- View All News
- March 2012
- December 2010
- September 2010
- May 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
Cancer Victors News
December 27, 2007
The Budwig Diet For The Cure And Prevention Of Cancer
Originally published December 26 2007
by Barbara L. Minton
(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.
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.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. Newstarget.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NewsTarget.com/terms.shtml
Posted 12/27/2007 6:42:00 PM
December 17, 2007
All the news about lycopene, a powerful antioxidant that makes tomatoes red and may help prevent prostate cancer in men, is turning into a powerful marketing tool for ketchup manufacturers. New research shows, however, that not all ketchups are created equal.
Biologists at the Agricultural Research Service in Albany, California, recently tested the lycopene levels in 13 commercial ketchups representing 10 manufacturers. They found that organic ketchup, usually darker red than conventional ketchup, averages 60 percent more lycopene. The higher levels may be a result of both the more gentle organic processing methods, such as a lower heat, and the fruit itself
Posted 12/17/2007 6:57:00 PM
December 17, 2007
A new molecular assay test improves the accuracy of finding cancer in the lymph nodes during a sentinel lymph node biopsy, according to results presented by researchers Saturday at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.
Results of the study showed that the GeneSearch BLN Assay test, developed by Veridex LLC and approved by the FDA in mid-July, is about 10 percent more sensitive than traditional histology and microscopic exams in finding evidence of tumor cells during a sentinel lymph node biopsy.
One of the challenges of the sentinel lymph node biopsy is that a pathologic examination of the lymph nodes must be done during a halt in the surgery to assess whether there is a tumor in the sentinel nodes. Traditionally, surgeons conduct a sentinel lymph node biopsy by removing less than 5 percent of the lymph node during an intra-operative halt in the surgery. The small node section is then frozen and examined under a microscope for the presence of cancer cells. If cancer cells are found in the nodes, the surgeon will typically remove these lymph nodes during the biopsy procedure.
However, all too often the results of this assessment are inaccurate, requiring the patient to undergo the physical and emotional stress of returning to the operating room for yet another surgical procedure to remove the cancerous lymph nodes.
The GeneSearch molecular assay test, approved as a replacement for the standard frozen section method of examining the sentinel lymph nodes during a biopsy, is an ultra-rapid method of doing a genetic screening test to look for evidence of tumor cells in the lymph nodes during the intra-operative halt in the surgery. Researchers reported that this new technique is more sensitive than frozen section, without sacrificing specificity.
Researchers did both standard frozen section and molecular assay tests on 319 breast cancer patients. The pathologists who did the frozen section did not know the results of molecular assay test, and vice versa. After both diagnostic tests were completed, researchers compared the results from each test to the final pathologic report on each patient.
According to Dr. Peter Blumencranz, lead investigator of the study, surgical oncologist and medical director of Moffitt Morton Plant Cancer Care at Morton Plant Hospital in Clearwater, Fla., the GeneSearch assay test correctly diagnosed patients for cancer 91 percent of the time.
Compared with the 65 percent accuracy of the frozen section in detecting tiny breast cancers, the GeneSearch test displayed a remarkable improvement from the traditional pathologic examinations currently in use for sentinel lymph node biopsies.
"Since we began using this test at our [medical] center on Aug. 1, we have tested 85 patients with the molecular assay and only one of them [received a false negative] and had to come back for a second surgery," Blumencranz said. "But in fact, more than that percent is missed in standard histology. So what is the greater truth? Looking at 50 percent of the node with the assay or what amounts to only about 5 percent of the node by microscopic exam."
But despite the proven increased sensitivity of the GeneSearch test in finding small and hard-to-diagnose cancers, some doctors remain more concerned about the risk of false positives from the molecular test than the risk of false negatives.
The GeneSearch assay test works by slicing the node into sections much like a loaf of bread. Each slice is then homogenized, or blended together, and put into the molecular assay machine. The machine then checks the cells for two molecular markers of breast cancer, giving doctors a qualitative positive or negative answer.
