Dandelion Root Cancer Cure? At No Cost!

[cruise4]

Dandelion Root Cancer Cure? At No Cost!

http://www.rense.com/general74/DANDI.HTM

George Cairns Writes...

Please save this page as it won't be printed again by me. It may save your life or the life of a love one or a friend. Anyone may reprint this if they print it word for word.

Every week around 10,000 people die of cancer. Government figures show the death rate for cancer deaths has not changed in the last 10 years. Chemo and radiation only save around 10% of the people treated. So this shows our doctors don't have much to work with. As this article goes on, I will explain how to prepare this plant and how much to take. There is nothing to buy. For some reason, the Lord has picked me to carry these words to you. I am only the delivery boy, and none of this is my idea. I do believe every word I write here, and I'm living proof it works. The cost of printing is my thanks to God for giving me back my life and health.

A little over three years ago I was about done in with cancer. One morning as I was waking up and hoping the end would come soon, a voice came to me and said. "You have to do something about your prostate cancer. Take the root of the dandelion. Don't expect a miracle. It took you a long time to get in this condition." The voice was gone. I thought the voice was kidding to use the dandelion. When this voice tells you to do something, you do it. You must do it, like writing this article. It is the last thing I ever expected to do. Then I thought he didn't tell me how much to take or how to prepare it. As soon as you could blink an eye. I knew how much to take, how to prepare it, and it would take 4 to 6 months to cure me. I also knew I wasn't to make a penny on it.

As soon as I got around that morning, I dug some roots and started to prepare it. About a week l! ater I started taking it. Three weeks later the pain in my back and side was gone and my bowels had improved. Five and one half months later they could find no cancer problem in me at all.

I, then wanted to find someone else to try it, and that was the biggest problem yet. Nobody seems to want to help. When I told doctors, they just smiled as if I was nuts. Finally, I was telling a friend about it and he said he had a friend that was dying of lung cancer. He had it in both lungs and was bed ridden. They were tapping his lungs. He had been given 4 to 6 weeks to live. After he had been on this powder about six weeks, he was up and around doing his chores and driving his car. He went to his doctor's office, and the doctors could not believe it. They took him to the hospital and gave him a CAT scan. They found no cancer lesions in his lungs and said it was a miracle. I then put an ad in The Northwest Herald offering it free, and four people's aid they would try it. Slowly one person told another and it spread. There was a fair amount of people taking it for different kinds of cancer and several for other things. For instance, a man lost the use of his immune system and was told he wouldn't be able to work again for three years, in six months he is now working ? days and feeling better. I know this is not a cure all. It won't help everyone or all kinds of cancer. I know it is not a cure for skin cancer and it hasn't had luck with brain tumors.

There is a doctor in Boston, Massachusetts that has developed a vaccine that is doing great things. This has been successful with prostate, colon, breast, liver and best of all with lung cancer. Five people have taken it for lung cancer and all five have been cured once. The immune system controls the cancer cells in your body. As long as the immune system is healthy, you don't usually have a cancer problem. When your immune system gets run down, it loses control of the cancer cells, and they start eating live cells and this is what they call cancer. This powder made from dandelion root has something in it that builds up the blood and the immune system.

When the immune system is built up so far, it gets back control of cancer cells, and they do an about face and start cleaning up the mess they've made. This is why you must have a fair appetite because your body must build itself up and be healthy if your immune system is going to be strong. This will not work for people that have lost their appetite or are on CHEMO. Doctors try to blast the cancer out of your body with Chemo or radiation. By doing so, it destroys your immune system and appetite. These are the most important things your body needs to beat cancer. Operations also knock the immune system haywire. This is why so many people that have operations for cancer find that a short time later it has spread somewhere else.

Many of the worst diseases that have plagued the world have been cured quite easily. When I was a boy, women dreaded the goiter more than cancer. A little iodine in the diet cured that. For hundred of years the most dreaded diseases was leprosy and lockjaw. A doctor found he could produce penicillin from moldy bread and could cure them and many more things. How long has moldy bread been around? I'm sure scientists will find many uses for the powder made from the root of the dandelions besides cancer. I have already found it builds up the blood so you heal much faster.

To make the powder from the dandelion root you must follow my directions to the letter. Any changes and it won't work. Dig a handful of dandelion roots any time of the year, it doesn't matter. Cut the leaves off just below the crown. DO NOT WASH. Then they must be dried around 100 degrees. I do it in an incubator with no water. You can also dry them under a heat light bulb if you raise or lower it so it's 100 degrees. You can also use the sun or put them in the attic if it's not too hot. It takes about 5 or 6 days in the incubator. I have not done this all the way under the heat light. When you break a root and it snaps it is ready to powder. Take an old iron frying pan and a clean hammer. Take one root at a time and place in the frying pan and start tapping. Don't hit hard or it will fly all over the place. I put my hand around the root to keep most of it in the pan. If it sticks to the hammer and pan, and doesn't crumble in your fingers, it isn't dry enough. Keep it up until you have enough to start. It takes about 20 minutes to ? hour to prepare enough for a week. When you get used to it you can go much faster.

I have an old vessel that druggists used to pound pills, this goes much faster. DO NOT USE AN ELECTRIC GRINDER, it won't work if you do. You lose too much of the good part in dust. You must do it as I have said or don't do it at all. I've tried shortcuts, but it seems someone was looking over my shoulder, and I know when I made a mistake. I'm just an old farmer and not a scientist, so I wouldn't know the correct amount to take on my own. Now take a little over one half teaspoon once a day at any time and mix it with water, orange juice, etc.. Do not use in soft drinks, liquor, or anything hot. When mixed, use it all. Don't let it stand around. Keep the power in a dry place. After taking it three or four days, you will feel good, but nothing else. That is because your blood is building up. When you blood is happy, you're happy. In most cases, this will build your immune system in from three days to three weeks to the point it takes back control of cancer cells and thus the cancer stops spreading. In most cases it is going to help. There is no body feeling as it works. You just feel a little better each week. After three weeks most of the pain will be gone in your back and you know it's working if you had pain there like I did. If you have bone cancer in the spine, it will take three months to work. This is not an overnight cure. It took a while to get in this condition and it will take a while for your body to heal. The sooner you start, the quicker you will be over cancer. Young people heal faster than old people, but it will help at any age. I know because I'm 80 and have been taking it for over three years.

No cancer has come back and no side effects except when my body has had enough, it lets me know by getting heart burn. Then I back off some.

Some people get stomach aches when they need less. It also means your cancer is under control and you don't need as much. You will also find you probably won't catch a cold while you are taking it full strength.

The biggest enemy for this root is Chemo. The stronger the Chemo, the less chance the power has to help you as Chemo tears your immune system and appetite down, two of the most important things you need to cure cancer. There is only a ten percent chance Chemo will cure you. With no chemo, your chances are 75 to 80% but you must take it every day. Don't let your doctor give you that old treat if you turn him down that goes, "If you want to throw your life away, I can't stop you". Just remember that 90% of the people that take his advice and take chemo are in the cemetery. Don't blame the doctor, he is doing his best with what he has to work with or you could ask for a written guarantee.

I have only mentioned cancers that I know people have had and used this root. It should help pancreas cancer if taken before the appetite is gone and most body cancer. This is food, not a drug. It shouldn't interfere with medicine your doctor may be giving you. Only two doctors have told patients to keep taking the power when they have made a miracle recovery. The rest of the doctors have run the power down and blasted the people even if the cancer has disappeared.

The medical world is not going to accept this easily.

Going back to not washing the roots and leaving a little soil on them, it is for your own good. A good bit of immunity comes from the soil, it starts as soon as you are born. Your fingers touch something, and you put them in your mouth. A little dirt at first, and more as you grow older and start crawling. Then everything you touch goes in the mouth. When children go outside to play and when they come in, they are the dirtiest around the mouth and hand. The hands go in their mouths no matter how dirty they are. Many diseases and bacteria live in the ground, but they don't seem to cause any trouble but it does build up the immune system. Some animals can't live if they can't eat a certain amount of soil. If you read this article over, you will see it! all goes back to common sense. I wish all of you people with cancer and other problems the best.

George Cairns (815) 338-1526 Or send self addressed envelope to: 708 Hughes Road Woodstock, IL 80096

This ad does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Northwest Herald.

The dandelion root power you can buy at a Health Food Store is not made the same way. It is not known to help cancer.

*This is a reprint of the ad in The Northwest Herald. Printing donated by Viking Lithographic, Elkhorn, WI 53121

[cruise4]

Even if that article is a sham spiritualism has been shown to actually play a great part in curing cancer: Chinese meditation has been shown to eliminate 85% of all cancers including the dreaded Leukemia.

During the early 1990's Bill Moyers did a series called healing and the mind.

The first part of which focuses on Chinese medicine, tai chi, and den mat. Durring this documentary Bill Moyers cites figures from several independent accredited sources that state china has a 70% cancer cure rate with acupuncture alone and a 90% success rate when all forms of Chinese medicine (meditation, herbal, and acupuncture) are tallied together.

In contrast Bill Moyers cities the fact that with all of our methods - radiology, chemo, surgical , etc) WE ONLY HAVE A MERE 40% Success rate at treating cancer with western medical practices.

Point being that there are real cures for cancer and they involve treating people with methods that allow their bodies to over come the disease.

Western medicine focuses on Eugenics and insuring the general population is in a state of constant disease. It has no real intention of curing cancer and therefore these statistics should come as no real surprise....


Once again this series is Called Healing and the Mind and was shown on PBS in the early 90's. And the episode in question can be found on google video here http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8305970374209659341&q=healing+and+the+mind&total=1593&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

[cruise4]

Doctors admit that the moment you take the first chemo treatment your "death clock" starts running.

There are numerous alternative treatments that have 80+% cure rates, in actuality probably closer to 100% but there are 2 main problems. First off, treating cancer requires going on a proper diet and eliminating all western/processed foods and severely restricting sugar (cancer feeds on it) and most people simply lack the restraint nowadays to do this even when faced with death. Secondly, most people only turn to alternative treatments after irradiating themselves within inches of death on chemo...there is simply too much damage to be undone.

But yes, the modern cancer industry is the worst eugenics scam ever.

[cruise4]

Most Cancer is caused by a virus. considering that the general public has been immunized with dead and live cancer viruses most of us are developing an immunity to cancer.

Read the scientific data on Cancer.

Its caused by viruses and those expensive hormones Alex mentioned.

Consider the number of Class action legal suites related on behalf of triphasic hormone litigation.

http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2007/Hormone-Therapy-Cancer12oct07.htm

Quote
Wyeth Hit With $134.5 Million Verdict
Hormone-Therapy Drugs Caused Breast Cancer
SARAH RUBENSTEIN / Wall Street Journal 12oct2007



A Nevada jury awarded $134.5 million to three women who claimed Wyeth's hormone-therapy drugs caused their breast cancer.

Doctors' Effectiveness
—An Illusion

The study of the evolution of disease patterns provides evidence that during the last century doctors have affected epidemics no more profoundly than did priests during earlier times. Epidemics came and went, imprecated by both but touched by neither. They are not modified any more decisively by the rituals performed in medical clinics than by those customary at religious shrines.8 Discussion of the future of health care might usefully begin with the recognition of this fact.

excerpt from:
Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health
IVAN ILLICH / Random House 1976

Jurors awarded compensatory damages to plaintiffs Arlene Rowatt, Jeraldine Scofield and Pamela Forrester after finding Wyeth was negligent, that its drugs were defective and that the company concealed a material fact about the products' safety. All these issues were a cause of injury or damage to the women, the jury said.

The jury, which also found that Wyeth acted with malice or fraud, awarded damages of $43.5 million to Ms. Scofield, $47.5 million to Ms. Forrester and $43.5 million to Ms. Rowatt.

A Wyeth spokesman declined to comment because the case "is not yet complete," citing a hearing on punitive damages scheduled for today. The plaintiffs' law firm also declined comment, citing today's hearing.

The suit, filed in Washoe County District Court in Reno, is one of some 5,300 hormone-replacement cases filed against Wyeth on behalf of 7,900 plaintiffs, according to the pharmaceutical maker. The complaints allege personal injury as a result of the plaintiffs' use of one or more of Wyeth's hormone- or estrogen-therapy products, including Prempro and Premarin, used to treat menopausal symptoms.

The Reno case is the seventh to reach a verdict since trials began last year. Three of the other six trials resulted in verdicts in favor of Wyeth. Of those favoring plaintiffs, one was overturned and judgment entered in favor of Wyeth, and verdicts in the two others were thrown out and new trials ordered by judges. None of the victorious plaintiffs in those cases had been awarded damages greater than $3 million.

Three other cases also have been dismissed by courts on summary judgment, and a dozen other cases that had been set for trial were voluntarily withdrawn by plaintiffs before trial.

Wall Street didn't appear rattled by the verdict. Wyeth's shares, which have been in a slump lately for reasons related to the company's pipeline and generic drugs, were down 38 cents to $45.78 in 4 p.m. composite trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Deutsche Bank drug analyst Barbara Ryan said that it is too early in the string of litigation to presume this case would be the start of a trend, and that in general the hormone-replacement cases appear tougher for plaintiffs to win than past "fen-phen" diet-drug litigation against the company. Wyeth is an investment-banking client of Deutsche Bank.

