- 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
October 15, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008; 12:00 AM
WEDNESDAY, Oct. 15 (HealthDay News) -- Young women receiving radiation after having surgery for breast cancer are at increased risk of developing a new tumor in the opposite -- or contralateral -- breast, a new Dutch study suggests.
And the risk jumps even higher if the woman also has a significant family history of breast cancer.
The study, appearing online in the current issue of theJournal of Clinical Oncology, looked at fairly recent radiation techniques (1970 to 1986), but experts pointed out that these techniques are continually being refined and improved.
"It's a very interesting study, [but] radiation techniques have changed dramatically over the last 25 years and a lot of these patients were treated with much older techniques," said Dr. Jay Brooks, chairman of hematology/oncology at Ochsner Health System in Baton Rouge, La.
The risk of contralateral breast cancer was also greatest when three or more family members had a history of breast cancer, indicating that some of the women in the study might have the risk-raising BRCA1 or 2 genetic mutations. These mutations weren't tested for in the study.
"Today, we're able to better identify women who may not be breast-conservation candidates," Brooks said.
Study author Maartje J. Hooning, of the department of medical oncology at Erasmus Medical Center Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center in Rotterdam, said that even though "radiation techniques of today will lead to a lower dose to the contralateral breast than the techniques presented in our study, treating clinicians should be aware of the existing dose-response relationship for risk of contralateral breast cancer. Especially in young women, the radiation dose to the contralateral breast should be kept as low as possible."
According to the American Cancer Society, radiation therapy is usually employed to destroy lingering cancer cells after a lumpectomy (also known as breast-conserving surgery), after a mastectomy involving a tumor larger than 5 centimeters in size, or when cancer is found in the lymph nodes.
In general, according to the study, women diagnosed with breast cancer in one breast have three to four times the risk of developing a new cancer in the other breast.
Much of this increased risk has been attributed to genetic predisposition, hormonal risk factors and other common causes. But there remains the possibility that treatment regimens for the first breast cancer, including chemotherapy and radiation, might also play a part.
For this study, the researchers looked at more than 7,000 one-year survivors of breast cancer who had been under the age of 71 when they were diagnosed. All were treated from 1970 to 1986 in the Netherlands.
Overall, radiation therapy did not significantly increase the risk of a new cancer in the opposite breast.
However, women treated with radiation before they turned 45 had a slightly increased risk of a new tumor in the other breast, while women receiving radiation before they were 35 had a 78 percent increased risk.
Women receiving post-lumpectomy radiation before the age of 45 had a 1.5-fold increased risk of contralateral breast cancer when compared with women who had undergone post-mastectomy radiation, according to the study.
Younger women with a strong family history of breast cancer who had also undergone post-lumpectomy radiation had a 3.5-fold increased risk of contralateral breast cancer, the study found.
"Now that we know that young patients with affected relatives are at increased risk of contralateral breast cancer following radiation therapy, we should define in more detail the subgroup that is genetically susceptible to radiation-induced breast cancer," Hooning said.
SOURCES: Maartje J. Hooning, Ph.D., department of medical oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Jay Brooks, M.D., chairman, hematology/oncology, Ochsner Health System, Baton Rouge, La.;Journal of Clinical Oncology, online
Posted 10/15/2008 5:47:00 PM
October 15, 2008
(NaturalNews) Following the release of a new study strongly correlating vitamin D deficiency with Parkinson's disease, the mainstream media (MSM) has once again gone out of its way to intentionally distort the findings of the study and mislead readers about vitamin D. The study was conducted by Emory University, the same university that has just had $9.3 million in NIH grants frozen because of undisclosed ties between its researchers and the drug companies (http://www.naturalnews.com/News_000362_...). Thus, from the start, we already know that Emory University researchers are working for Big Pharma and likely have a financial stake in promoting pharmaceuticals or discrediting natural alternatives.
Nevertheless, the study -- which was published in Archives of Neurology -- examined 300 people: 100 with Parkinson's, 100 with Alzheimer's and another 100 they called "healthy" (which, by modern medicine standards, could have been seriously diseased but not yet diagnosed with disease). The study found that 90% of the healthy people had sufficient vitamin D levels in their blood. In the Alzheimer's group, the number was lower: 84%. And in the Parkinson's group, it was lower still: 77%.
