Is there a link between consumption of dairy produce and breast cancer?
How I beat breast cancer with a vegan diet and you can too
Higher vitamin D may help prevent breast cancer
Further evidence that vitamin D deficiency may contribute to the development of breast cancer...
Studies continue to leave out the 'raw' part of the dairy equation.
If you look at the correct studies(away from the money and the control) you will find that raw dairy will assist the body to overcome most diseases.
But we will still hear folk say, "dairy is dairy." "It's the lactose that's the problem!" In rare cases, this may be so.
But, it's more likely to be a lack of good bacteria in the gut.
Too much bad, contaminated science out there. And they keep getting bad results. (overall)
There are certain vitamins that can both help prevent breast cancer and assist those that have this disease.
The bottom line with all forms of cancer is that a healthy lifestyle, to the extent where the pH of your body fluids is neutral or slightly alkaline, will safeguard you because cancer cells cannot survive in an alkaline environment. Avoid acid-forming foods like animal protein, sugar and refined carbohydrates and ensure sufficient intake of calcium together with the important co-factors in food-form to ensure bio-availability. Chelated supplements and other "impressive" forms of processing will not help. I can send you an extensive list of acid forming and alkaline forming foods if you mail me on email@example.com.
It is however, unlikely that just having the oncogene is enough to trigger breast cancer. One survey of women with the BRCA1 gene found that they were actually no more likely to die of the cancer than women with the disease who did not have this gene.
The researchers suggested that by making certain dietary and lifestyle choices, women carrying the gene did not need to resign themselves to contracting fatal cancer. This is because most oncogenes only release their disruptive instructions when activated by carcinogens
- Patrick Holford
Scientists at Manchester University have recently reported that women with advanced breast cancer that had spread to their bones were less likely to die of the disease when they had high amounts of active vitamin D in their blood.
One possible explanation for the cancer-protective effect of vitamin D is that calcium is important for proper immune function. Vitamin D helps the body to make use of calcium.
In any event, the presence of both nutrients in optimal amounts equates with lower risk of breast cancer
- Patrick Holford
Thank you for all this good info John.
John, are there studies showing women are more likely to have breast cancer if their emotions are unstable, and remain unstable and unchecked.
Unstable emotions can be partly attributed to many diseases.
I guess unstable emotions could be seen as a disease in itself. (?)
Some practitioners will check on the emotions, before addressing the main complaint.
Good raw fats can help to stabilize the emotions and nervous system. All part of the big picture of good health & well being.
Thank you, Keith.
There are many trigger factors for breast cancer. And yes, negative emotions, due to trauma and distress can be one of those factors.
The mind is a very powerful force - for good or ill.
Looking at the wider picture, I would certainly say that maintaining a positive mental attitude is of great significance and benefit when battling cancer.
Emotions affect our health too and tragic stories of people who suffer a major shock in life, like the loss of a partner through death or divorce and develop cancer within a few years, are common.
My mother was angry and bitter after my father died aged only fifty from a heart attack.
In later life she developed a cancer that killed her and I firmly believed it was her overall attitude to life that eventually caused her death.
Hence I believe that healing emotional scars as well as physical ones is crucial to our long term health
- Hazel Courteney
Too often mammograms are suggested and they are really not the best idea. Here is some of the info about why mammographs are not always the best thing to do: http://www.naturalnews.com/010886.html http://www.preventcancer.com/patients/mammography/dangers.htm
Thermography & mammograms are both explained here in this excellent post: http://thedetoxspecialist.com/blog/detox/what-are-the-dangers-of-mammogram-radiation
Those with the lowest vitamin E levels have the highest risk for breast cancer- Dr Wald, St Bartholomews Hospital, London
[Vitamin E works synergistically with the mineral selenium - another nutrient with proven anti-cancer capabilities]
A study done at John Hopkins showed women with low progesterone levels (estrogen dominance) to have a 540 percent greater risk of developing breast cancer.
But that same study also showed that women with low progesterone levels had a ten-fold higher incidence of all types of cancer, compared to women with good progesterone levels.
In other words, women with insiufficient progesterone carry a 1,000 percent higher risk of developing cancer of any type, when compared to women with good progesterone levels.
This study clearly indicates that breast cancer is not the only type of cancer that can result from estrogen dominance
- Tanya Harter Pierce ('Outsmart Your Cancer')
* You can test for progesterone deficiency by taking a hormone saliva test.
* You can correct a progesterone deficiency by using a transdermal progesterone cream - needs to be minimum 400 mgs of progesterone per ounce
* Do not confuse (natural) progesterone with (synthetic) progestin. The latter increases breast cancer risk!