Lawyers for the Madison, N.J., drug maker have argued that the company clearly warned users that there was a slightly increased risk of breast cancer from taking Prempro, which was first marketed in 1995. In a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said it hasn't established any litigation-reserve fund for its hormone-therapy litigation.

Howard Erichson, a professor at Seton Hall law school in New Jersey, said it is common for surprisingly large damage awards to be lowered. But, he added, "With thousands of cases remaining to be tried, it's a scary thing to know that juries don't like your argument."

[cruise4]

Posted from another forum thread:

My mom had a hysterectomy in 1983. The doctors put her on Hormone therapy. 4 years ago she got breast cancer and got treatment. Luckily I live in a state where we have advanced cancer treatments but it cost $50,000. Were poor but most of our bills our paid. Im currently getting help paying off a new car. The cancer treatment mom got was a Lumpectomy with no Lymphotomy combined with radial radiation or radial keroitomy in a Baltimore hospital comparable to Cyberknife at UMAB.

I dont go into my personal details but after working for the grocery store for 5 years to pay for college I am unemployed.
In 1995 I won litigation against the FED for SSDI and TEI status. In short I pay no taxs. The government pays me.

You want to know what causes cancer.

During vaccine development mysterious non undetectable Cancer viruses showed up Mercs Vaccines. And in Hormone replacement theory Litigation related to Tri Phasic hormone compounds. The technology involved killing live viruses with Thymerisol and Formalahyde, also known carcinagens. The problem is with this technology a nearly non detectable 1 in 10000 particles does not die but simple goes dorment. Its comparable to killing cockroaches with raid (Dioxen) and than hours later they are still running around.

This is why as Alex mentioned cancer is way up. And diabetes, is related to Fluoride in the water and Corn syrup in soft drinks. Hi fat diets and GMO food.

So how did they find the non detectable viruses in the Vacines? Well if you do research on one of the shows sponsers, resonant frequencey technology developed by Ramond T Rife.

It says that he invented an Analog Spectrometer that Made Viruses on the molecular level viewable without the process of killing them in an Electron microscope. Its this simple. If the device uses Spectrometers and light and Viruses are viewable it works. This is how people likely later found the non detectable virsues in the cancer vaccines.

Remember that Merk Admitted "accidentally" putting the live cancer Virsues in the reeses monkey vaccines (MMRP).

And Aids in the hepatitis vaccines that the hospitals are all telling parents children are not allowed to leave the hospital without.

And also Leukemia a bone cancer virus.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5056162949373484568&q=merk+cancer&total=2&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Quote
Rife's Microscope in Action

Here is a Rife Micrograph of Bacillus Typhosus (responsible for Typhoid fever) shown here at 23,000X on 35 mm film and enlarged 300,000X. 23 This is from "The New Microscopes, Seidel and Winter, 1944"

http://www.xenophilia.com/zb/zb0012/typh.gif

As an independent observer, how can we know this is really magnified at 23,000 diameters (which recall, is a 23,000 times larger magnification than you would see under clear glass.)

If we could compare this to an electron micrograph of Bacillus Typhosus, we'd have a strong clue that Rife had exceeded the 2500 to 5000X limit of optical microscopes.

So far, we have been unable to find an electron microscope picture of Bacillus Typhosus.

The Government F****** lies to you.

"If you remove the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth."

Sherlock Holmes.

http://www.mindfully.org/Health/2007/Hormone-Therapy-Cancer12oct07.htm

Quote
Wyeth Hit With $134.5 Million Verdict
Hormone-Therapy Drugs Caused Breast Cancer
SARAH RUBENSTEIN / Wall Street Journal 12oct2007


A Nevada jury awarded $134.5 million to three women who claimed Wyeth's hormone-therapy drugs caused their breast cancer.

Doctors' Effectiveness
—An Illusion

The study of the evolution of disease patterns provides evidence that during the last century doctors have affected epidemics no more profoundly than did priests during earlier times. Epidemics came and went, imprecated by both but touched by neither. They are not modified any more decisively by the rituals performed in medical clinics than by those customary at religious shrines.8 Discussion of the future of health care might usefully begin with the recognition of this fact.

excerpt from:
Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health
IVAN ILLICH / Random House 1976

Jurors awarded compensatory damages to plaintiffs Arlene Rowatt, Jeraldine Scofield and Pamela Forrester after finding Wyeth was negligent, that its drugs were defective and that the company concealed a material fact about the products' safety. All these issues were a cause of injury or damage to the women, the jury said.

The jury, which also found that Wyeth acted with malice or fraud, awarded damages of $43.5 million to Ms. Scofield, $47.5 million to Ms. Forrester and $43.5 million to Ms. Rowatt.

A Wyeth spokesman declined to comment because the case "is not yet complete," citing a hearing on punitive damages scheduled for today. The plaintiffs' law firm also declined comment, citing today's hearing.

The suit, filed in Washoe County District Court in Reno, is one of some 5,300 hormone-replacement cases filed against Wyeth on behalf of 7,900 plaintiffs, according to the pharmaceutical maker. The complaints allege personal injury as a result of the plaintiffs' use of one or more of Wyeth's hormone- or estrogen-therapy products, including Prempro and Premarin, used to treat menopausal symptoms.

The Reno case is the seventh to reach a verdict since trials began last year. Three of the other six trials resulted in verdicts in favor of Wyeth. Of those favoring plaintiffs, one was overturned and judgment entered in favor of Wyeth, and verdicts in the two others were thrown out and new trials ordered by judges. None of the victorious plaintiffs in those cases had been awarded damages greater than $3 million.

Three other cases also have been dismissed by courts on summary judgment, and a dozen other cases that had been set for trial were voluntarily withdrawn by plaintiffs before trial.

Wall Street didn't appear rattled by the verdict. Wyeth's shares, which have been in a slump lately for reasons related to the company's pipeline and generic drugs, were down 38 cents to $45.78 in 4 p.m. composite trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Deutsche Bank drug analyst Barbara Ryan said that it is too early in the string of litigation to presume this case would be the start of a trend, and that in general the hormone-replacement cases appear tougher for plaintiffs to win than past "fen-phen" diet-drug litigation against the company. Wyeth is an investment-banking client of Deutsche Bank.

Lawyers for the Madison, N.J., drug maker have argued that the company clearly warned users that there was a slightly increased risk of breast cancer from taking Prempro, which was first marketed in 1995. In a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said it hasn't established any litigation-reserve fund for its hormone-therapy litigation.

Howard Erichson, a professor at Seton Hall law school in New Jersey, said it is common for surprisingly large damage awards to be lowered. But, he added, "With thousands of cases remaining to be tried, it's a scary thing to know that juries don't like your argument."
source: p.B6 12oct2007


Think about it. COmpanies make twice as much money selling you broke products rather than ones that work.

http://www.monheit.com/prempro/

Quote
While Prempro may cure your hot flashes, it has serious side effects. It may also debilitate or kill you from ovarian cancer, breast cancer, endometrial cancer, and stroke.

Since 1995, millions of women have confidently taken Prempro, a leading hormone replacement therapy drug, prescribed to treat postmenopausal hot flashes and other menopausal symptoms.

However, a recent major study concludes that long-term use of Prempro has significantly increased the risk of stroke, blood clots, Prempro ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, and breast cancer, while maximizing the risk for dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Evidence has revealed that Prempro and other estrogen progestin combinations can actually harm perfectly healthy women.

These results were found in the nation's largest hormone replacement study and were so alarming that the National Institute of Health (NIH) prematurely canceled the study citing risk to the participants. As a result the study is suggesting that many of the women who use Prempro and other estrogen and progestin combinations should quit and talk to their doctors about Prempro alternatives.

Prempro is manufactured by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. In 2001 Prempro accounted for approximately $890 million of the company's $13.9 billion in sales. For your Wyeth pharmaceuticals lawsuit for hrt (hormone replacement therapy law suits), Contact Monheit Law.

Do you have a Prempro cancer case?
Have you, a family member, or dear friend been prescribed Prempro? Are you now suffering or have you ever suffered from any life threatening side effects or lesser but still diminished quality of life side effect? You may have a Prempro case and could be included in the nationwide Prempro class action lawsuit. To consult with a Prempro lawyer, please complete the FREE no obligation consultation today.

Are you suffering from any of these Prempro side effects?
Serious and often deadly Prempro side effects include:

· Breast cancer
· Uterine cancer
· Endometrial cancer
· Heart attack
· Gallbladder disease
· Ovarian cancer
· Blood clots
· Dementia

Other Prempro side effects include:

· Headache
· Breast pain
· Stomach cramps
· Nausea and vomiting
· Hair loss
· Irregular vaginal bleeding or spotting

These are just a sampling of Prempro side effects. For more information, talk to your doctor or pharmacist.

http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN2022501520070221

Merck ending lobbying for mandatory Gardasil vaccine

Quote
EW YORK (Reuters) - Drugmaker Merck & Co. said on Tuesday it would stop lobbying state legislatures to make it mandatory for schoolgirls to be inoculated with its new cervical cancer vaccine.

The company said it made the decision after re-evaluating its lobbying program, which has generated fierce debate with some religious organizations saying it could encourage promiscuity and parents groups questioning the need for such a widespread vaccination program.

Merck's Gardasil is the first and only vaccine against cervical cancer. Approved in 2006 for females aged 9 to 26, it works against strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted disease responsible for about 70 percent of cervical cancer cases.

Earlier this month, Texas became the first U.S. state to require that all 11- and 12-year-old girls be vaccinated against HPV. Republican Gov. Rick Perry said parents could opt out of mandatory vaccinations for their children if they objected for reasons including religious beliefs.

About 20 U.S. states had been considering mandating the vaccine, many for girls before they entered the sixth grade.

The vaccine, given in a series of three injections at a price of $360, has been endorsed by medical organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics.

In December, Merck said it was looking into providing Gardasil at much lower prices in developing countries and to make it available within months.

Richard Haupt, executive director of medical affairs for vaccines at Merck, said the media publicity had become a "potential distraction" that was interfering with the company's objective of promoting widespread use of the product.

"We've re-evaluated our position, but certainly plan to continue education efforts in different venues, such as with legislators, health departments and coalition groups in various states," Haupt said.

[megafish33]

lol I make dandelion root tea all the time... it's good.

[smariot]

I wouldn't doubt it; for all I know, they could contain Amygdalin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

[syke]

Perhaps a strange question, but when the man from the article talks about 100 degrees... does he mean Celsius or Fahrenheit? :confused:

[rynath]

Perhaps a strange question, but when the man from the article talks about 100 degrees... does he mean Celsius or Fahrenheit? :confused:

Yeah I need to know this as well.

I've mentioned before on these forums that my mom has carcinoid cancer so I'm willing to give this a go and I know she would as well. She has already decided against chemo so we're good to go in that aspect.

Thank you for taking the time to post this info. There's nothing to lose in trying this so I'm going to have her read it tonight. I'm trying to figure out where to get dandelions in the dead of winter. I'm assuming fresh out of the ground is the best but we've got snowpack here all over the place. Any suggestions are MOST welcome.

[cruise4]

I'm afraid I don't know... in case you are waiting for an answer :D

Maybe a search will bring up more info. Thats all I can suggest.

[rynath]

I'm afraid I don't know... in case you are waiting for an answer :D

Maybe a search will bring up more info. Thats all I can suggest.

KK :)

[thetonic]

Yeah I need to know this as well.

I've mentioned before on these forums that my mom has carcinoid cancer so I'm willing to give this a go and I know she would as well. She has already decided against chemo so we're good to go in that aspect.

Thank you for taking the time to post this info. There's nothing to lose in trying this so I'm going to have her read it tonight. I'm trying to figure out where to get dandelions in the dead of winter. I'm assuming fresh out of the ground is the best but we've got snowpack here all over the place. Any suggestions are MOST welcome.

There is a drink out there as well called KOMBUCHA.. it is an asian live mushroom cultured tea and it does wonders against cancer i hear.. Worth a shot yes?;)

[talkingchimp]

hi guys,

really interesting post, dandelion roots are now on the menu for me.


rynath you may find this link very informative, a chap called jerry brunetti on eating himself well from cancer and goes into what chemo really is......its apparently a derivative of ww1 mustard gas. check it out.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8841234327210711547&q=food+as+medicine&total=1224&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

cheers

[cruise4]

Even More Proof Cancer
Is Caused By Bacteria
Alan Cantwell, MD
2-23-8

http://www.rense.com/general80/proof.htm

From: Alan Cantwell
Date: February 23, 2008 2:46:58 PM PST
To: Greg Blaney
Cc: Trevor Marshall
Subject: Re: "Acne bacteria" (P.acnes) repeatedly found in prostate cancer!! More proof of "cancer bacteria"!!

To Greg Blaney, MD:

Thanks for notifying me regarding this important paper published in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology in Nov, 2007......more proof that "cancer bacteria" are involved in cancer -- and particularly in prostate cancer -- now if only we could get pathologists to see these bacteria in acid-fast stained sections of prostate ca -- as noted by me in my partner's tissue sections taken from his prostate cancer when his prostate gland was removed in 2004 - and pictured below in the paper published in the Journal of Independent Medical Research (www.joimr.org) in 2004.