What the study showed was a statistically significant correlation between low vitamin D levels and higher risk of Parkinson's disease.
Why vitamin D is a miracle nutrient for the brain
To anyone who knows even a little bit about vitamin D, these results are not surprising. Vitamin D is essential for proper functioning of the nervous system. The protective effects of vitamin D on cognitive function are well known and well documented. You can see a sampling of the thousands of clinical studies on vitamin D and brain function here: http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/science/...
Thus, it is no surprise that patients who lacked sufficient levels of vitamin D would suffer poor brain function and eventually be diagnosed with neurological disorders such as Parkinson's or Alzheimer's, both of which are entirely preventable through nutrition.
But the relationship between vitamin D and neurological function remains a great mystery to those in the mainstream media (or so they want you to believe). In fact, they've gone to great lengths to misrepresent these clinical findings and try to twist the story around to imply that vitamin D causes Parkinson's!
The false headlines
Today's BBC health headline declares, "Parkinson's linked to vitamin D."
The implication, of course, is that vitamin D causes Parkinson's. There's a word conveniently missing from this BBC headline: "deficiency." The correct headline should be, "Parkinson's linked to vitamin D deficiency," right? But no, that would tell the truth. Instead, BBC editors have decided to remove the word "deficiency" and, in doing so, completely flip the meaning of the headline, making readers believe that taking too much vitamin D might cause Parkinson's disease. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/76667...)
Not to be outdone by the BBC, The Press Association parroted the same loopy logic in their own headline: "Vitamin D 'link' to Parkinson's" (http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM...). Just like the BBC headline, this carefully-phrased headline also implies that vitamin D causes Parkinson's.
The Craegmoor Healthcare news website in the UK went even further, declaring that sunshine is linked to Parkinson's! Here's their headline: "Sunshine linked to Parkinson's" (http://www.craegmoor.co.uk/news/industr...)
Do they really think readers are so stupid as to believe sunshine exposure causes Parkinson's disease? They're apparently willing to print the false headlines and find out.
Composing such obviously-false headlines requires an incredible leap of really bad logic (or a sinister agenda). But mainstream media journalists have had a lot of practice over the years, reporting lies about 9/11, the War on Iraq, vaccines and just about every other contentious topic gullible news consumers have swallowed without a single moment of critical thinking. To become a mainstream media journalist, the first thing you have to do is leave your brain at home. It's far better to arrive at work with a hollow head that can be filled with nefarious agendas and false facts.
Some of those journalists work at HealthDay news, of course, where today's headline in the Washington Post hilariously declares, "Parkinson's Patients More Prone to Vitamin D Deficiency." (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...)
In case you missed that, this HealthDay headline implies that Parkinson's disease causes vitamin D deficiency! Wow. The idiocy of it would be hilarious if it weren't being reprinted in a news source read by so many people. I suppose scurvy causes vitamin C deficiency, too, and cancer causes vitamin D deficiency. Maybe osteoporosis causes calcium and magnesium deficiencies. It is a worrisome sign of the times when the mainstream media engaged in such blatant logic reversals and prints them as fact.
If it all sounds familiar, it should: George Orwell's 1984 book provided the template for such newspeak:
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
And vitamin D causes Parkinson's disease, if you believe HealthDay news.
I've found HealthDay news, by the way, to be the very worst agenda-driven health news misinformation organization in America. HealthDay editors have famously authored some of the most intellectually-challenged stories I've ever seen, including one that claims people can lose weight by chugging sodas and eating ice cream and pizza (http://www.naturalnews.com/022453.html).
HealthDay editors have also authored insanely stupid stories on vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/022479.html) and even a story that claims lip balm defies the laws of physics and bends light rays (http://www.naturalnews.com/023122.html).
Where does HealthDay find these people? And what do they make them smoke before they start work in the morning? Given how incredibly retarded some of the news reports are that come out of HealthDay, it's no surprise that they've achieved global distribution with CNN, the Washington Post, Yahoo, Business Week, Forbes, MSN and even iVillage. What these organizations do is copy and paste the misinformation from HealthDay and run it as their own stories. This is how health lies get spread through the mainstream media.