However, because the test looks for molecular markers of breast cancer rather than identifying actual cancer cells, some doctors fear it will result in too many false positives.
"This might result in a few patients getting an axillary dissection when the next day the pathologist found that the sentinel node is negative, even though it was called positive by the molecular test," said Daniel Hayes, clinical director of the Breast Oncology Program at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center. "It's a little like if you walk through the woods and see scratches on a tree, you presume there are bears in the woods, though you didn't actually see any bears."
Researchers reported a 4 percent to 5 percent rate of false positives with the GeneSearch test. Dr. Lee Wilke, assistant professor of surgery at Duke University, said it will take more research and a decreased rate of false positives before she is convinced that the GeneSearch test should be used as a replacement for the frozen section.
"Certainly false positive rates are our biggest fear. You don't want to tell a patient they have cancer when they don't. That's why more larger studies need to be done to double check and make sure that what we're seeing is not a large number of false positives," Wilke said. "I would like to see the number [of false positives] go lower [with the GeneSearch test], into the 1 to 2 percent range."
The study reported that the frozen section method of diagnosing cancer in the sentinel nodes has sensitivity rate somewhere between 60 and 80 percent, meaning that this test misses cancers in 40 to 20 percent of women. The reason for the large disparity in the rate of accuracy with the frozen section is that this method often fails at detecting hard to diagnose cancers, such as lobular carcinoma. About 15 to 20 percent of all breast cancers are lobular cancers.
Because the GeneSearch test has a heightened sensitivity in finding evidence of lobular cancer, Hayes said he believes the important question facing breast surgeons is whether it is better to have a few patients undergo an unnecessary operation to remove lymph nodes due to a false positive by the molecular assay test, or to have many patients undergo a second surgery due to a false negative from a frozen section.
"I think this is going to cause a lot of hand-wringing for us doctors to determine which outcome is better for the patient," Hayes said. "I think we should probably use this in addition to the final pathology report, rather than have the molecular test replace the frozen section."
However, Blumencranz maintains that breast surgeons should adopt the GeneSearch test into their practice as a method of providing each woman with the most accurate assessment of their disease as possible.
"The burden on us, as surgeons and pathologists, is to assure the patient as much as possible that we are accurately diagnosing disease where it is present. And if there's a tool that can do that better, then I think we should be using it," Blumencranz said.
Posted 12/17/2007 6:45:00 PM
December 12, 2007
Israeli Researchers Link Cell Phones, Cancer
Friday, December 07, 2007
Israeli researchers say they've found a link between cell phones and cancer. A study led by Dr. Siegal Sadetzki, an oncologist at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, Israel, found a nearly 50 percent increase in the risk of tumors of the parotid gland, a salivary gland found slightly ahead of each ear. Agence France-Presse quoted a report in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot, which apparently said the risk was highest those who used their cell phones for more than 22 hours per month, held the phone to the same ear or lived in rural areas. AFP said it saw an abstract from the American Journal of Epidemiology, where the study is to be published. Dozens of studies regarding cell phones and cancer have been carried out over the past 15 years, with often contradictory results.
Israeli researchers say they've found a link between cell phones and cancer.
A study led by Dr. Siegal Sadetzki, an oncologist at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, Israel, found a nearly 50 percent increase in the risk of tumors of the parotid gland, a salivary gland found slightly ahead of each ear.
Agence France-Presse quoted a report in the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot, which apparently said the risk was highest those who used their cell phones for more than 22 hours per month, held the phone to the same ear or lived in rural areas.
AFP said it saw an abstract from the American Journal of Epidemiology, where the study is to be published.
Dozens of studies regarding cell phones and cancer have been carried out over the past 15 years, with often contradictory results.
