much as 0.2 rad per x-ray ("rad" is a measurement of the radiation dose). It is important to note that radiation is cumulative. Each rad of 1.0 exposure increases the risk of breast cancer by one percent. Pre-menopausal women have breast tissue which is highly sensitive to radiation, possibly increasing the risk even more.

Whether or not a biopsy is performed, once a suspicious lesion is discovered, it is highly likely that another series of mammograms will be scheduled within six months, sometimes less. With some women, this debacle goes on year after year.

In a recent study involving 5,685 women, published in the July 15, 2000 issue of the International Journal of Cancer, the association between diagnostic radiation exposure and breast cancer was examined. The results of this study conclude that some forms of low-dose radiation may increase the risk of breast cancer. The study also found that women who underwent diagnostic chest x-rays for pneumonia or tuberculosis had more than twice the normal risk of breast cancer.

...

It is unfortunate that these recent studies suggesting the link between dense breast tissue and a higher risk for breast cancer did not include the possibility that dense breasts receive, on average, more radiation due to repeat diagnostic x-rays. Sensitive, delicate breast tissue is routinely zapped with harmful, accumulating radiation and this fact was not mentioned, nor explored in these widely published studies.

In recent years, advances in ultrasound technology allow for an x-ray free, highly effective diagnostic tool. Being that ultrasound is more expensive and time-consuming, the mammogram is the standard for repeat examinations. The appeal of ultrasound would be further bolstered with more conclusive research about the radiation exposure associated with mammography. In conclusion, studies reporting a link between fibrocystic breasts and an increased risk of breast cancer should include (or at least mention) the possibility that the higher cancer risk may be caused by the increased exposure to radiation due to mammography.

About the author
Cindie Leonard has a Master's degree in Counseling Psychology and is a Certified Hypnotherapist.

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.

What exactly is 714X?

Just when I thought I had found all the alternative cancer treatments, I stumble on information about 714X and it is interesting indeed.

Please see the following links for more information

http://www.billybest.net/
http://naturalhealthline.com/newsletter/1june01/714x.htm
RedOrbit.com

I also picked up one of Kevin Trudeau's books - "The Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You To Know About" Despite the flagrant criticism of Kevin Trudeau by the mainstream medical people I think his message and information is quite valid. It syncs with others in the alternative health field and contains much common sense relating to health.. common sense that has been lost on most of us today in this pill-popping, junk food eating world we live in.

Breast Cancer Stem Cells Seem to Survive Radiation Therapy

Oh my God can I say "I told you so?" Can I? Please?

TUESDAY, Dec. 19 (HealthDay News) -- Breast cancer stem cells, a type of cell that scientists have recently discovered is difficult to kill, may be especially resistant to radiation therapy, a new study suggests.

In fact, the radiation can even increase the growth of these stubborn stem cells, report researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles, David Geffen School of Medicine.

"This population of stem cells is more radiation-resistant than are non-stem cells," said Dr. Frank Pajonk, an assistant adjunct professor of radiation oncology at UCLA and corresponding author on the study. "We are the first to report this."

--------------------
Yet I read this VERY thing in several books - most notably the World Without Cancer book by G Edward Griffin.. so they are NOT the first to report this. Bah humbug.. They are the first CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE place to report this.. I'll give them that.. I think also Dr Lorraine Day said this kind of thing. This is why after radiation they think it was successful when the tumor *shrinks* but what has been eliminated may only be the normal cells and the cancer cells live on in the smaller now exposed mass. The tumor capsule that is killed by radiation is actually protecting the body from the cancer! And then they go and remove that protection. Then, of course months later, the person comes back with an even worse case of cancer and a few OTHER side effects from the radiation.
---------------------------------------

When Pajonk's team exposed the cells to a higher dose of 3 Gray, every day for five days, then stopped the treatment before what would be considered a full round, the proportion of stem cells actually increased.
-----------------------

Breast cancer drop tied to hormones

Good news IF you were someone who stopped taking or never took hormones for menopause.
Seems they did not really test the use of hormones that well to me. .but to be fair, it is hard to test such a long term effect of hormones too. I just feel many of us are doing the testing on these drugs and therapies and I think most people are unaware of how much is unknown about the drugs they take.

Follow the title link for the full story.

SAN ANTONIO - The millions of women who quit taking menopause hormones after a big federal study found that the pills raised the risk of breast cancer now have more reason to be glad they stopped.