Today, HealthDay's home page declares, "Smoking Makes You Old Before Your Time." Gee, really? That might have actually been news in 1973, too.
Not all the MSM journalists are complete idiots
A few mainstream media sources actually got the vitamin D story right. Astonishingly, even WebMD managed to state the correct headline: "Low Vitamin D Level Tied to Parkinson's." (http://www.webmd.com/parkinsons-disease...)
The Telegraph (in the U.K.) also got the story headline correct. It reported, "Lack of sunshine linked to Parkinson's" (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop...)
Kudos to the Telegraph's medical editor, Rebecca Smith, who apparently has a far greater grasp of logic than, say, certain editors at HealthDay. Then again, the Telegraph is a far smarter newspaper to begin with.
But if you want to find really smart news sources, you've got to turn to the alternative press. Check out www.Alternet.org or www.OrganicConsumers.org or www.PRwatch.org
NaturalNews, of course, remains the most trusted online destination for honest news about natural health. We don't take money from any advertisers at all (other than Google, whose ads we don't choose). Our only "agenda" is to empower the People with honest, independent information they can use to prevent ALL disease (cancer, diabetes, Parkinson's, you name it...) and enhance the quality of their lives.
Far too often, the agenda of the mainstream media is to distort the truth, and in doing so, intentionally mislead readers with harmful disinformation. A careful review of mainstream newspapers, magazines and news websites reveals a clear, intentional pattern of news distortion that just happens to benefit the drug companies that fund so much of their advertising.
Posted 10/15/2008 5:44:00 PM
October 9, 2008
Foods Containing B17 (Nitrilosides)
Vitamin B17 appears in abundance in untamed nature. Because B17 is bitter to the taste, in man's attempt to improve tastes and flavors for his own pleasure, he has eliminated bitter substances like B17 by selection and cross-breeding. It can be stated as a general rule that many of the foods that have been domesticated still contain the vitamin B17 in that part not eaten by modem man, such as the seeds in apricots. Listed below is an evaluation of some of the more common foods. Keep in mind that these are averages only and that specimens vary widely depending on variety, locale, soil, and climate. SOURCE: The Little Cyanide Cookbook by June de Spain - (former) FDA Toxicologist and Pharmacologist.
|Blackberry, Domestic||Low||Apple Seeds||High||Black||Low|
|Blackberry, Wild||High||Apricot Seeds||High||Black Eyed Peas||Low|
|Choke Cherry||High||Cherry Seed||High||Garbanzo||Low - Med|
|Wild Crabapple||High||Flax||Med||Green Pea||Low|
|Market Cranberry||Low||Millet||Med||Kidney||Low - Med|
|Swedish (lignon) Cranberry||High||Nctarine Seed||High||Lentils||Med|
|Currant||Med||Peach Seed||High||Lima, U.S.||Low|
|Elderberry||Med - High||Pear Seed||High||Lima, Burma||Med|
|Gooseberry||Med||Plum Seed||High||Mung||Med - High|
|Sprouts||Range*||Nuts (all raw)||Range*||Leaves||Range*||Tubers||Range*|
|Bamboo||High||Cashew||Low||Beet Tops||Low||Sweet Potato||Low|
|Fava||Med||Macadamia||Med - High||Eucalyptus||High||Yams||Low|
High — above 500 mgs. nitriloside per 100 grams food
Medium — above 100 mgs. per 100 grams food
Low — below 100 mgs. per 100 grams food
Vitamin B-17 is one of the main sources of food in cultures such as the Eskimos, the Hunzas, the Abkasians and many more. Did you know that within these tribes there has never been a reported case of cancer? According to Dr. Krebs, we need a minimum of 100 mg of vitamin B-17 (the equivalent of about seven apricots seeds) too nearly guarantee a cancer free life. Foods that contain vitamin B-17 are as follows:
|KERNELS OR SEEDS OF FRUIT: The highest concentration of vitamin B-17 to be found in nature, aside from bitter almonds. Apple, apricot, cherry, nectarine, peach, pear, plum, prune.|
|BEANS: broad (Vicia faba), burma, chickpeas, lentils (sprouted), lima, mung (sprouted), Rangoon, scarlet runner.|
|NUTS: Bitter almond, macadamia, cashew.|
|BERRIES: Almost all wild berries. Blackberry, chokeberry, Christmas berry, cranberry, elderberry, raspberry, strawberry.|