Posted 12/12/2007 4:09:00 PM
December 6, 2007
Breaking News: Omaha Shooter Robert Hawkins Had Been "Treated" For ADHD, Depression
Original story at: http://www.newstarget.com/022330.html
NewsTarget) America seems shocked that, yet again, a young male would pick up an assault rifle and murder his fellow citizens, then take his own life. This is what happened last night in
It all started in , when Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold massacred their way into the history books on April 20, 1999 by killing 12 and wounding 23 people. The mainstream media virtually glorified the event, yet utterly failed to report the connection between violence in young men and treatment with psychiatric drugs. (Both Harris and Klebold were taking antidepressant drugs.)
It's a little known fact that antidepressant drugs have never been tested on children nor approved by the for use on children. It is well established in the scientific literature, however, that such drugs cause young men to think violent thoughts and commit violent acts. This is precisely why the U.K. has outright banned the prescribing of such drugs to children. Yet here in the United States -- the capitol of gun violence by kids on depression drugs -- the and drug companies pretend that mind-altering drugs have no link whatsoever to behavior.
Enormous evidence linking mind-altering drugs with violent acts
In 2005, I reported on this site that http://www.newstarget.com/003086.html )
In 2006, we reported the results of a study published in the showing that teens taking antidepressant drugs are more likely to commit suicide (and to be "successful" at completing the act). See http://www.newstarget.com/020643.html
On September 11, 2006, I reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and violent behavior yet again. (See http://www.newstarget.com/020394.html ) In that article, I explained, "If you're going to alter the brain chemistry of these children, you had better be prepared for the results. The result we're seeing now is mass killings. Elsewhere around the world, where children aren't doped up on all these drugs, we don't see this kind of behavior. This is what happens when you change children's brain chemistry; you get these results..."
The very next day, we published a report about the anti-depressant drug Paxil doubling the risk of violent behavior. (See http://www.newstarget.com/020406.html ) In that article, I stated, "This finding helps explain why school shootings are almost always conducted by children who are taking antidepressants. We also know that SSRIs cause children to disconnect from reality. When you combine that with a propensity for violence, you create a dangerous recipe for school shootings and other adolescent violence.
In April of this year, I also reported on the link between antidepressant drugs and the Virginia Tech shooting. See http://www.newstarget.com/021798.html
What I said in that article has urgent application right now, following the shooting:
A study published in the Public Library of Science Medicine (an open source medical journal) explored these same links in detail. (See Antidepressants and Violence: Problems at the Interface of Medicine and Law, by David Healy, Andrew Herxheimer, David B. Menkes)
The authors note that "Some regulators, such as the Canadian regulators, have also referred to risks of treatment-induced activation leading to both self-harm and harm to others" and the "United States labels for all antidepressants as of August 2004 note that 'anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and nonpsychiatric'".
In other words, the link between antidepressants and violence has been known for years by the very people manufacturing, marketing or prescribing the drugs. As the author of the study mentioned above concluded, "The new issues highlighted by these cases need urgent examination jointly by jurists and psychiatrists in all countries where antidepressants are widely used."
That was last year, well before this latest shooting. The warning signs were there, and they've been visible for a long time. Medical authorities can hardly say they are "shocked" by this violent behavior. After all, the same pattern of violence among antidepressant takers has been observed, documented and published in numerous previous cases.
(Click the cartoon for the full-sized version.)
Not surprised at what happened in Omaha
The people of
And what is the standard American psychiatric "treatment" for these conditions? Mind-altering drugs, of course.
ADHD, for example, is treated with a drug that used to be an illegal street drug called "speed." It's an amphetamine, and recent research published in the August, 2007 issue of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reveals that Ritalin and other ADHD drugs actually stunt the growth of children, causing their brains and bodies to be physically altered. (See http://www.newstarget.com/021944.html )
Depression, of course, is treated with SSRI drugs, none of which have ever been safety approved by the for use on children or teens. In other words, the use of these drugs on teenagers is a grand, mind-altering medical experiment, and what we just witnessed in is one result of that experiment.