As you note -- from abstracts you attached below, this is NOT the first time Propioniobacterium acnes has been associated with prostate cancer......it amazes me that this research is largely ignored by urologists (and also by the media) -- like Helicobacter pyloris in stomach ulcers was ignored for decades by physicians.

With prostate cancer being an older man's worst nightmare -- one would expect greater interest in this!

Best regards,
ALAN CANTWELL, MD


On Feb 23, 2008, at 9:10 AM, Greg Blaney wrote:

1: J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Nov;45(11):3721-8. Epub 2007 Sep 19. Links
Direct visualization of Propionibacterium acnes in prostate tissue by multicolor fluorescent in situ hybridization assay.

Alexeyev OA, Marklund I, Shannon B, Golovleva I, Olsson J, Andersson C, Eriksson I, Cohen R, Elgh F.
Department of Pathology, Umeå University, S-90185, Umeå, Sweden. oleg.alexeyev@medbio.umu.se

Prostate tissues from patients with prostate cancer and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) frequently contain histological inflammation, and a proportion of these patients show evidence of Propionibacterium acnes infection in the prostate gland. We developed a multicolor fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) assay targeting P. acnes 23S rRNA along with a 14-kb region of the P. acnes genome. This assay was used to analyze prostate tissues from patients with prostate cancer and BPH. P. acnes infection of the prostate gland was demonstrated in prostatic tissue in 5 of 10 randomly selected prostate cancer patients.

FISH analysis and confocal laser microscopy imaging revealed intracellular localization and stromal biofilm-like aggregates as common forms of P. acnes infection in prostate tissues from both prostate cancer and BPH patients. A sequential analysis of prostate tissue from individual patients suggested that P. acnes can persist for up to 6 years in the prostate gland. These results indicate that P. acnes can establish a persistent infection in the prostate gland. Further study is needed to clarify the link between this bacterium and prostatic inflammation which may contribute to the development of BPH and prostate cancer.
PMID: 17881550 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


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

http://www.joimr.org/phorum/read.php?f=2&i=57&t=57

Acid-Fast Bacteria In-Vivo in Prostate Cancer and the Connection between Prostate Cancer, Other Cancers, and the Kaposi's Sarcoma Virus


Author: Alan R Cantwell, Jr., M.D.
Los Angeles, California,
contact email: alancantwell@sbc global.net

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/canc1.jpg

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/canc2.jpg

Paper Type: Review

Please cite as: Cantwell AR Jr. Acid-Fast Bacteria In-Vivo in Prostate Cancer and the Connection between Prostate Cancer, Other Cancers, and the Kaposi's Sarcoma Virus. JOIMR 2004;2(3):1
Published: 28 May 2004
(C) 2004, by Alan Cantwell, Jr. M.D.

Abstract

Bacteria in the form of previously described "cancer microbes" were identified in a Fite (acid-fast)-stained histopathologic tissue section from a case of prostate adenocarcinoma in a 68 year- old, HIV-negative Italian-American man with a concomitant history of a solitary skin lesion of classic Kaposi's sarcoma. The pleomorphic bacteria observed in vivo are consistent with so-called cancer-associated bacteria previously described in breast cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma, and other forms of cancer, by various investigators over the past century. The proposed microbiology of cancer is discussed, as well as the new finding of the Kaposi's sarcoma virus (human herpes virus-8) in the blood of up to 40% of patients with prostate cancer. Further studies of acid-fast bacteria in vivo and the KS virus in prostate cancer are sorely needed to further determine the possible role of these infectious agents in this common cancer of men.


1: J Urol. 2000 Oct;164(4):1221-8.
Related Articles, Links

Bacterial dna sequences in prostate tissue from patients with prostate cancer and chronic prostatitis.

Krieger JN, Riley DE, Vesella RL, Miner DC, Ross SO, Lange PH.

Department of Urology, University of Washington, School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA.

PURPOSE: Although bacterial genetic material has been detected in prostate tissue from patients with various disorders, the prevalence of these organisms is unknown. We tested the hypothesis that bacterial detection rates differ between patients with prostate cancer and those with the chronic prostatitis/pelvic pain syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sterile prostate biopsies were obtained during radical retropubic prostatectomy from 107 patients with prostate cancer and using a perineal approach from 170 with the chronic prostatitis/pelvic pain syndrome. Numerous controls were also evaluated. Bacterial ribosomal encoding DNA (165 rDNA) sequences were detected using a polymerase chain reaction assay. Selected positives were cloned, sequenced and compared with DNA databases. RESULTS: Bacterial DNA sequences were detected in 21 (19. 6%) of 107 patients with prostate cancer compared to 79 (46.4%) of 170 with chronic prostatitis (p <0.0001). These bacteria included urogenital pathogens, other described microorganisms and bacteria not reported previously. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial DNA sequences may be identified in prostate tissue from many patients. Bacterial detection rates in prostate tissue appear to differ among populations, with higher rates among patients with the chronic prostatitis/pelvic pain syndrome than among those with prostate cancer. Future studies of the role of various bacteria in the prostate may provide insight into the pathophysiology of prostate disease.

1: J Urol. 2005 Jun;173(6):1969-74.
Related Articles, Links

Propionibacterium acnes associated with inflammation in radical prostatectomy specimens: a possible link to cancer evolution?

Cohen RJ, Shannon BA, McNeal JE, Shannon T, Garrett KL.

Uropath Pty Ltd, Perth, Western Australia. ronnie@uropath.com.au

PURPOSE: Inflammation is commonly observed in the prostate gland and has been implicated in the development of prostate cancer. The etiology of prostatic inflammation is unknown. However, the involvement of a carcinogenic infectious agent has been suggested. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prostatic tissue from 34 consecutive patients with prostate cancer was cultured to detect the presence of bacterial agents. Prostatic inflammation was assessed by histological examination of wholemount tissue sections. RESULTS: The predominant microorganism detected was Propionibacterium acnes, found in 35% of prostate samples. A significantly higher degree of prostatic inflammation was observed in cases culture positive for P. acnes (p =0.007). P. acnes was separated into 3 groups based on cell surface properties, phenotype and genetic grouping. All skin control isolates were classified as group 1 whereas most prostatic isolates were classified as groups 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: P. acnes has been isolated from prostatic tissues in men who underwent radical prostatectomy for localized cancer and has been shown to be positively associated with prostatic inflammation. This inflammation may then be linked to the evolution of carcinoma. Furthermore, organisms infecting these patients with prostate cancer differ genetically and phenotypically from the commonly identified cutaneous P. acnes isolates, suggesting that specific subtypes may be involved in development of prostatic inflammation.


1: Future Oncol. 2006 Apr;2(2):225-32. Links
Links between Propionibacterium acnes and prostate cancer.

Shannon BA, Garrett KL, Cohen RJ.
Tissugen Pty Ltd, Perth, Western Australia.
Incidental foci of prostate cancer are found at autopsy in 30% of men in their third decade, and by their eighth decade more than 75% have histological evidence of cancer. This unprecedented cancer prevalence points to a ubiquitous causative agent or perhaps an interaction between multiple common carcinogenic cofactors. We propose that one of these carcinogens is Propionibacterium acnes. Several characteristics of prostate cancer suggest the involvement of an infectious agent and we provide evidence that P. acnes is an excellent candidate. We have cultured P. acnes from a substantial proportion of prostate glands containing cancer and shown a significant positive association with prostatic inflammation. P. acnes is well suited to cause persistent, low-grade infection involving a marked inflammatory response and the P. acnes subtypes most frequently associated with prostate cancer become highly prevalent in the urinary tract of males following puberty.
PMID: 16563091 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


1: Res Microbiol. 2007 May;158(4):386-92. Epub 2007 Feb 21. Links
Biofilm formation by Propionibacterium acnes is associated with increased resistance to antimicrobial agents and increased production of putative virulence factors.

Coenye T, Peeters E, Nelis HJ.
Laboratorium voor Farmaceutische Microbiologie, Universiteit Gent, Harelbekestraat 72, B-9000 Gent, Belgium. tom.coenye@ugent.be
Propionibacterium acnes plays an important role in the pathogenesis of acne vulgaris, a common disorder of the pilosebaceous follicles. Recently, it was suggested that P. acnes cells residing within the follicles grow as a biofilm. In the present study, we tested the biofilm-forming ability of several P. acnes strains in a microtiter plate model. We also evaluated the resistance of biofilm-grown P. acnes towards antimicrobial agents commonly used in the treatment of acne and the production of putative virulence factors. Our results indicate that P. acnes can form biofilms in vitro. The results also show that sessile P. acnes cells are more resistant to various commonly used antimicrobial agents than planktonic cells. In addition, sessile cells produce more extracellular lipases as well as significant amounts of the quorum-sensing molecule autoinducer-2.
PMID: 17399956 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

[kasalt]

Perhaps a strange question, but when the man from the article talks about 100 degrees... does he mean Celsius or Fahrenheit? :confused:

I'm just making a deduction here, but judging by the context of the article, I'm sure the author must have meant Fahrenheit rather than Celsius. He makes mention of drying the root by putting it "in the sun or put them in the attic if it's not too hot". 100 degrees Fahrenheit equals 38 degrees Celsius, but 100 degrees Celsius equals 212 degrees Fahrenheit. That would be too hot, even for an attic. Then he says it takes him 5 or 6 days to dry them in an incubator, and if he meant 100 degrees Celsius, I think that would burn the roots rather than just dry them. Besides which, the author is an American, and the Fahrenheit scale is still in common usage in America.

Again, 100 degrees Fahrenheit = 38 degrees Celsius.

[rynath]

There is a drink out there as well called KOMBUCHA.. it is an asian live mushroom cultured tea and it does wonders against cancer i hear.. Worth a shot yes?;)

Thx I'll pass this on to my mom :)

[rynath]

hi guys,

really interesting post, dandelion roots are now on the menu for me.


rynath you may find this link very informative, a chap called jerry brunetti on eating himself well from cancer and goes into what chemo really is......its apparently a derivative of ww1 mustard gas. check it out.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-8841234327210711547&q=food+as+medicine&total=1224&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

cheers

KK will do! This reminds me of the Gerson Institute. How can you go wrong with real food eh?
http://www.gerson.org/

[rynath]

I'm just making a deduction here, but judging by the context of the article, I'm sure the author must have meant Fahrenheit rather than Celsius. He makes mention of drying the root by putting it "in the sun or put them in the attic if it's not too hot". 100 degrees Fahrenheit equals 38 degrees Celsius, but 100 degrees Celsius equals 212 degrees Fahrenheit. That would be too hot, even for an attic. Then he says it takes him 5 or 6 days to dry them in an incubator, and if he meant 100 degrees Celsius, I think that would burn the roots rather than just dry them. Besides which, the author is an American, and the Fahrenheit scale is still in common usage in America.

Again, 100 degrees Fahrenheit = 38 degrees Celsius.

That does ring true thanks for explaining :)

[madthumbs]

I have no trust in Rense. Why isolate one obscure cancer fighting food and promote it over others? What if there's something wrong with ingesting a lot of dandelion root?

There are many cancer fighting foods to learn about: Alternative Cancer Protocols (http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=83)

[megafish33]

I know making a tea of the root helps detoxify your liver. It assists in flushing out fatty toxins. Actually, I think a pharmaceutical company is researching dandelion, as well as cinnamon and stuff like that.

[madthumbs]

I know making a tea of the root helps detoxify your liver. It assists in flushing out fatty toxins. Actually, I think a pharmaceutical company is researching dandelion, as well as cinnamon and stuff like that.

Antibiotics kill germs in your body, would you take them every day? If a pharmaceutical company is researching dandelion: it's not for a cancer cure, but it might be to create a report that appears to debunk it's efficacy.

[catfood]

Might seem a stupid question but how do you make dandelion root tea?
I ask because I would like to try sum. :)

[megafish33]

Antibiotics kill germs in your body, would you take them every day? If a pharmaceutical company is researching dandelion: it's not for a cancer cure, but it might be to create a report that appears to debunk it's efficacy.

I don't understand what your talking about concerning antibiotics. I wouldn't take them every day if you paid me; antibiotics are over prescribed!

madthumbs, my gf's brother works in R&D at a pharma company. Trust me, they employ both the smart and the empathetic to do their dirty work. The problem is all of the bureaucracy and conflicts of interests. The almighty dollar, or euro technically, is king. Hopefully more and more people begin to see the Big Pharma corruption. They created reports to debunk the activity of tocopherol supplementation saying that it could cause cancer... Yet it's used to preserve the shit foods that are being force-fed to the Western, and now Eastern populations of the world. Thankfully, some scientists pointed out that the E vitamins used in such studies were made in such a pathetic fashion that they couldn't help but hurt the stats of the persons in the study. This has been done all the time, and I'm afraid you're right, they might do it with these herbs as well...

[megafish33]

Might seem a stupid question but how do you make dandelion root tea?
I ask because I would like to try sum. :)

Here you go... (http://www.traditionalmedicinals.com/?id=31&pid=32) Yes, I know... it comes in a bag... but don't worry, it's effective.
Enjoy :)

[madthumbs]

Vitamin E supplementation? From what I've read, it can cause heart disease and I don't doubt it at all. We can get more than all the nutrition we need through food. If you don't believe me, take a look around and watch what other moderately healthy people are living in as food.