|SEEDS: Chia, flax, sesame.|
|GRASSES: Acacia, alfalfa (sprouted), aquatic, Johnson, milkweed, Sudan, minus, wheat grass, white dover.|
|GRAINS: oat groats, barley, brown rice, buckwheat groats, chia, flax, millet, rye, vetch, wheat berries.|
|MISCELLANEOUS: bamboo shoots, fuschia plant, sorghum, wild hydrangea, yew tree (needles, fresh leaves).|
Two rules of thumb: According to Dr. Krebs, the basic concept is that sufficient daily B-17 may be obtained by following either of two suggestions:
First, eating all the B-17-containing fruits whole (seeds included), but not eating more of the seeds by themselves than you would be eating if you ate them in the whole fruit. Example: if you eat three apples a day, the seeds in the three apples are sufficient B-17. You would not eat a pound of apple seeds.
Second, one peach or apricot kernel per 10 lbs of body weight is believed to be more than sufficient as a normal safeguard in cancer prevention, although precise numbers may vary from person to person in accordance with individual metabolism and dietary habits. A 170-lb man, for example, might consume 17 apricot or peach kernels per day and receive a biologically reasonable amount of Vitamin B-17.
And two important notes: Certainly, you can consume too much of anything. Too many kernels or seeds, for example, can be expected to produce unpleasant side effects. These natural foods should be consumed in biologically rational amounts (no more than 30 to 35 kernels per day).
High concentrations of B-17 are obtained by eating the natural foods in their raw or sprouting stage. This does not mean that moderate cooking and other tampering will destroy the B-17 content. Foods cooked at a temperature sufficient for a Chinese dinner, for example, will not lose their B-17 content.
Posted 10/9/2008 9:47:00 AM
October 9, 2008
. . . by Raymond Francis
America has one of the highest cancer rates in the world, and cancer is the most dreaded disease in our society. Once rare, affecting less than one in a thousand, by 1900 cancer affected 30 in a thousand. Today almost 500 in a thousand will develop cancer in their lifetimes.
Unfortunately, modern medicine is of no help. Since 1971, when President Nixon declared "war" on cancer, we have thrown 200 billion dollars at cancer research. What has this money bought us? More cancer! The public has yet to grasp the colossal gap between how much money the cancer industry is spending, and the paltry results it is achieving.
Fortunately, we can protect ourselves. If you are over age 50, you are probably past preventing cancer, you already have it! Now you need to keep it under control. Don't turn the cancer on, and if you already have active cancer, turn it off. Can this be done? Sure it can, and it is done every day by people who take charge of their health.
A few years ago, businessman Paul Orberson told his story on the Beyond Health radio show. Mr. Orberson had been diagnosed with advanced kidney cancer. Given only months to live, he read my book Never Be Sick Again -- and put his cancer into remission.
To prevent and reverse cancer, it helps to understand something about what causes and promotes cancer. The cancer process occurs in three stages: initiation, promotion and metastasis.
DNA can be damaged by a variety of means, including viruses, chronic infections, foreign bodies, nutrient deficiency, radiation and toxic chemicals. Numerous natural and manmade chemicals have been identified as carcinogenic. Upon exposure, these chemicals can, in a matter of minutes, cause potentially permanent damage to DNA. Such chemicals include many common household chemicals, pesticides, herbicides, food additives, fluoride and metals such as mercury and lead. We live in a sea of carcinogens and must learn how to avoid them. Radiation is carcinogenic; it damages DNA. This is why mammograms cause breast cancer, and why medical X-rays play a major role in our cancer epidemic.
Due to our exposure to carcinogenic chemicals and X-rays, most of our older population and many of our younger people have completed this initiation, and they have clusters of cancer cells throughout their bodies. This stage of cancer is not believed to be reversible. Given the right conditions, these cells will grow and then metastasize.