* Use of progesterone cream should not be considered as a replacement for other anti-cancer measures, but as an addition.
Re - British doctor Dr P E Mohr, who conducted a study of hormone levels in women at the time of breast cancer surgery. (All the women in Dr Mohr's study were node-positive i.e. their BC had metasized)
What Dr Mohr's study showed was that those women whose breast cancer surgery was performed in the second half of their menstrual cycle (which is when their own production of progesterone was at its highest) were much less likely to have their breast cancer recur later on.
This study showed that, of the women who had higher levels of progesterone in their bodies at the time of surgery, about 65% were still alive 18 years later. But of those women who had low levels of progesterone on the day of their surgery, only about 35% were still alive 18 years later.
In other words, if you are a women preparing to undergo breast cancer surgery, Dr John Lee (author of 'What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Breast Cancer') says "You double your survival rate just by having your progesterone level satisfactory on the day of your surgery"
- Tanya Harter Pierce ('Outsmart Your Cancer')
Obesity is the biggest driving force behind the most common form of breast cancer in older women, say researchers.
Alcohol and then cigarettes are the next largest culprits, according to Cancer Research UK.
One in eight women in the UK will develop breast cancer in their lifetime, data shows, and the majority of these tumours are 'hormone sensitive', meaning their growth is fuelled by hormones.
Too much stored fat in the body raises the level of these 'sex hormones'
- BBC Ceefax 22/7/2011
Other studies clearly show that reducing your intake of fat and increasing your intake of fibre cause substantial positive changes in many measures known to increase breast cancer risk, including reductions in IGF-1 levels.
Reducing your intake of sugar does the same thing
- Patrick Holford
Professor Jane Plant gives us a slightly different angle on the fat issue. (Using the calories from a high fat diet to 'burn' for energy and warmth is, of course, altogether different from building up an obese state due to over-eating )
Populations such as the Eskimos living on a predominantly fish diet have long been known to have less breast cancer than those eating other animal fats. If properly cooked, seafood also contains lots of iodine, and iodlne compounds (like those of zinc) are involved in ensuring that mistakes (which could cause cancer) do not occur during cell division in the body.
After the thyroid, the highest concentration of iodine in human females is in the breast, suggesting that - as is the case with zinc, which is concentrated in the prostate in males - it plays an essential role in the proper functioning of breast tissue. (Indeed, I have helped many of my friends who have had sore breasts before a period to overcome the problem by taking Icelandic kelp tablets)
[From 'Your Life In Your Hands: Understanding, Preventing and Overcoming Breast Cancer'. Essential reading for any woman with or afraid of getting breast cancer.]
Just read out the below lines : care is important You are in the danger zone if you have a history of breast cancer on either side of your family. Three of more direct relations in two generations, ups the risk by 50 per cent. have menstruated before 12 have menopaused after 55 have postponed childbirth until after 30 are childless have more than three drinks a day so your risk is doubled have not breastfed adequately are frankly overweight carry the BCRA1 and BCRA2 genes i found above article in below link and it is very useful info please go through below site for continuation of full article http://www.canceravoid.com/category/breast-cancer/
Aspirin cuts breast cancer risk Sunday, 11:31 PM
Nearly 18 articles were posted or published in the canceravoid.com with regard to BREAST CANCER AND MAXIMUM INFORMATION WAS PUBLISHED IN THE CANCERAVOID.COM OR http://www.canceravoid.comA new study has shown that postmenopausal women who take aspirin and other analgesics regularly have lower estrogen levels, which could contribute to a decreased risk of breast or ovarian cancer. Frequency of all analgesic use was inversely associated with estradiol, free estradiol, estrone sulfate and the ratio of estradiol to testosterone. Average estradiol levels were 10.5 percent lower among women who regularly used aspirin or non-aspirin NSAIDs. Similarly, free estradiol levels were 10.6 per cent lower and estrone sulfate levels were 11.1 percent lower among regular users of aspirin or other NSAIDs. Among regular users of any analgesic (aspirin, NSAIDs or acetaminophen), levels of these hormones were 15.2 per cent, 12.9 per cent and 12.6 per cent lower, respectively, according to Gates. These study results are published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.i found this article in http://www.canceravoid.com/aspirin-cuts-breast-cancer-risk/
According to Professor Jeff Holly, from Bristol University's Faculty of Medicne, one of the world's leading experts in IGF-1, "those in the top quarter for blood IGF-1 levels have approximately a three to fourfold increase in risk of breast, prostate or colorectal cancer."
Holly doesn't drink milk and actively discourages anyone with diagnosis of these cancers to have any dairy produce - Patrick Holford
*** Milk contains 38 different hormones and growth promoters. After all, that is it's job to make cells grow. But one in particular is attracting attention - IGF-1...