[megafish33]

Vitamin E supplementation? From what I've read, it can cause heart disease and I don't doubt it at all. We can get more than all the nutrition we need through food. If you don't believe me, take a look around and watch what other moderately healthy people are living in as food.

I agree that the average person doesn't need it if they're eating healthy, but I'm also into sports nutrition and there is some observed benefit to having extra vitamin e(along with c), amongst other things, in an energy phase supplement. That would be a time when supplementing your diet may prove effective.

[magicmerlin]

What Pharma companies tend to do is pick up on natural chemicals and then turn them into drugs to fool ignorant people into thinking they are something that can't be obtained from nature. There are thousands of people working in Pharma with good intentions, but these people are blind to the truth.

Regarding consuming singular vitamins such as Vit E, what I will say is that I too train alot in the gym and without regular vitamin c, I develop mouth ulcers. It's as simple as - ''stop taking it for 2 weeks and i will get an ulcer'.....'start taking it again and ulcer gone in 3 days'. Yes there is some debate over some vitamins (and whole food supplements are definately better), but perhaps Pharma and NWO didn't like so many people taking responsibility for their own health?

[madthumbs]

I agree that the average person doesn't need it if they're eating healthy, but I'm also into sports nutrition and there is some observed benefit to having extra vitamin e(along with c), amongst other things, in an energy phase supplement. That would be a time when supplementing your diet may prove effective.

People who are more physically active eat more. A single or possibly a half a kiwi a day can provide more than enough vitamin C. I've also read about Vitamin C supplements causing disease. Even if the vitamins themselves don't cause disease, I've experienced first hand that additives do (http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/index.php).

[megafish33]

People who are more physically active eat more. A single or possibly a half a kiwi a day can provide more than enough vitamin C. I've also read about Vitamin C supplements causing disease. Even if the vitamins themselves don't cause disease, I've experienced first hand that additives do (http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/index.php).

Sorry to hear. :(

Agreed. I'd take the kiwi any day. :)

[cruise4]

Scientific Evidence Proves Significant Anti-Cancer Effect of Milk Thistle
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 by: Leslee Dru Brownin

http://www.naturalnews.com/022724.html

(NaturalNews) Milk Thistle has been used in the treatment of liver diseases including liver cancer for years. It heals the liver by lowering enzyme levels and assisting the liver in its process of detoxifying the body. Herbalists and Chinese Physicians have prescribed milk thistle for all types of liver disorders including cirrhosis, inflammation, high liver enzymes, jaundice, hardening of the liver, hepatitis and liver cancer. Herbalists recommend milk thistle for any type of cancer as it is vital in aiding detoxification of the blood.

According to a recent report in the World Journal of Gastroenterology, scientists have now demonstrated the anti-cancer effects of silibinin, a major biologically active compound of milk thistle. Being widely used as a folk remedy for liver diseases, milk thistle is safe and well-tolerated, and it protects the liver from drug or alcohol-related injury. Silibinin is highly purified from milk thistle, with a defined chemical structure and molecular weight (C25H22O10, MW: 482.44).

The study was carried out by Dr. Ke-Qin Hu and his research team at the University of California, Irvine. Dr. Hu is a well-experienced research scientist and physician in the field of hepatology. He has published over 70 scientific articles in various medical professional journals. Many of his scientific research publications are focused on viral hepatitis B and C, cirrhosis, and liver cancer, all of which have significantly contributed to our better understanding of common liver diseases.

Dr. Hu and his colleagues' discovery of silibilin's anti-liver cancer effects was recently published.*

The researchers found that silibilin can significantly reduce the growth of several human hepatoma cell lines. In addition, they demonstrated that silibinin mediates anti-liver cancer effects by:

1. reduced cancer cell proliferation and cell cycle progression;

2. enhanced programmed death of cancer cells; and

3. altered chromatin structure of the cancer cells.

Their research results indicate that silibinin can be used to prevent the development of liver cancer, one of the most common cancers worldwide. The results have also opened our minds to the possibility of testing other herbal supplements for possible treatment of human cancers.

Milk Thistle From an Herbal Perspective

Milk thistle has been observed in the reversal in symptoms of both acute and chronic liver problems. There is significant antioxidant and free radical scavenger action properties in milk thistle.

Milk thistle is beneficial for the liver in both protecting and regenerating it and is one of the best examples of preventative medicine that we have today as it not only protects each cell of the liver, kidneys, gall bladder, skin, brain and other tissues from incoming toxins, but at the same time encourages the liver to cleanse itself of damaging substances, such as alcohol, drugs, medications, mercury and heavy metals, pesticides, anesthesia, and even the most poisonous of mushrooms, the Amanita or Death-cap mushroom.

Additional Benefits of Milk Thistle

Milk thistle accelerates protein synthesis by the liver cells. It stimulates the liver to produce SOD, a potent free radical scavenger. It prevents depletion of glutathione in the liver.

Researchers have shown that milk thistle stimulates the synthesis of RNA (an important molecule that helps carry out and control protein synthesis)

Milk thistle protects the kidneys and is beneficial to those with skin problems like psoriasis.
Milk thistle blocks allergic and inflammatory reactions.

Milk thistle in mucilaginous and increases immune response, eradicates infection and soothes inflamed tissue.

Milk thistle has been found to maintain the basic function of the liver, thereby keeping the blood vascular system clean, which has an overall effect of maintaining health in the entire body.

This is an excellent herb for anyone who is under stress, uses alcohol, recreational drugs, prescription medications, or lives in today's modern times of pesticides, environmental toxins, and pollution.

Sources:

*Journal reference: Lah JJ, Cui W, Hu KQ. Effects and mechanisms of silibinin on human hepatoma cell lines. World J Gastroenterol 2007; 13(40): 5299-5305

The Little Herb Encyclopedia by Jack Ritchason: N.D. Page 146

Milk Thistle - Silybum Marianum: ((http://www.skyeherbals.com/materia_medi...)

About the author
Leslee Dru Browning is a 6th generation Medical Herbalist & Nutritionist from the ancestral line of Patty Bartlett Sessions; Pioneer Mid-Wife & Herbalist. Leslee practiced Medical Herbalism and Nutritional Healing for over 25 years and specialized in Cancer Wellness along with Chronic Illness. She now devotes her career to teaching people, through her writing, about Natural Healing from An Herbal Perspective.

[cruise4]

Chemo A FRAUD - More Evidence It's WORTHLESS
3-1-8

".....RESULTS: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. CONCLUSION: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required."

Chemotherapy...the massive, evil poisoning of the already immuno-suppressed human body...remains one of the most barbaric, criminal undertakings of modern 'medicine' against the human species. The cost of the average chemotherapy regimen: $300,000 to $1,000,000. It's ALL about MONEY and PROFITS. YOU are worthless to the AMA-Pharma death machine. The FAKE war on cancer has raised over a trillion dollars to date and now one out of every TWO Americans will be confronted with cancer at some point. Most of all, the criminal 'war on cancer' has made a lot of people wealthy. It is, without question, one of the biggest hoaxes in human history.

There are MANY cures for cancer, from Rife to Essiac to Ozone to Hoxey to Glyconutrients to the simple cessation of poisoning one's body with meat, dairy and processed foods loaded with MSG and countless other carcinogens. This particular article is but one of many showing that chemo (and radiation) do NOT extend the life of one cancer patient over another with the same cancer who does NOTHING. To devastate a body trying to cope with a disease by poisoning the hell out of it is beyond something from the Dark Ages.

So, when your 'doctor' tells you a tumor can be 'shrunk' ask him/her how that actually translates to ANY increase in survival. The vast majority of times chemotherapy will only HASTEN death...and utterly destroy the quality of life until then.

While chemo can shrink some tumors, the devastating cycotoxic nature of chemo 'therapy' further destroys the patients already compromised and failing immune system causing an even quicker demise. Until and unless the patient takes the responsibility for his or her OWN health and stops poisoning their own body...and begins to study so-called 'alternative' approaches to recovery...there is virtually no hope for true healing. Cancer doesn't just 'happen'...it is CAUSED by diet, lifestyle, stress, anxiety and environmental toxins in the work place and home.

Do a search for Rife and Ozone and Essiac. Read NotMilk.com and NoMilk.com. Read MadCowboy.com and MeatStinks.com. And others. Educate yourself if you want to
live. By all means, see the new Rife Documentary (http://www.zerozerotwo.org) and prepare to be outraged beyond your worst imaginings. -JR

Comment in:
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol).
2005 Jun;17(4):294.

The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies.

Morgan G,
Ward R,
Barton M.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
gmorgan1@bigpond.net.au

AIMS: The debate on the funding and availability of cytotoxic drugs raises questions about the contribution of curative or adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to survival in adult cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a literature search for randomised clinical trials reporting a 5-year survival benefit attributable solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adult malignancies. The total number of newly diagnosed cancer patients for 22 major adult malignancies was determined from cancer registry data in Australia and from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data in the USA for 1998. For each malignancy, the absolute number to benefit was the product of (a) the total number of persons with that malignancy; (b) the proportion or subgroup(s) of that malignancy showing a benefit; and (c) the percentage increase in 5-year survival due solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy. The overall contribution was the sum total of the absolute numbers showing a 5-year survival benefit expressed as a percentage of the total number for the 22 malignancies. RESULTS: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. CONCLUSION: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.

PMID: 15630849 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630849?ordinalpos=1&itool=Entrez
System2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_ RVDocSum

[cruise4]

David Swain has offered to pay for the drug
A Leicestershire man with terminal bowel cancer has said he is furious at being denied a new drug on the NHS that could extend his life.
David Swain from Long Clawson wants to take Erbitux, but NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence) ruled it was too expensive.

He offered to pay £2,000 a month for it, but the NHS told him that if he did he would have to fund all his care.

Mr Swain said he plans to appeal against this decision.

Since being diagnosed with inoperable bowel cancer two and a half years ago, Mr Swain has used a mixture of chemotherapy and radiotherapy to keep the disease at bay.

I feel a little bit cheated ... there are so many things I still want to do

David Swain, cancer patient

However, his condition has worsened as the tumour is now pressing against his spine and his consultant at the Leicester Royal Infirmary recommended taking Erbitux.

But Mr Swain was told if he chose to pay for that, he would have to pay for all his treatment, costing around £10,000 a month.

David Swain said: "A two-tier health system exists, I'm afraid, and there are so many examples that can be quoted to prove this.

"We have a family of four fantastic children, we've got two wonderful grandchildren. I want to enjoy as much of my time with them as possible.

"And I feel a little bit cheated that there are still so many things I still want to do and I've got to an age now where I would naturally be retiring anyway and there are so many things that I want to do and carry on with."

In a statement, Leicestershire County and Rutland NHS Primary Care Trust said: "We follow national guidelines which do not allow individuals to part-fund NHS care.

"This is because NHS care is free to everyone, and does not differentiate between individuals according to their ability to pay."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/7275451.stm

[cruise4]

New survey lists hundreds of potential carcinogens
17:01 14 May 2007
NewScientist.com news service
Roxanne Khamsi

Scientists divided the 216 compounds linked to breast cancer into 11 groups based on chemical use and source. Image: Cancer/American Cancer SocietyRelated Articles
Europe signs up to tough new chemical laws
13 December 2006
Deodorants plus shaving linked to breast cancer
24 January 2004
Cosmetic chemicals found in breast tumours
12 January 2004
Search New Scientist
Contact us
Web Links
Susan G. Komen for the Cure
National Cancer Institute
Cancer (journal)

The most comprehensive survey to date of environmental chemicals linked to breast cancer lists 216 compounds – many of which are commonly encountered in most women's lives.

The wide-ranging review of 900 scientific studies involving humans and rodents produced a long list of chemicals in our food, air and water that appear to cause breast cancer.

The researchers behind the review stress that 29 of the potential carcinogens on the list are produced in the US in massive amounts - each exceeding 500,000 kilograms per year. However, even though scientists have closely examined these chemicals, relatively little is known about their effects on health.

Breast cancer poses a substantial threat to women as they age – it is the leading cause of death of US women in their late 30s to early 50s.

Genes can influence a person's risk of this disease dramatically: women with mutations in either the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes have up to a seven-times greater risk of breast cancer, the US National Cancer Institute estimates.

Genetic factors alone, though, cannot explain the striking variation in cancer rates between regions. Women living in developed countries are roughly five times more likely to develop the disease - mainly, it is thought, due to chemicals in the environment that increase the risk of cancer.

Comprehensive survey
The new review, by researchers from a range of US institutes, and funded by the breast cancer foundation Susan G. Komen for the Cure, has come up with a list of 216 chemicals that caused breast tumours in animal studies, some of which have been linked to breast tumours in humans as well.

The researchers say it is the most comprehensive survey of this type to date and have made the list available here.