There will be more. I hate to be accurate about this grisly prediction, because I grieve for the families of those lost to pharmaceutically-induced violence, but the truth is that until we stop drugging our children with psychotropic drugs, the shootings are not going to stop.
Big Pharma is to blame for this one, not the manufacturer of the gun. That gun has a trigger, you see, and the trigger was pulled by a finger. The finger was connected via a series of nerves to a brain, and that brain was altered by psychotropic drugs. The brain wasn't functioning like a normal, healthy, well-nourished brain; it was functioning like a zoned out "zombie" brain permanently distorted by psychiatric drugs.
Sending a teenager out into the public doped up on mind-altering drugs that we KNOW are linked to violence -- and jacked up on junk foods (he worked at ) -- is a certain recipe for disaster. Big Pharma executives, drug reps and the irresponsible psychiatrists who dish these pills out to teenagers might as well have just walked right into the mall and set off a bomb themselves. These are the people ultimately responsible for the tragedy in . Hawkins may have pulled the trigger, but modern psychiatry drugged him with violence-inducing chemicals. The fact that such drugs promote violence isn't even disputed. It's printed right on the warning labels of those drugs!
And as sad as this tragedy is for all those affected by this medication-induced violence, the truly sad part is that America still hasn't learned this lesson. If you drug the children with chemicals that cause violence, you're going to see more shootings. It's as simple as that. And if you take away the guns, you'll see bombs, knives or machetes used in these attacks. When disturbed young boys are doped up on psychotropic drugs that promote violence -- and they're drugged by the hundreds of thousands -- it's like playing a national game of Russian roulette (with apologies to ). Sooner or later, another kid whose mind has been altered by Ritalin, Prozac or some other drug is going to walk into yet another school or mall and start killing people. This kind of behavior is a direct product of chemical-based psychiatric "treatment."
The criminals running modern psychiatry
In fact, I predict we'll see another such shooting in the next 30 days, if not sooner. And yet, even with the increasing frequency of these events, the unholy alliance between Big Pharma and the immensely evil psychiatric industry will continue. Yet more children will be put on mind-altering drugs that stunt their growth, alter their brain chemistry, and turn them into mind-numbed massacre drones who acquire dangerous weapons and open fire in public places.
The psychiatric industry, though, thinks that yet MORE children need "treatment" with drugs for ADHD and depression. In fact, an industry press release recently claimed that only one-third of those children "suffering" from ADHD are receiving appropriate "treatment" for the condition. Of course, those are just code words for "drugging the children with high-profit pharmaceuticals." When the psychiatric authorities say "treatment," what they mean is "more drugging."
Want to learn the horrifying, yet true, history of modern psychiatry? Check out www.CCHR.org - the Citizens' Commission on Human Rights. They have a documentary so downright shocking that I couldn't even finish watching the whole thing. It's called Psychiatry: An Industry of Death.
Also be sure to check out the shocking book by Kelly Patricia O'Meara called Psyched Out: How Psychiatry Sells Mental Illness and Pushes Pills That Kill. This book explains exactly why kids like Robert Hawkins who have been treated with psychiatric drugs end up shooting innocents.
What could have healed Robert Hawkins and saved lives
So what's the solution to all this? Robert Hawkins could have been healed with a radical change in diet that supports healthy brain chemistry. His parents or caretakers should have stopped the junk food, ended the medication and put him on raw, living foods and daily superfood smoothies, fresh vegetable juices, raw nuts and seeds and other wholesome, non-processed foods. Nutrition is the single most powerful factor determining healthy moods and behavior, and virtually all young men who commit violent acts (including the vast majority of those imprisoned in the U.S. today) suffer from wild nutritional deficiencies.
Robert Hawkins could have been a healthy, stable and normal kid with the help of some real food, real nutrition and real love from a supporting family. Instead, he lived on junk food, worked at and took medication pills as directed by his psychiatric doctor. The results speak for themselves: This recipe of processed food and mind-altering drugs created a monster, and yesterday in , that monster exploded in a rage of violence.