Defects in DNA repair will increase the risk of developing cancer after being exposed to X-rays and chemicals. Certain nutrients are known to support the DNA repair process. These include vitamins B3, B6, B12, and folate, zinc and L-carnitine. Most Americans are deficient in one or more of these nutrients. According to the USDA, 73 percent of Americans are deficient in zinc, and 40 percent are deficient in B12. To optimize DNA repair, eat a diet rich in fresh, organic vegetables and fruits, and take high-quality nutritional supplements. Everyone should, at the very least, be on a superior vitamin/mineral formula like Beyond Health Vit/Min Formula.
The next step in the cancer process is promotion. This is when a small cluster of initiated cancer cells grows larger. These cells will not grow unless a precise group of conditions are met, allowing their growth-control mechanisms to be overridden.
Certain foods are known to promote tumor growth and spread. Sugar, excess omega-6 oils and excess animal protein all promote cancer. Cancer cells differ from normal cells in that they are totally dependent on sugar to produce energy. So raising the sugar content of the blood feeds cancer cells and helps them grow. In addition, increased blood insulin is a powerful promoter of tumor growth and spread.
Oils high in omega-6s such as corn, safflower, sunflower, peanut, soybean and canola oils are known to support cancer progression. Never eat these oils, or any of the thousands of products made with them, including baked goods and salad dressings.
Perhaps the most significant factor of all is animal protein and most especially dairy protein. Animal protein, beyond what can be used for growth and daily repairs, promotes cancer, and the average American eats ten times too much. Excess animal protein is able to turn cancer on in experimental animals 100 percent of the time! A high-protein diet increases estrogen, and excess estrogen is known to promote a number of cancers. Protein also acidifies the body and cancer thrives in an acid environment. Animal protein also contains large amounts of the amino acid methionine. Excess methionine is known to be a cancer promoter.
Preventing and Reversing Promotion
Fat soluble toxins bioaccumulate in the body. Their synergistic effect can be a powerful cancer promoter. The average person is accumulating hundreds of such chemicals, including pesticides, styrene, PCBs, dioxins, phthalates and fire retardants. The only reliable way to get rid of them is with regular saunas, which have become as necessary as regular exercise. (Beyond Health sells a sauna I researched and approved.)
Chronic stress substantially increases free radical formation and also severely depresses the immune system. Both promote cancer. Using stress-reducing techniques such as meditation are important.
When cancer cells enter the blood stream and get transported to other locations, they become very vulnerable to attack by the immune system. Strong immunity is critical to prevention. Cancer cells require special enzymes to invade other tissues. Studies have found that inhibiting these enzymes stops the spread of the cancer. Plant flavonols found in fruits and vegetables, such as quercitin and luteolin, are known to interfere with these enzymes.
Since almost all Americans are deficient in vitamins and minerals, supplements are necessary. Here is a list of the nutrients known to inhibit cancer: vitamins A, all the Bs, C, D, E, beta carotene, choline, selenium, acetyl L-carnitine, alpha lipoic acid, zinc, magnesium, flavonoids and omega-3 oils.
Nutrition improves immunity. Immune cells have a higher metabolic rate, and therefore, need more nutrients. Water soluble nutrients such as B vitamins and vitamin C are not stored well in the body and need constant replacement. When this does not happen, immunity is quickly affected. Whenever the immune system responds to a threat, billions of immune cells are needed quickly. These cells will be limited by the amount of nutrients available for their construction. Any vitamin or mineral deficiency will quickly be felt, impairing immunity. This is why the Beyond Health Life Essentials Comprehensive Kit, along with the Cancer Support Kit is a powerful anti-cancer regimen.
The bad news is that cancer is an out-of-control epidemic. The good news is that cancer is a complex disease requiring the successful completion of many steps to make it happen-this provides us with multiple opportunities for its prevention and reversal. The most powerful preventive and healing tools are fresh fruits and vegetables plus high quality supplements.
Reprinted with permission from:
Beyond Health News 2006
Posted 10/9/2008 8:49:00 AM