Of the 216 compounds identified in the new database:

73 have been present in consumer products or as contaminants in food, including 10 that are registered with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as food additives
35 are air pollutants
29 are produced in large amounts, each exceeding at least 500,000 kilograms per year

Some of the common chemicals linked to breast cancer include:


benzene, a constituent of vehicle pollution
acrylamide, which is formed when starchy foods, such as French fries, are heated to high-temperatures
perfluorooctanoic acid, a chemical used in non-stick and stain-resistant coatings on rugs, furniture, clothes and cookware
vinyl chloride, which is used by the plastics industry to produce polyvinyl chloride (PVC), a hard plastic that forms vinyl records and building materials, for example
clonitalid, a pesticide used to control populations of sea lamprey in tributaries that feed the Great Lakes in the upper US. Studies have linked the compound to breast cancers in rats
malachite green, a textile dye that is also used as a cheap antifungal agent in fish hatcheries, although the US Food and Drug Administration has not approved it for use on aquatic species

The authors of the survey say that researchers and governments need to make the screening of potential carcinogens less expensive and time-consuming: "If methods for identifying potential carcinogens were more efficient, a higher proportion of chemicals in use could be evaluated."

Journal reference: Cancer (DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22653, 10.1002/cncr.22654, 10.1002/cncr.22655)

[cruise4]

http://news.ufl.edu/2006/01/12/berries/

Quote:
GAINESVILLE, Fla. — A Brazilian berry popular in health food contains antioxidants that destroyed cultured human cancer cells in a recent University of Florida study, one of the first to investigate the fruit’s purported benefits.

Published today in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, the study showed extracts from acai (ah-SAH’-ee) berries triggered a self-destruct response in up to 86 percent of leukemia cells tested, said Stephen Talcott, an assistant professor with UF’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

“Acai berries are already considered one of the richest fruit sources of antioxidants,” Talcott said. “This study was an important step toward learning what people may gain from using beverages, dietary supplements or other products made with the berries.”

He cautioned that the study, funded by UF sources, was not intended to show whether compounds found in acai berries could prevent leukemia in people.

“This was only a cell-culture model and we don’t want to give anyone false hope,” Talcott said. “We are encouraged by the findings, however. Compounds that show good activity against cancer cells in a model system are most likely to have beneficial effects in our bodies.”

Other fruits, including grapes, guavas and mangoes, contain antioxidants shown to kill cancer cells in similar studies, he said. Experts are uncertain how much effect antioxidants have on cancer cells in the human body, because factors such as nutrient absorption, metabolism and the influence of other biochemical processes may influence the antioxidants’ chemical activity.

Another UF study, slated to conclude in 2006, will investigate the effects of acai’s antioxidants on healthy human subjects, Talcott said. The study will determine how well the compounds are absorbed into the blood, and how they may affect blood pressure, cholesterol levels and related health indicators. So far, only fundamental research has been done on acai berries, which contain at least 50 to 75 as-yet unidentified compounds.

“One reason so little is known about acai berries is that they’re perishable and are traditionally used immediately after picking,” he said. “Products made with processed acai berries have only been available for about five years, so researchers in many parts of the world have had little or no opportunity to study them.”

Talcott said UF is one of the first institutions outside Brazil with personnel studying acai berries. Besides Talcott, UF’s acai research team includes Susan Percival, a professor with the food science and human nutrition department, David Del Pozo-Insfran, a doctoral student with the department and Susanne Mertens-Talcott, a postdoctoral associate with the pharmaceutics department of UF’s College of Pharmacy.

Acai berries are produced by a palm tree known scientifically as Euterpe oleracea, common in floodplain areas of the Amazon River, Talcott said. When ripe, the berries are dark purple and about the size of a blueberry. They contain a thin layer of edible pulp surrounding a large seed.

Historically, Brazilians have used acai berries to treat digestive disorders and skin conditions, he said. Current marketing efforts by retail merchants and Internet businesses suggest acai products can help consumers lose weight, lower cholesterol and gain energy.

“A lot of claims are being made, but most of them haven’t been tested scientifically,” Talcott said. “We are just beginning to understand the complexity of the acai berry and its health-promoting effects.”

In the current UF study, six different chemical extracts were made from acai fruit pulp, and each extract was prepared in seven concentrations.

Four of the extracts were shown to kill significant numbers of leukemia cells when applied for 24 hours. Depending on the extract and concentration, anywhere from about 35 percent to 86 percent of the cells died.

The UF study demonstrates that research on foods not commonly consumed in the United States is important, because it may lead to unexpected discoveries, said Joshua Bomser, an assistant professor of molecular nutrition and functional foods at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio.

But familiar produce items have plenty of health-giving qualities, he said.

“Increased consumption of fruits and vegetables is associated with decreased risk for many diseases, including heart disease and cancer,” said Bomser, who researches the effects of diet on chronic diseases. “Getting at least five servings a day of these items is still a good recommendation for promoting optimal health.”

[cruise4]

Cancer
By Ken Adachi <Ken Adachi, Editor>
http://educate-yourself.org/cancer/
February 26, 2002

Introduction
When I was a much younger person growing up in the greater New York metropolitan area, the word "cancer" struck more fear in my heart than any other word in the English language. We really didn't have much cancer in our immediate family, but the occasional relative or school friend that did go to an early grave from this frightening and mysterious disease had me worried enough to look into finding out where the best cancer hospitals and clinics in the country were located, so if I did get cancer, I would know where to go for the most knowledgeable treatment and maximize my chances of survival. I wasn't going to entrust my life to some local yokel oncologist who wasn't up on the the most recent research or the latest equipment and diagnostic gear. No sir. If I got cancer, I was going to head straight for the Big Boys of Cancer Research.

After doing some research at the library, I found out that Sloan Kettering Memorial Hospital in New York had one of the biggest reputations in the country as a major cancer research hospital and was only a 45 minute drive into New York City. Whew! What a load off my mind. I could rest easier now. I not only knew where to go for the best treatment, but felt 'lucky' to have such a major cancer center located nearby. Of course, it never occurred to me how I was going to pay for their top shelf treatment, but at 22 years old, those sort of details never burdened my mind for long. Somehow, it would all work out.

Today, I have a rather different opinion of the entire matter. I now understand why I was so fearful of getting cancer in my youth and why I had been led to believe that Sloan Ketting was the best possible place to go for the treatment of cancer. I, along with 98% of the country, had been snookered and deceived into believing it by a huge pharmaceutical propaganda machine that inculcates its deceit upon our schools, text books, magazines, professional journals, scientific writers, radio shows, TV shows, screen plays, movies, and of course, the vast majority of allopathic doctors, nurses, and other so called "health" professionals into a knee jerk acceptance of its lies as the gospel truth. If you want to examine the 'business' of health care and the cancer industry more closely, read The Story on Drugs and go to our Introduction and Forbidden Cures pages.

Cancer & You
Now we come to you. You are reading this page because you either know someone who has cancer, or you have cancer yourself., or far more rarely, you want to find out how to beat cancer before you are confronted with that grim diagnosis. The vast majority of you (or your loved ones) have likely already gone through the 'best' that the Sloan Ketterings of the world have to offer and now you're being told that "there's nothing more that can be done" or " It's in God's Hands", etc.

Of course, your bank account or your insurance company is $300K or $500K or $750K poorer than it was before receiving your Sloan Kettering style treatment and now you no longer own your home, having sold it or mortgaged it to the hilt in order to get the money to pay the miracle workers of the allopathic cancer industry. You've gone through your retirement savings and 401 k's or borrowed all you could from your relatives and friends to pay for their wonderful life saving treatment that- unfortunately-didn't work. In all fairness, they did tell you up front that they couldn't guarantee anything, but they indicated to you that you had a 40, 50, or 60% or perhaps a "good" chance of making it-at least for 5 years. Five years of continued breathing on the planet from the day of your cancer diagnosis now being the official, sanctified, and anointed recasting of the "new" definition of the word "cure" by the American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society.

Just so you know, if you die of cancer or its complications just one day after your 5 year anniversary date, you are still statistically carried as a "successful cure"; advertised and touted to the next cancer patient coming in through the front door to use in their spiel to him about his 40, or 50, or 60, or 70% chance of being "cured" with their marvelous, patented, and expensive chemo, radiation, and surgery treatments.

So what's the reality? A study completed in 1993 by a German biostatistician named Ulrich Abel found that the overall success rate for most cancers treated with standard allopathic treatment (chemo, radiation, & surgery) was just 4%. That's right. Statistically averaged, 96% of cancer patients treated conventionally died of cancer or from complications related to their 'treatment'. The only group of cancers treated conventionally that had a higher batting average were some blood cancers such as leukemia or Hodgskins which approached a 35% success rate.

Also, for your edification, only those allopathic physicians approved by the AMA and the American Cancer Society have the legal authority to use the word "cure" with reference to cancer treatment. Anyone else who dares utter that four letter word in a public forum and is not on the AMA's approved list, can face serious jail time or heavy fines. That Federal law was pushed through by the AMA and their friends a few years ago. How's that for free speech?

The Death Sentence
I can't tell you how many people have programmed their bodies to die because they were told by the orthodox medicine priesthood (their allopathic physician) or a cancer specialist (oncologist) that they were going to die in so many weeks, or so many months or so many years from their cancer. How many people have foolishly placed their trust in the hands of the those who are the least educated in 1. how the human body truly functions, 2. in how cancer begins and why cancer proliferates, and 3. how to treat the body to overcome disease with therapies that are in harmony with Nature?

Undoubtedly, that number runs to many millions of people who went to an early grave because they listened to-and believed- the high priests of organized medicine. Those priests are trained and brain washed from the first day they enter undergraduate school-through graduation from medical school-through internship-and through specialist training, that the ONLY acceptable and sanctioned way to treat cancer is with 1. chemotherapy, 2. surgery, and 3. radiation. With the possible exception of surgery (in some cases), the methods used by orthodox medicine are the worst and most destructive ways to treat cancer.

I don't care what 'stage' of cancer you are rated at and I don't care what type of cancer you've been diagnosed with, you CAN CURE YOURSELF OF CANCER. Your likelihood of success, however, is lowest if you depend on conventional treatment and highest if you employ Nature-based, non-allopathic therapies. Of course, you are free to choose the modality of your choice, even though that choice is largely coerced in the direction of orthodox treatment. You are reading MY opinion in this matter. YOU must decide on your heatlth care decisions and not give away your power to someone else. .

If you prefer to accept the death sentence of an orthodox medicine priest and resign yourself to die on cue, then you likely WILL DIE pretty much within the time frame laid out by the high priest. And then your relatives will remark at your funeral how "wonderful" Dr. So & So of the Big Deal Medical Center is because he was so accurate in his death prediction. He SAID you were going to die in six months and sure enough, you held on for six months and 10 days, so he MUST know what's he's talking about! Of course, your relatives will keep his name in mind if they get a diagnosis of cancer because he seems to be so KNOWLEDGABLE when it comes to cancer.

What Causes Cancer?
This is part of the reason why so many people have a strong fear of getting cancer. They don't really understand how or why cancer can take hold in the human body and they aren't given enough information about it by the orthodox cancer industry. Yes, there are plenty of softball reasons offered such as smoking, drinking, radiation exposure, asbestos exposure, radon gas, etc. And yes, these environmental irritants can trigger cancers, but is that all there is to it?

If that were so, then why doesn't everyone who smokes come down with cancer? We all have the same DNA. Are we not of one species, homosapiens? If the human body was actually a 'wonderful machine' as explained to us in countless science books and TV documentaries, then why don't we all respond like machines to an irritant? If I poured a bag of sugar into my car's gas tank, the engine would stop running. If I poured a bag of sugar into any car's gas tank, the engine would stop running, so why don't our bodies-if they are wonderful machines-respond in a similar fashion?

Why is it that some guy can work in an asbestos plant for 30 years and still die in his bed from natural causes at the age of 89 and Steve McQueen, by simply wearing an asbestos-lined jump suit at the race track, comes down with mesothelioma lung cancer, the type of cancer associated with asbestos exposure?

There's obviously more to acquiring cancer than the mere exposure to an external irritant, but the external irritant is the only topic the cancer industry is willing to address. The internal biological environment and the spiritual/emotional state of mind is not discussed by the cancer industry, but therein lies a greater insight into the causes of cancer.

The SPECIFICS of how cancer cells begin and WHY they begin to gestate and grow are clearly explained in the lastest book (published in 2005) from Dr. Hulda Clark. The book is titled The Prevention of All Cancers. You can obtain the book by calling her book publisher, New Century Press at 1-800- 519-2465 or 1-619-476-7400

And when it comes to successful therapies for treating cancer, and I mean really successful treatment of cancer (not the cancer industry's 5 year survival nonsense), there's a great deal you are not being told by established medicine. What you are being told by the orthodox cancer industry are cleverly crafted lies and distortions designed to mislead you into believing that alternative modalities are worthless. The truth, of course, is just the opposite.

It's much easier to cure yourself of cancer once you understand what causes cancer malignancy and how to stop it. By reading the books of Dr. Hulda Clark , you will understand what causes cancer to grow and what stops it from growing. It follows very tight biological processes or rules and once you understand those rules, you can turn cancer off like a water spigot and free yourself of this disease for the rest of your life. It's really that simple.

Dr. Hulda Regher Clark
I am more impressed with the astounding discoveries made by Dr. Hulda Clark than any other health scientist/researcher/writer in the world, past or present. She deserves to receive the Nobel Prize twenty times over for her quantum leaps in discoveries of how the body succumbs to disease and how the body can cure itself of disease. I encourage anyone reading these words to buy Hula Clark's books-all of them- and study them until the cows come home.