If we don't learn from all this and stop drugging our nation's children, then those innocents in will have died in vain. And I ask the question: How many more innocent Americans must pay the price for medication-induced violence?
Ask yourself one question: Why does the continue to allow these dangerous drugs to be prescribed to children and teens when 1) They have never been tested on children or teens, and 2) Other countries have already banned the prescribing of these drugs to children and teens?
Story Notes: The Associated Press originally reported Hawkins' age as 20 years old, but corrected it to 19 years old following a correction by local police. Hawkins was not reported to have been taking medications at the precise time of the shooting, but his caretaker, Debora Maruca-Kovac, said that "he had been treated in the past for depression and attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder." We do not know exactly which drugs Hawkins had been treated with in the past, and we hope the names of those drugs will surface in future reports on this tragedy.
NewsTarget deeply regrets the loss of life witnessed in this event, and we commit to doing our part to end these medication-induced crimes that continue to be perpetrated by Big Pharma and modern psychiatry. You have permission to forward or reprint this article, with appropriate credit and a link back to this URL: http://www.newstarget.com/022330.html
Please protect our children from Big Pharma!
- Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Consumer health advocate
Posted 12/6/2007 2:15:00 PM
December 5, 2007
A prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test measures the amount of prostate-specific antigen in the blood. PSA is released into a man's blood by his prostate gland. Healthy men have low amounts of PSA in the blood. The amount of PSA in the blood normally increases as a man's prostate enlarges with age. PSA may increase as a result of an injury, a digital rectal exam, sexual activity (ejaculation), inflammation of the prostate gland (prostatitis), or prostate cancer.
Prostate cancer often grows very slowly, without causing major problems. Detecting prostate cancer early and treating it may prevent some health problems and reduce the risk of dying from the cancer. However, some treatments for prostate cancer can cause other problems, such as controlling urination (incontinence) or erection problems (erectile dysfunction). Some men may choose not to have a PSA test or treat prostate cancer if it is detected. For example, a man older than age 75 who has no bothersome symptoms of prostate cancer may choose not to treat the cancer if it is found, so he would not need a PSA test.
Posted 12/5/2007 2:49:00 PM
December 5, 2007
That news appears in today's early online edition of Cancer.
The researchers included Laurel Northouse, PhD, RN, of the University of Michigan School of Nursing.
In a previous study, Northouse and colleagues studied the emotional toll that prostate cancer takes on patients and spouses.
They found that the patients' wives reported as much distress -- and less social support and confidence in their coping abilities -- as the patients themselves.
Now, Northouse's team is studying solutions for those stresses.
Cancer and Marriage
Northouse's latest study includes 235 prostate cancer patients -- most of whom were newly diagnosed with prostate cancer -- and their wives.
The researchers split the couples into two groups.
One group took part in a four-month family support program that fostered family involvement, optimistic attitude, effective coping, uncertainty reduction, and symptom management.
As part of the program, counselors visited the couples at home three times for 90 minutes per visit and called the couples twice for discussions that lasted for half an hour.
For comparison, the other couples didn't participate in the family support program.
Curbing Cancer Stress
The patients and their wives completed surveys about their experiences with and emotions about prostate cancer four times: at the study's start and four months, eight months, and a year later.
At the four-month check, the wives in the support group reported higher quality of life, better communication, less uncertainty, less hopelessness, and less symptom distress than those in the comparison group.
Some of the positive results lasted beyond the end of the yearlong study.
Support for Spouses
The need to support cancer patients is widely known, and it's the topic of a recent report from the Institute of Medicine.
Northouse and colleagues write that in their study, prostate cancer patients "obtained benefits" from the support program, but "the effects were far greater for their spouses."
That may be because the wives were at least as distressed as the patients and didn't get support unless they happened to be assigned to the researchers' support program.
"At a minimum, the findings suggest that spouses of men with prostate cancer need to be included in programs of care," the researchers conclude.
Posted 12/5/2007 2:26:00 PM