A new analysis reveals that U.S. breast cancer rates plunged more than 7 percent in 2003 and strongly suggests that the reason is less hormone use.

"It's a big deal ... amazing, really," said one of the researchers, Dr. Rowan Chlebowski of Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. "It's better than a cure" because these are cases that never occurred, he said.

About 14,000 fewer women were diagnosed with the disease than had been expected, researchers reported Thursday at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

Cancers take years to form, so going off hormones would not instantly prevent new tumors. But tumors that had been developing might stop growing, shrink or disappear, so they were no longer detected by mammograms, doctors theorized.

Cases dropped most among women 50 and older — the age group taking hormones. The decline was biggest for tumors whose growth is fueled by estrogen — the type most affected by hormone use.

In fact, when both factors were combined — older women with estrogen-positive tumors — the drop was 12 percent.

The decline was seen in every single cancer registry that reports information to the federal government, and no big change occurred with any other major type of cancer. These are strong signs that the breast cancer decline is no statistical fluke or error.

follow link for the rest of the article....

Dow Chemical tried to silence report that Bisphenol A plastic is harmful

Read full story at this link

This is shameful of DOW and shows that corporate greed prevails over concern for public safety hands down every time.

I think the most upsetting part is that this plastic has been used in the spill-proof toddler's cups for HOW LONG and they knew it could be harmful??? How about all the plastic food trays that Americans heat up in microwave ovens every single day??

I abandoned as much plastic as I could in my kitchen and switched to glass. If I buy frozen food I remove it from the plastic dish and put it into a glass dish and cook in the convection oven. I store nothing, cook nothing in plastic. However, I still use plastic water bottles so I probably need to find alternatives for those as well. I no longer use my microwave oven and I think the combination of microwaving and this deadly plastic are a HUGE factor in the drastic INCREASE in prostate and breast cancers in the industrialized world.

But guess where I found I may be exposing myself to this chemical without realizing it? My BRITA water jug. DOH! It is a very hard clear plastic jub but there is no recycle symbol. I did a search and found that it does indeed contain this chemical. Guess I'll be throwing THAT out now.

Excerpt:

University of Missouri, Colombia biological sciences professor Fred vom Saal is determined to show that plastics corporations are just as dangerous as tobacco companies, and reports that one major chemical company tried to persuade him to hold off on publishing his research to that effect.

The primary focus of vom Saal's research is bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical that is found in polycarbonate plastics, which are used in steel food can linings, Lexan items, Nalgene bottles, baby bottles, spill-proof toddler's cups, plastic wrap, microwave-safe plastic dishware, and food containers. He says the chemical mimics powerful sex hormones and even small doses can cause brain damage, abnormal organ development, and hyperactivity. Vom Saal noted that many -- but not all -- products that have a 7 inside the recycling triangle symbol contain BPA, which he said is one of the biggest chemicals in production worldwide, with more than 6 billion pounds created and used annually.

Here is some more info on the harmful effects of BPA:

Suspicion Lingers Over BPA and Breast Cancer
Bisphenol A, a common industrial chemical claimed to speed the growth of human breast and ovarian cancers, retains its carcinogenic properties even after being modified by body processes, report Indiana University and University of California at Berkeley scientists in the Aug. 28th issue of Chemistry & Biology, a Cell Press journal.

"If our hypothesis is true about BPA, it's probably going to be the sum of effects of a lot of cancer-causing compounds that is responsible for the disease," Widlanski said. "We would not anticipate that BPA or any other single chemical is the only culprit here."

Plastics chemical BPA may Promote Breast Cancer

New research appearing in the journal Chemistry & Biology has shown that a chemical found in harder plastics -- such as those used to make water cooler jugs and CD cases -- may promote breast cancer.

Researchers from Indiana University studied how bisphenol-A (BPA) may be more easily absorbed by breast tumor cells than healthy cells. Experts have long assumed that since healthy cells do not readily absorb bisphenol sulfate -- one of the body's metabolized forms of BPA -- BPA is a harmless chemical. However, the Indiana researchers found that breast tumor cells, which vastly differ from normal, healthy cells, convert bisphenol sulfate back into BPA, which can be easily taken up into tumor cells.

Adams warns consumers to avoid heating food in plastic containers and to use glass, Pyrex or other non-plastic food containers whenever possible. He also urges consumers to read The Hundred-Year Lie to get the full story about the dangers of chemicals in foods, beverages, drugs and common kitchen items like storage containers.