You will learn how to take care of your body, to cure yourself of any disease, and to live a long and fruitful life. If I had more time, I would love to post 50 or 60 or 70 articles here describing to you just some of the many gems of new knowledge that I've gleaned from Dr. Hulda Clark's books, but you don't have to wait for me. Dr. Clark has already given away her incredible discoveries-freely- in her books. Order them today and learn how to take care of your body and your health.

The Books of Dr. Hulda Clark

1. The Prevention of All Cancers (**New book-extermely important information **)
2. The Cure for All Cancers
3. The Cure for Advanced Cancers
4. The Cure for All Disease
5. The Cure for HIV/AIDS
6. The Synchrometer Lab Manual

You can get the books directly from the publisher in California, New Century Press:

New Century Press
1055 Bay Blvd., Ste. C
Chula Vista, CA 91911

http://www.newcenturypress.com

1-800-519-2465
1-619-476-7400

Dr. Max Gerson & Charlotte Gerson
Most alternative cancer therapists will acknowledge the leading role that Dr. Max Gerson played, first in Germany in the 1920's & 30's and then the United States in the 40's and 50's, in demonstrating the crucial role of nutrition in the recovery from deadly diseases like tuberculosis and cancer. The heart of the Gerson therapy is 13 glasses of freshly made, organic vegetable juice taken each hour, 13 times a day. If the patient is capable of eating, the food is stricly vegetarian, fresh, raw, and organic. Dental cleanup is an absolute must. Other supportive measures inlcude thyroid, electrolyte, and liver support. Max Gerson also helped to popularize the use of the coffee enema, an incredibly powerful detoxification technique utilized by all Gerson patients. After his death in 1959, Dr. Gerson's successful approach to cancer treatment has been faithfully carried on by his daughter Charlotte Gerson at their clinic in Tiajuana, Mexico. You can do the Gerson therapy yourself at home using the book, manual, and video tapes offered at her web site (see below).



To be continued...


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

Important Information Resources for Alternative Cancer Treatment

www.CancerTutor.com from Webster Kerr, One of the Best

Message Boards for Alternative & Natural Medicine Information

Cancer Resources from Chris Gupta

www.JonBarron.org

Hydrogen Peroxide

Oxygen, Ozone, & Hydrogen Peroxide by Dr. Majid Ali (July 17, 2003)
http://educate-yourself.org/cancer/ozonebymajidli17jul03.shtml

The Many Benefits of Hydrogen Peroxide (July 17, 2003)
http://educate-yourself.org/cancer/benefitsofhydrogenperozide17jul03.shtml

Articles on Cancer & Alternative Therapies

Pancreatic Cancer (Nov. 26, 2006)

A Thumbnail Tutorial on Dr. Hulda Clark & The Amazing CS/H2O2 Nasal Sprayer (Jan. 17, 2005)

Dr. Ryke Geerd Hamer, German Alternative Cancer Researcher, Faces Jailing in France (Oct. 13, 2004)

Mother Finds Answer For Dying Daughter's Cancer on Alternative Medicine Chat Board (Aug. 31, 2004)

Adam the Healer (August 21, 2004)

The Story of Laetrile and Cancer (June 26, 2004)

Jason Vale Inprisoned for Alternative Cancer Cure (June 26, 2004)

Taking On the Medical Racketeers (June 17, 2004)

Pleomorphism, it’s Discovery and Suppression by Dave Cowan (June 12, 2004)

Zapping for Mitral Valve Heart Problems (Mar. 15, 2004)

Horsetail Plant for Cancer (Feb. 11, 2004)

Cancer & Vit. B 17 (Laetrile) By Joe Vialls (Jan. 26, 2004)

Laura Takes Control: Rebuffing the Oncologists (July 27, 2003)

Cancer & Orthodox Medicine, Planting Seeds of Doom (July 4, 2003)

Oxygen, Ozone, & Hydrogen Peroxide by Dr. Majid Ali (July 17, 2003)

The Many Benefits of Hydrogen Peroxide (July 17, 2003)

Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death in the US, Causing 250,000 Deaths Every Year


Dr. William D. Kelly's Approach to Curing Cancer

[Editor's Note: April 14, 2005. I was notified that Dr. Kelly passed away on January 30, 2005 after being hospitalized for a heart attack and stroke. He saved his life from cancer nearly 40 years ago by listening to his mother and turning to Nature for his answer rather than continue to poison his body with junk food and orthodox cancer treatment. He would have become fabulously rich and famous had the fact that he cured actor Steve McQueen of cancer using a Nature-based therapy became widely known. But because McQueen had boasted to Dr. Kelly over the phone that he was going to 'blow the cancer racket out of the water" by announcing to the world of his cure by Kelly, McQueen was covertly murdered with an injection while recovering from a successful surgery to remove an already dead tumor mass from his abdomen. The personal turmoil, betrayals, and strife that Dr. Kelly suffered in the wake of McQueen's murder was typical of the all out effort that is always made by our greed-orientated friends in the orthodox cancer industry who will always attempt to destroy the lives of alternative competitors whenever they gain too much successful exposure in the media. The same ilk of cancer industry racketeers also destroyed the cancer cure work pioneered by Dr. Royal Raymond Rife in the 1930's and again in the early 1960's. Dr. Kelly was a dentist who re-discovered that cancer is CURABLE by working with Nature, rather than against Nature as is the case with orthodox treatment. You can learn the same lessons for yourself by reading the writings of Dr. Kelly and especially by studying the books of Dr. Hulda Clark. ..Ken]

[cruise4]

Cancer Is An Infection Caused
By Tuberculosis-Type Bacteria
By Alan Cantwell M.D.

Why does the medical establishment ignore a century of research pointing to tuberculosis-type "acid-fast" bacteria as the cause of cancer? TB-type bacteria can be seen in specially-stained tissue sections of cancer tumors and viewed under the highest magnification of the light microscope at a magnification of 1000 times, under oil immersion. So why isn't this simple microscopic procedure performed in cancer?

As long ago as 1890, Scottish pathologist William Russell discovered "a characteristic organism of cancer" in every cancer he examined; and other pathologists of that era confirmed his findings. Yet, a century ago, the powers-that-be in medical science ignored this research and declared emphatically that bacteria were not the cause of cancer. The reasoning behind this dictum was that cancer did not act like an infectious disease, nor was it communicable. We know now this reasoning was false. Many scientists believe viruses cause cancer; and sexually- transmitted cancer-causing viruses can be passed from person-to- person as well.

For more than a half-century, the cancer microbe has been reported as a pleomorphic, intermittently acid-fast bacterium closely related to the acid-fast mycobacteria and to Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the acid-fast microbe that causes tuberculosis (TB). The acid-fast stain is a time-honored laboratory stain specifically used to detect TB-type mycobacteria in tissue and in culture. Virginia Livingston M.D. (1906-1990) was the foremost proponent of the bacterial cause of cancer. She was the first to discover that the acid-fast stain was the key to the detection of the cancer germ, both in tissue (in vivo) and in laboratory culture (in vitro). Livingston, along with microbiologist Eleanor Alexander- Jackson, cell cytologist Irene Diller, and chemist and TB expert Florence Seibert, all reported that the cancer germ was pleomorphic (meaning it has various appearing growth forms) and was filterable, indicating that in certain stages of its life cycle the microbe was virus-like and submicroscopic. Bacteria can be seen with the light microscope; the much smaller viruses cannot. (For more information on the acid-fast stain, mycobacteria, and pleomorphism, simply Google those key words.)

What do the bacteria in cancer look like? Cancer microbes in vivo are primarily in the cell-wall-deficient (CWD) form. As a result of the loss of a cell wall, the bacteria appear as round, coccus-like, granular forms that are found both within the cell (intracellular) and outside the cell (extracellular). Various types of bacteria may all look similar when in the CWD form. In the body and in the laboratory CWD bacteria (also known as "mycoplasma") have the amazing capacity to enlarge in size. These so-called round "large bodies" can attain the size of red blood cells and even larger. When seen in cancerous tissue these large bodies of bacteria can resemble large spore forms of yeasts and fungi, perhaps explaining why some researchers claim Candida and other fungi are the cause of cancer.

Russell's nineteenth century "parasite of cancer" is now recognized by pathologists as "Russell bodies." Pathologists generally believe these large forms are "immunoglobulins" and they do not accept them as microbial in origin. It is my contention that Russell bodies represent large, variably-sized CWD forms of bacteria in vivo; and that is why both coccal forms of CWD bacteria, as well as Russell bodies, can both be identified in cancerous tissue. (For more details and microphotographs, see my paper "The Russell body: The forgotten clue to the bacterial cause of cancer," posted on the joimr.org and the rense.com websites; and view my video lecture "The cancer microbe and the Russell body," currently available on Youtube.com.)

Why aren't cancer bacteria recognized by pathologists and oncologists? As mentioned, bacteria were excluded a century ago, and medical science never looked back. The result was that any physician who persisted in cancer microbe research was never taken seriously and was often viewed as a medical pariah. There are less than a handful of living physicians in the world who actively promote cancer microbe research. Erik Enby is a 70 year-old Swedish physician, whose accomplishments are cited in the Wikipedia. Nevertheless, his medical license has recently been revoked by the government for his belief in cancer-causing bacteria. I am currently regarded by the Wikipedia as a "conspiracy theorist in the field of cancer microbiology."

Although largely ignored, the microbiology of cancer has a rich history. Details of this research can be found in my books, The Cancer Microbe, and Four Women Against Cancer: Bacteria, Cancer, and the Origin of Life.

At present, doctors generally regard cancer-associated bacteria as laboratory "contaminants" of no consequence, or as "secondary invaders" of diseased tissue. However, cancer bacteria can be observed in precancerous conditions and in areas distant from the tumor. In general, microbiologists have been silent regarding bacteria in cancer and some remain skeptical about bacterial pleomorphism. Over the past decade British microbiologist Milton Wainwright has written extensively about the history of the cancer microbe and his reports are easily accessible on the Net. In Current Trends in Microbiology in 2006, he wrote: "There are signs that more consideration is being given towards the potential role of non-virus microorganisms in cancer, a fact reflected in the recent appearance of major reviews on the subject, and the consideration of novel approaches such as the possible role of nanobacteria in carcinogenesis. It remains probable however, that until the potential role of non-virus microorganisms in carcinogenesis is taken seriously, and a massive research effort is directed towards determining their role in carcinogenesis, we will face another century when the solution to the enigma of cancer may be staring us in the face, only to remain ignored."

In retrospect, it was premature and irrational a century ago to discard bacteria in cancer because the science of bacteriology was in its infancy. Nothing was known about CWD forms and filterable virus-like forms of bacteria. The recent acceptance (after a century) of bacteria (Helicobacter pylori) as the cause of most stomach ulcers is a case in point. For several decades after his 1940 discovery of peculiar S-shaped bacteria in stomach ulcers, A. Stone Freedberg MD stood alone. His research was totally ignored because doctors believed that bacteria could not exist in the acid environment of the stomach. A half century later, these same bacteria were finally accepted and are now a major factor in the development of stomach cancer. Two Australian scientists (Barry Marshall and Robin Warren) received a Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2005 for proving this. Interestingly, in 1998, a new tumor-like stomach lesion was discovered called "Russell body gastritis."

In order to recognize CWD bacteria in cancer in vivo, one must know what they look like. Physicians are taught that bacteria have a certain fixed type of appearance. Most know little about the pleomorphism of CWD bacteria, particularly the acid-fast mycobacteria. In TB the microscopic appearance of the typical red- staining "acid-fast" rod-shaped bacillus of M. tuberculosis is well-known. However, the pleomorphic CWD forms of M. tuberculosis and mycobacteria look entirely different from the typical rod form. CWD forms in vivo appear primarily as small, round coccal and granular forms. They stain poorly, if at all, with the time-honored Gram stain for bacteria. In addition, the routine stain (hematoxylin-eosin stain) used by pathologists to diagnose cancer is not suitable to demonstrate CWD bacteria. To demonstrate the typical red-staining rods of M. tuberculosis, an "acid-fast" stain in required.

Likewise, in cancer an acid-fast stain is necessary. However, in cancer it is almost impossible to find acid-fast rods typical of mycobacteria. As a result of all this, CWD bacteria in cancer are not recognized; and the large body forms are passed over as Russell bodies of dubious significance. Examples of the microscopic appearance of intra- and extracellular cancer microbes in acid-fast stained tissue sections (viewed at a magnification of 1000 times, in oil) are shown in breast cancer, lung cancer, Hodgkin's disease (lymphoma), Kaposi's sarcoma, AIDS-related immunoblastic sarcoma, and prostate cancer in Figures 1-7. Note that the microscopic appearance of CWD bacteria in vivo appears similar in various types of cancer, and consists primarily of small coccoid forms, resembling the size and shape of ordinary staphylococci.