The more milk you drink, the higher your level...
...It also stops overgrowing cells from committing suicide, a process called apoptosis.
When you are a growing baby this is good news. But when the only overgrowing cells are cancer cells, this is especially bad news, because IGF-1 has also been shown to directly stimulate the growth of cancer - Patrick Holford
These studies seem to rarely separate raw dairy from heated dairy when doing these studies. or at least they don't announce it. The composition and activity of the milk is vastly different when pasteurized.
Also are they testing invitro, or invivo? Another big difference in the results. It's possible they may do both, but not likely.
Keep the postings coming! All good.
All forms of milk - organic and pastuerized - contain these growth factors...
Growth factors for laboratory (cancer) research are normally derived from milk or cheese whey
- Professor Jane Plant
This post was modified from its original form on 27 Sep, 2:28
In 1992, Dr Lorraine Day, an orthopedic trauma surgeon at San Francisco General Hospital, was diagnosed with breast cancer that had already metastasized. Cancer specialists treating her advised her to undergo a mastectomy, followed by chemotherapy and radiation. She declined and set out to discover alternative measures to treat and save herself.
Eventually she completely healed and overcame her advanced breast cancer, through drastic changes in her diet and lifestyle.
[As of October 2011, Dr Day is still alive, still active and still cancer free.]
Another good webpage. Lots of good information on here...
being lactose intolerant,may save your life?
Removing unaffected breast in women with cancer results in little benefit, many problems (NaturalNews)
Several celebrities have been in the news lately, because after being diagnosed with cancer in one breast, they decided to have both breasts removed. The procedure, known as contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), is offered to women as a kind of insurance. Supposedly, it will greatly reduce the odds they will not get breast cancer again.
In fact, the study shows that the surgery actually reduces the measure of life expectancy that takes into account quality of life (technically called "quality-adjusted life expectancy") among women who do not have hereditary breast cancer. About 90 percent of women with breast malignancies do not have cancers known to be caused by genetic factors. So that means the new findings apply to the vast majority of women diagnosed with breast cancer who are treated with mastectomy.
The Relationship Between Root Canals and Breast Cancer
This post was modified from its original form on 10 Dec, 12:03
a root canal is nothing compared to flap surgery. have a look at my dental group for more. pick up your birthday card,lol
WHAT CAUSES CANCER
The History of the mineral Cesium Used in Cancer Treatments
The theory behind the cesium treatment for cancer is largely the result of Dr. A. Keith Brewer, PhD. However, it should be noted that during his time a powdered form of cesium was being used, not a liquid ionic form.
The cesium used back then (probably cesium carbonate) was not as powerful, gram for gram, as today's more potent liquid ionic cesium chloride. Thus, do not use any treatment doses which were designed for powdered cesium. use the doses given by your vendor who has a great deal of experience setting doses. This is especially true if inflammation or swelling is a potential problem.
The key issue is how big the clusters of cesium atoms are. If the cluster is too big, as it frequently is with the powdered versions, virtually none of the cesium gets inside the cancer cells. Cesium simply doesn't work unless it does get inside the cancer cells.
Cesium has been proven to get into cancer cells, when other nutrients cannot. The cesium:
1) Makes the cancer cells alkaline (Note: the BLOOD is NOT made alkaline, only the inside of the cancer cells),
2) Limits the intake of glucose into the cell (thus starving the cell and making the cell "sick" from lack of food),
3) Neutralizes the lactic acid (which is actually what causes the cell to multiply uncontrollably), and
4) Stops the fermentation process, which is a second affect of limiting the glucose.
A practitioner of cesium chloride was Hans A. Nieper, M.D., (1928-1998), who practiced in Hannover, Germany. Many celebrities and executives from America went to Germany to be treated by Dr. Nieper, including one President of the United States.
Liquid ionic cesium chloride works by making cancer cells highly alkaline, typically 8.0 and above, thus making them so "sick" the immune system may attack and kill them.
Cesium chloride not only kills cancer cells indirectly, it immediately stops the metastasis of the cancer; can start shrinking tumor masses within weeks; and almost always stops the pain of cancer within 24 to 48 hours, depending on what is causing the pain.
Technically, the cesium chloride does not directly kill the cancer cells. What is does is allow the immune system to kill the cancer cells. When you see a statement that cesium chloride does not kill cancer cells, that is at least partially correct.
However, it is also probable that cesium chloride reverts cancer cells into normal cells. This can happen if the cesium chloride kills the microbes inside the cancer cells (by its high alkalinity) and the cancer cells are thus able to revert into normal cells. This is actually the ideal way to cure cancer because there is far less debris for the body to get rid of.