Chemical used in food containers disrupts brain development

The chemical bisphenol A (BPA), widely used in products such as food cans, milk container linings, water pipes and even dental sealants, has now been found to disrupt important effects of estrogen in the developing brain.

A University of Cincinnati (UC) research team, headed by Scott Belcher, PhD, reports in two articles in the December 2005 edition of the journal Endocrinology that BPA shows negative effects in brain tissue "at surprisingly low doses."

Long known to act as an artificial estrogen, the primary hormone involved in female sexual development, BPA has already been shown to increase breast cancer cell growth, and in the January 2005 edition of the journal Cancer Research, another UC research team reported that it increased the growth of some prostate cancer cells as well. Warnings about other possible long-term health risks associated with fetal exposures to BPA have also been discussed in recent scientific literature.

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

I found this great link on dangerous and safer plastics.

Widespread vitamin D deficiency may be cause of post-Winter flu outbreaks, scientists suggest

From this link at NewsTarget.com

by Ben Kage

(NewsTarget) A team of researchers is gathering data in an attempt to determine why flu outbreaks hit the Northern Hemisphere during winter months and tend to peak between December and March, and a new theory suggests it may be a lack of sunshine-produced vitamin D.

In the past, many theories have been put forward to explain the seasonal flu flux, but explanations such as cold air and the tendency of people to group together "remain astonishingly superficial and full of inconsistencies," said Dr. Scott Dowell, director of the Global Disease Protection Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

Theories about a chill causing the disease's prevalence is upended by evidence from tropical locations, where flu remains common and follows a similar seasonal pattern to its cold-climate counterpart. The grouping theory is debunked by the fact that certain groups of people are stuck in small spaces together year round, with no greater likelihood of contracting flu than anyone else.

>Now, the Harvard-University-led team is investigating whether inadequate sun exposure during the winter may open people up to infection, since exposure to ultraviolet B radiation (UVB) radiation from the sun causes vitamin D production in the skin. If the lack of vitamin D and increased flu cases in the winter are connected, it could have a significant impact on public health, as an average of 36,000 people die from flu in the United States every winter, primarily the elderly or the very young.

R. Edgar Hope-Simpson published the first paper that identified a link between flu epidemics and the winter solstice -- usually indentified as the start of winter and the shortest day of the year -- in 1981, despite having no formal training in the field of epidemiology. Simpson noted that flu infections spiked just before and after the winter solstice, and theorized that solar radiation might cause a sort of "seasonal stimulus" in the virus, the host or both, although he could not identify the stimulus.

Simpson's work was largely ignored, according to Dr. John Cannell, a psychiatrist at the Atascadero State Hospital in California. However, Cannel and his Harvard colleagues suggest the stimulus to which Simpson referred may be vitamin D. Cannell began investigating the possibility when a flu outbreak hit Atascadero in April of 2005 and all the wards surrounding his were infected, Cannell's patients were not. All of his patients, he said, were taking high daily doses of vitamin D.

During the winter, people are outdoors less often and the skin has less opportunity to produce vitamin D, and the atmosphere during that season is adept at blocking UVB radiation. This is why some health experts warn that Americans may not be getting sufficient vitamin D, especially with the resurgence of the vitamin-deficiency-related bone disorder known as rickets.

In the report -- published in the December issue of Epidemiology and Infection -- the researchers posit that the vitamin D stimulated by sunlight may, in turn, cause the body to produce the infection-fighting peptide cathelcidin. No studies been conducted that to show whether cathelcidin effects influenza, but previous studies in the March issue of Science have shown it attacks a range of fungi, viruses and bacteria, including the bacteria that causes tuberculosis.

The tropical evidence that upsets the chill theory does not preclude the vitamin D theory, as Cannell and colleagues point out, as studies show that vitamin D deficiencies have even been recorded in equatorial locations. Additionally, a 2003 analysis of flu cases found they were greatest during the rainy season, when there is a significant cloud cover and reduced sun exposure.

Despite the evidence offered by Cannell and colleagues, some members of the scientific community remain skeptical about the theory.

"They have manipulated the literature -- some of it very bad literature -- to prove their points," said Dr. James Cherry, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at UCLA's David Geffen School of Medicine. However, he added, "The hypothesis should be easy to prove or disprove with a controlled, blinded study."

Cannell, for his part, said he takes more than twice the recommended daily dose of vitamin D during winter months and reports he rarely gets sick.