Can the cancer microbe be seen in diseases other than cancer? Further complicating the bacteriology of cancer is the observation that similar-appearing microbes can be seen in vivo in certain chronic diseases, such as lupus, scleroderma, sarcoidosis, and others.(For details, consult my papers posted on the joimr.org website.) Livingston claimed that all human beings carried cancer microbes; and she postulated these microbes were closely connected with the origin of life. In the healthy state these microbes caused no harm and were beneficial. However, when the immune system was weakened, these bacteria were capable of inducing a variety of human illnesses, including cancer. CWD bacteria may
prove to be the cause of many illnesses currently regarded as "of unknown etiology." Because submicroscopic forms of CWD bacteria are virus-sized, they may be confused with ordinary viruses. CWD bacteria are also resistant to antibiotics and are difficult (if not impossible) to eradicate or subdue, at least in the current state of our knowledge.

Are these microbes the true cause of cancer? Although bacteria can be identified in cancer, there are obviously other well-known factors that can induce cancer, such as sunlight in skin cancer, smoking in lung cancer, radiation-induced cancer, etc. But in each case it may require these ever-present bacteria to induce the cellular changes of cancer. The demonstration that these microbes are found within the cell and even within the nucleus (as shown by Irene Diller) indicates that these agents may access the genetic material of the cell, thereby transforming the cell to a cancerous state. In this respect, CWD forms may act like viruses. Studies by Douglas Robinson MD show that bacteria (like viruses) may swap genes back and forth between the infected cell and the microbe.

If cancer is finally accepted as an infection with bacteria it could explain why some people develop two or more different kinds of cancer in their lifetime. At present, physicians believe each type of cancer is different, each requiring its own special type of treatment. Because physicians do not believe in the existence of a cancer microbe, there has been no therapy devised to treat this infection. In my view, Virginia Livingston's greatest contribution was her observation that the microbe could be detected in all cancers in vivo with an acid-fast stain. Only when physicians learn to recognize and accept these infectious bacteria in cancer can we begin to design appropriate therapies against them.

(Dr. Cantwell is a retired dermatologist. A full list of his published scientific reports can be found at the PubMed website.

His books are available through Aries Rising Press (www.ariesrisingpress.com) and also through Amazon.com and Book Clearing House @ 1-800-431-1579. E-mail: alancantwell@sbcglobal.net.)

Selected Bibliography:

Alexander-Jackson E. A specific type of microorganism isolated from animal and human cancer: bacteriology of the organism. Growth. 1954 Mar;18(1):37-51.

Broxmeyer L.Is cancer just an incurable infectious disease? Med Hypotheses. 2004;63(6):986-96. Review.

Cantwell AR, Craggs E, Wilson JW, Swatek F. Acid-fast bacteria as a possible cause of scleroderma. Dermatologica. 1968: 136:141-150.

Cantwell AR. Histologic forms resembling "large bodies" in scleroderma and pseudoscleroderma. Amer J Dermatopathol. 1980; 2:273-276.

Cantwell AR, Rowe L. African "eosinophilic bodies" in vivo in two American men with Kaposi's sarcoma and AIDS. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1985 Apr;11(4):408-12.

Cantwell AR, Kelso DW, Jones JE. Histologic observations of coccoid forms suggestive of cell wall deficient bacteria in cutaneous and systemic lupus erythematosus.
Int J Dermatol. 1982 Nov;21(9):526-37.

Cantwell AR. Variably acid-fast cell wall-deficient bacteria as a possible cause of dermatologic disease. In, Domingue GJ (Ed). Cell Wall Deficient Bacteria. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co; 1982. Pp. 321-360.

Cantwell A. The Cancer Microbe. Los Angeles: Aries Rising Press; 1990.

Cantwell A. Four Women Against Cancer: Bacteria, Cancer and the Origin of Life, Los Angeles: Aries Rising Press; 2005.

Dienes L. Morphology and reproductive processes of bacteria with defective cell walls. In, Guze LB (Ed). Microbial Protoplasts, Spheroplasts and L-Forms. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company; 1968, Pp 74-93.

Diller IC, Diller WF. Intracellular acid-fast organisms isolated from malignant tissues. Trans Amer Micr Soc. 1965; 84:138-148.

Ewing J. The parasitic theory. In, Ewing J (Ed), Neoplastic Diseases (Ed 1); Philadelphia: Saunders; 1919. Pp 114-126.

Gaylord HR. The protozoon of cancer. Amer J Med Sci. 1901;121:501-539.

Glover TJ. The bacteriology of cancer. Canada Lancet Pract. 1930; 75:92-111.

Haensch R, Seeliger H. Problems of differential diagnosis of blastomyces and Russell bodies. Arch Dermatol Res. 1981;270(4):381-5.

Hess D. Can Bacteria Cause Cancer? New York:New York University Press; 1997.

Jetha N, Priddy RW. Exact nature of Russell bodies still an enigma. Am J Clin Pathol. 1984 Apr;81(4):545.

King DF, Eisenberg D. Russell's fuchsine body. "The characteristic organism of cancer". Am J Dermatopathol. 1981 Spring;3(1):55-8.

Mattman LH. Cell Wall Deficient Forms (Ed 2). Boca Raton:CRC Press; 1993.

Mazet G. Corynebacterium, tubercle bacillus and cancer. Growth. 1974; 38:

McLaughlin RW, Vali H, Lau PC, Palfree RG, De Ciccio A, Sirois M, Ahmad D, Villemur R, Desrosiers M, Chan E. Are there naturally occurring pleomorphic bacteria in the blood of healthy humans? J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Dec;40(12):4771-5.

Nuzum JW. The experimental production of metastasizing carcinoma of the breast of the dog and primary epithelioma in man by repeated inoculation of a micrococcus isolated from human breast cancer. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1925; 11;343-352.

Robinson DH.Pleomorphic mammalian tumor-derived bacteria self- organize as multicellular mammalian eukaryotic-like organisms: morphogenetic properties in vitro, possible origins, and possible roles in mammalian 'tumor ecologies'. Med Hypotheses. 2005;64(1): 177-85.

Russell W. An address on a characteristic organism of cancer. Br Med J. 1890; 2:1356-1360.

Russell W. The parasite of cancer. Lancet. 1899;1:1138-1141.

Scott MJ. The parasitic origin of carcinoma. Northwest Med.
1925;24:162-166.

Seibert FB, Feldmann FM, Davis RL, Richmond IS. Morphological, biological, and immunological studies on isolates from tumors and leukemic bloods. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1970 Oct 30;174(2):690-728.

Tedeschi GG, Bondi A, Paparelli M, Sprovieri G. Electron microscopical evidence of the evolution of corynebacteria-like microorganisms within human erythrocytes. Experientia. 1978 Apr 15;34(4):458-60.

Wainwright M. Highly pleomorphic staphylococci as a cause of cancer. Med Hypotheses. 2000 Jan;54(1):91-4.

Wuerthele Caspe-Livingston V, Alexander-Jackson E, Anderson JA, et al. Cultural properties and pathogenicity of certain microorganisms obtained from various proliferative and neoplastic diseases. Amer J Med Sci. 1950; 220;628-646.

Wuerthele-Caspe Livingston V, Livingston AM. Demonstration of Progenitor cryptocides in the blood of patients with collagen and neoplastic diseases. Trans NY Acad Sci. 1972; 174 (2):636-654.

Young J. Description of an organism obtained from carcinomatous growths. Edinburgh Med J. 1921; 27:212-221.


LEGEND FOR PHOTOGRAPHS (7)

Figure 1. Tissue section of breast cancer showing (in center) tightly-packed intracellular coccoid forms with some forms loosely attached to the cell.

Figure 2. Additional view of breast cancer showing two areas (one below center and the other on the right) of intracellular coccoid forms.

Figure 3. Tissue section of lung cancer showing tightly-packed intracellular coccoid forms.

Figure 4. Tissue section of Hodgkin's disease showing intracellular and extracellular coccoid forms in the connective tissue at autopsy.

Figure 5. Tissue section of fatal AIDS-related Kaposi's sarcoma of the skin showing two foci of coccoid forms.

Figure 6. Tissue section of fatal case of AIDS-related immunoblastic sarcoma of the face. Three red-stained typical acid- fast rods are seen in the center. These forms are extremely rare in cancer. Mycobacterium avium-intracellulare was cultured from the tumor.

Figure 7. Tissue section from prostate cancer showing a focus of closely-knit coccoid forms as well as scattered forms.


Alan Cantwell M.D.
alancantwell@sbcglobal.net
http://www.ariesrisingpress.com
Author - AIDS & The Doctors of Death
and Queer Blood

[tinmenace]

lol I make dandelion root tea all the time... it's good.

My husband's grandfather makes dandelion wine all the time...it's good ;) :D

[cruise4]

HEMP OIL IS NOT THE SAME AS "HEMP SEED OIL". Although hemp seed oil is extremely nutritious, it does not contain the high concentrations of THC needed to cure cancers.

The true story of hemp, as told by Rick Simpson, the man who cured cancer with hemp oil. Please visit www.phoenixtears.ca for a vast collection of hemp research and hidden truth about "the miracle medicine"!

I have worked closely with Mr. Rick Simpson on the documentary RUN FROM THE CURE: The Rick Simpson Story for several months, and I can tell you that you will never meet a more honest and caring man in your lifetime than Ricky Logan Simpson. He is a true Canadian Hero!

Please feel free to promote this video for the good of all mankind - it seems the best things in life might really be free after all. - Christian Laurette

This video has been recommended by Jack Herer and you can find even more information about hemp on JackHerer.com! (Thanks Jack!)

http://www.youtube.com/chrychek

[cruise4]

G. Edward Griffin - A World Without Cancer - The Story Of Vitamin B1...

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=4312930190281243507

[cruise4]

Suppressed Medical Discovery: Dr. Robert C. Beck
(Cancer,AIDS, anything viral)

n 1990, an astounding discovery was reported at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in NYC by Drs. Kaali and Wyman, resulting in Patent ... all » No. 5,188,738 being issued in 1993 entitled "Alternating Current Supplied Electrically Conductive Method and System for Treatment of Blood and/or Other Body Fluids and/or Synthetic Fluids with Electric Forces.". Their research work involved an in vitro & in vivo human Blood Electrification process, which electronically sterilizes the blood, resulting in all known pathogens, including bacteria, viruses, parasites, and fungus, being completely eliminated! Their research had been anticipated 24 years earlier in 1973 with the research involved in Patent No. 3,753,886. Not surprisingly though, due to the stranglehold, that the Pharmaceutical Cartel has in the U.S., this revolutionary clinical data was almost totally suppressed. Other than a few News Articles such as the Science News: Mar. 30, `91 pg. 207, Longevity: Dec. `92/pg. 14, and Houston Post: Mar. 20, '91 /Sect. A-10, plus the Patent No. 5,188,738, there has been a complete BLACKOUT since then in the News Media about this powerful medical technology. «

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-3383948315844437935

[cruise4]

Cannabinoids and tumor inhibition

Cancer Cure - Cannabis & Cannabinoids,by Robert Melamede,PhD - YouTube

[cruise4]

How to Cut Your Risk of Cancer in Half www.mercola.com

How to Cut Your Risk of Cancer in Half - YouTube

[cruise4]

A rare glimpse of the humble Canadian nurse who brought "Essiac" to the world in the 1920's. Filmed in the 70's.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-9217561641346418553

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-949159430620668032

[cruise4]

http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html

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.

American Cancer Society opposes vitamin D
This research on vitamin D is such good news that the American Cancer Society, of course, had to say something against it. An ACS spokesperson, Marji McCullough, strategic director of nutritional epidemiology for the American Cancer Society, flatly stated that nobody should take supplements to prevent cancer.

If it seems surprising to you that the American Cancer Society -- which claims to be against cancer -- would dissuade people from taking supplements that slash their cancer risk by 77 percent, then you don't know much about the ACS. In my opinion, the ACS is an organization that actually prevents prevention and openly supports the continuation of cancer as a way to boost its power and profits. The ACS is the wealthiest non-profit in America and has very close ties to pharmaceutical companies, mammography equipment companies and other corporations that profit from cancer. Notice the name, too: It isn't the American Anti-Cancer Society, it's the American Cancer Society! What they really stand for is right in the name!

Click here to read more about the ACS and its financial ties to chemical companies, pharmaceutical companies and radiology equipment manufacturers.

The cancer industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, and I've written extensively about the criminal organizations that protect and promote the industry. Just about everything the public is told about cancer by these cancer institutions is a lie. Those "race for the cure" cancer walks are a complete scam (they really aren't searching for any way to prevent cancer or cure cancer, they're only searching for new patented drugs to profit from cancer).

This research on vitamin D is a huge threat to the cancer industry profit mongers because it reveals a way to prevent cancer for free -- by seeking natural sunlight exposure and letting your skin manufacture your own powerful anti-cancer medicine (vitamin D). The idea that the cancer industry could lose 80% of its patients due to widespread education about vitamin D and sunlight scares the living daylights out of the cancer industry. Billions of dollars in cancer profits are at stake here, so the pro-cancer groups have to do everything they can to discredit vitamin D by creating doubt and confusion. The degree of dishonesty at work here is almost unbelievable to those who don't really know what's happening in the cancer industry.

Ten questions to ask yourself about the cancer industry
Consider these questions:

#1: Why does the cancer industry refuse to educate people about cancer prevention?

#2: If people keep donating money for the "search" for a cancer cure, why won't drug companies pledge to "open source" their patents on cancer drugs to benefit the people whose donations funded them in the first place? In other words, why do people donate money for cancer research but then get charged for cancer drugs?

#3: Why does the entire cancer industry so strongly dissuade people from using sunlight exposure to dramatically reduce their cancer risk? (Hint: Follow the money to the sunscreen industry...)

#4: Why have all the really good cancer supplements, clinics and naturopaths been banned, arrested or run out of the country? (Look up the FDA's oppression of Lane Labs over MGN-3 for a fascinating review of this...)

#5: The U.S. has poured billions of dollars into the cancer industry over the last three decades. Cancer cures were promised in the 1970's. Why are cancer rates still essentially the same today as they were in the 1970's?

#6: Why does the cancer industry continue to use chemotherapy, radiation and other toxic procedures to "kill tumors" when the latest science clearly shows that cancer tumors are only the symptoms, not the cause, of cancer? Chemotherapy destroys immune function and causes permanent damage to the heart, brain and liver...

#7: The World Health Organization says that 70% of all cancers are easily preventable through dietary and lifestyle changes. This latest research shows that sunlight and low-cost calcium supplements can slash cancer risk by 77% in women. Why won't conventional medicine embrace this low-cost, safe and highly effective method for preventing cancer?

#8: The cancer industry routinely attacks anti-cancer herbs, superfoods and supplements. Why is the cancer industry opposed to anti-cancer nutrition? Why does it believe that only man, not nature, can manufacture anti-cancer medicines?

#9: Dark skin pigmentation blocks ultraviolet radiation, meaning that people with black skin need far more time under the sun to generate the same amount of vitamin D as someone with white skin. Not surprisingly, black women suffer extremely high rates of breast cancer while black men show similarly high levels of prostate cancer. The white-dominated medical industry pretends to be "mystified" by all this. Why won't conventional medicine simple tell black people the truth about vitamin D, skin pigmentation and cancer? Why do oncologists try to keep black people ignorant about their vitamin D deficiencies?

#10: Why is it illegal for nutritional supplement manufacturers to tell the truth about the anti-cancer effects of their products? Broccoli, garlic, onions and sprouts all have powerful anti-cancer effects, as do dozens of rainforest herbs (Cat's Claw, for example), Chinese herbs and Western herbs. But the FDA threatens and censors any company that dares to mention cancer prevention on its supplement products. Why is the FDA enforcing a policy of nutritional ignorance with U.S. consumers? Why does the federal government want people to remain ignorant of methods for preventing or treating cancer?

You probably already know the answer to all these questions, because the answer is the same for each one: Corporate profits. Cancer is hugely profitable to treat. Substantially preventing cancer would result in a loss of billions of dollars in profits for the oncologists, drug companies, hospitals and clinics that currently prey upon the finances of cancer victims.

The cancer industry is operated like a criminal racket, using false information, intimidation, political pressure and propaganda to protect its power base and keep its corporations profitable. And that, my friends, is exactly why the industry is against the use of sunlight to prevent cancer. Free medicine from the sky? The very thought of it makes the cancer industry cringe. Sunlight doesn't even need a prescription, you see, and it can't be patented, either.

Preventing cancer the healthy way
Let me tell you how I prevent cancer. I take long walks in the desert with no shirt on, and I don't wear sunscreen. I soak up the sun's rays for many hours each week, and I never get a sun burn because I eat lots of antioxidant-rich superfoods, berries and fresh produce.

I drink a raw superfood smoothie each morning, made of fresh produce and superfoods. My two favorite recipes are chocolate (with raw cacao, coconut oil or macadamia nut oil, raw avocado, spirulina, quinoa, banana and almond milk) and super berry (fresh berries, freeze-dried berries, egg white protein, stevia, aloe vera gel, fresh cucumber or watermelon, celery).

I put no personal care products on my skin whatsoever: No deodorants, no fragrance, no skin creams, no cosmetics and no sunscreen. This alone saves me from exposure to hundreds of cancer-causing toxic chemicals added to personal care products. I refuse to use chemical laundry detergent and, instead, use natural laundry soap that grows on trees: Natural soap berries that we sell as a replacement for chemical laundry detergents.

Corporate-controlled U.S. government doesn't want to prevent cancer
The U.S. government doesn't want the population to be free of cancer. That's a strong statement, so let me offer you an undeniable piece of strong evidence to back that up: The artificially low RDA numbers for vitamin D.

One of the best ways to keep the population suffering from cancer is to enforce long-term nutritional deficiencies that lead to cancer. The US government accomplishes this by keeping the recommendations for vitamin D artificially low, practically guaranteeing that anyone who follows the recommendations will eventually be diagnosed with cancer. Vitamin D deficiency is the leading cause of breast cancer.

Most educated nutritionists agree that the daily dose of vitamin D for an adult should be at least 1000 IUs, perhaps as high as 1400. But the U.S. Institute of Medicine (IoM), which controls the recommendations on these things, currently states that adults under 50 only need 200 IUs of vitamin D a day. This policy is, in my opinion, an organized conspiracy to keep the American people diseased by making sure they stay deficient in anti-cancer nutrients. It serves the interests of all the powerful corporations and non-profits that run Washington. And yes, it is a conspiracy. I've documented it in far more detail in my book, Natural Health Solutions and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing About Them, which reveals shocking details, documents and photographs showing how modern medicine is a system that's literally designed to keep the people in a state of chronic disease.

The FDA doesn't want people to prevent cancer either. That's why they've aggressively attacked companies offering anti-cancer nutrients, and completely censored the very mention of the word "cancer" by supplement companies. In fact, the only reason I can print the information you're reading right now is because I sell no food or supplements and my free speech writing is not regulated by the FDA. If I were selling supplements and writing these same words you're reading right now, I would be arrested, charged with federal crimes, and put out of business by state and federal authorities. That's the reality of the oppressive medical environment under which we live today: Health is outlawed, and only disease is allowed to be promoted.

The cancer industry, you see, is not merely incompetent; it is criminal. Intentionally keeping a population sick so that you can profit from disease is a crime against humanity. And yet this is business as usual in America's modern cancer industry.

Discrediting simple, free and safe cancer prevention strategies is also criminal, and yet this is what the American Cancer Society seems to do at every opportunity.

Plotting to profit from the suffering of other humans beings is evil. And yet the entire revenue base of the cancer industry is based on precisely that: Keeping people alive long enough to "treat" them with overpriced toxic chemicals that can be billed to Medicare at 50,000% markups over their manufacturing cost.

Cancer is big, big business. And curing cancer is a threat to all the criminals participating in that industry: The non-profit employees, oncologists, doctors, federal regulators, drug company executives, med school propaganda teachers, pharmaceutical reps and many others. These people cannot allow cancer to be prevented or cured. Their jobs and careers are at stake.

Another outstanding source for learning more about the evils of the cancer industry is G. Edward Griffin. Click here to read our article about Griffin or click here for his website.

Click here to see his video documentary on vitamin B17

A world free from cancer and full of abundance
Personally, I believe we could create a world virtually free of cancer. We could accomplish it in two generations by taking tough action to outlaw cancer-causing chemicals and investing in genuine cancer prevention education. Drug companies would lose trillions of dollars in profits, hospitals would lose huge amounts of patients, and pro-cancer non-profit groups would lose power, money and prestige. But guess what? We'd all be better off without cancer.

Here's a startling statistic: Did you know that reducing the cancer death rate by just 1% would be worth almost $500 billion to the U.S. economy over the next hundred years or so? (Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) Drop the cancer rate by 10% and it's worth $5 trillion dollars to the economy. (These gains are due to increased productivity and life spans of working, contributing people.)

We know right now that vitamin D and calcium can slash cancer rates by 77 percent. Do the math on that, and you realize that sunlight and calcium could result in a $38.5 trillion boost to the U.S. economy over the next century.

That's enough economic productivity to pay off our entire national debt, build new schools in every town and city in the country, provide free college educations to all young people who wish to go to college, invest billions in new energy technologies and even fund massive health education campaigns to keep our population healthy. $38 trillion is a lot of money. With that kind of increased abundance, we could build a whole new society of health, wealth and education.

But guess what? The cancer industry won't let that happen. There's too much short term profit to be made in keeping everybody sick. The cancer industry is so evil that it will sell out our future in order to maintain power, profits and control over the people today. The cancer industry doesn't want cancer rates to go down, regardless of the benefits to society or individual lives. The cancer industry wants there to be MORE cancer, which is exactly why it opposes commonsense prevention strategies that would reduce cancers. (It's true, this industry actually opposes removing cancer-causing chemicals from the workplace...)

Read more at Dr. Sam Epstein's website: http://www.preventcancer.com

The bottom line in all this? New research shows us that using low-cost calcium and vitamin D supplements (or just natural sunlight), we could slash cancer rates by an astonishing 77 percent. The cancer industry opposes this and is firmly positioned as an opponent of cancer prevention. The industry depends on cancer to grow its own power and profits, and it will invest in the de-education of the public in order to maximize its own revenues.

Cures for cancer exist all around us: Sunlight, rainforest herbs, anti-cancer foods and superfoods, etc. The causes of cancer are well known: Toxic chemicals in foods, cosmetics, personal care products, home cleaning products, and so on. So why don't we, as a nation, take steps to outlaw the things that cause cancer while promoting the things that prevent cancer?

The reason, once again, is because there's too much money at stake here. The corporations are in charge, and as long as they're running the show, cancer cures or prevention strategies that really work will simply not be tolerated.

Creighton press release
Here's the original press release about the new findings on vitamin D and cancer prevention:

OMAHA, Neb., June 8 -- Most Americans and others are not taking enough vitamin D, a fact that may put them at significant risk for developing cancer, according to a landmark study conducted by Creighton University School of Medicine.

The four-year, randomized study followed 1,179 healthy, postmenopausal women from rural eastern Nebraska.* Participants taking calcium, as well as a quantity of vitamin D3 nearly three times the U.S. government's Recommended Daily Amount (RDA) for middle-age adults, showed a dramatic 60 percent or greater reduction in cancer risk than women who did not get the vitamin.

The results of the study, conducted between 2000 and 2005, were reported in the June 8 online edition of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

"The findings are very exciting. They confirm what a number of vitamin D proponents have suspected for some time but that, until now, have not been substantiated through clinical trial," said principal investigator Joan Lappe, Ph.D., R.N., Creighton professor of medicine and holder of the Criss/Beirne Endowed Chair in the School of Nursing. "Vitamin D is a critical tool in fighting cancer as well as many other diseases."

Other Creighton researchers involved in the study included Robert Recker, M.D.; Robert Heaney, M.D.; Dianne Travers-Gustafson, M.S.; and K. Michael Davies, Ph.D.

Research participants were all 55 years and older and free of known cancers for at least 10 years prior to entering the Creighton study. Subjects were randomly assigned to take daily dosages of 1,400-1,500 mg supplemental calcium, 1,400-1,500 mg supplemental calcium plus 1,100 IU of vitamin D3, or placebos. National Institutes of Health funded the study.

Over the course of four years, women in the calcium/vitamin D3 group experienced a 60 percent decrease in their cancer risk than the group taking placebos.

On the premise that some women entered the study with undiagnosed cancers, researchers then eliminated the first-year results and looked at the last three years of the study. When they did that, the results became even more dramatic with the calcium/vitamin D3 group showing a startling 77 percent cancer-risk reduction.

In the three-year analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in cancer incidence between participants taking placebos and those taking just calcium supplements.

Through the course of the study, 50 participants developed nonskin cancers, including breast, colon, lung and other cancers.

Lappe said further studies are needed to determine whether the Creighton research results apply to other populations, including men, women of all ages, and different ethnic groups. While the study was open to all ethnic groups, all participants were Caucasian, she noted.

There is a growing body of evidence that a higher intake of vitamin D may be helpful in the prevention and treatment of cancer, high blood pressure, fibromyalgia, diabetes mellitus, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis and other diseases.

Humans make their own vitamin D3 when they are exposed to sunlight. In fact, only 10-15 minutes a day in a bright summer sun creates large amounts of the vitamin, Lappe said. However, people need to exercise caution since the sun's ultraviolet B rays also can cause skin cancer; sunscreen blocks most vitamin D production.

In addition, the latitude at which you live and your ancestry also influence your body's ability to convert sunlight into vitamin D. People with dark skin have more difficulty making the vitamin. Persons living at latitudes north of the 37th parallel -- Omaha is near the 41st parallel -- cannot get their vitamin D naturally during the winter months because of the sun's angle. Experts generally agree that the RDA** for vitamin D needs to be increased substantially, however there is debate about the amount. Supplements are available in two forms -- vitamin D2 and vitamin D3. Creighton researchers recommend vitamin D3, because it is more active and thus more effective in humans.

* Study participants came from the Nebraska counties of Douglas, Colfax, Cuming, Dodge, Saunders, Washington, Sarpy, Burt and Butler. ** RDA recommendations for vitamin D are 200 IU/d, birth-age 50; 400 IU/d, 50-70 years; and 600 IU/d, 70 years and older.

###

About the author: Mike Adams is a natural health author and technology pioneer with a mission to teach personal and planetary health to the public He has authored and published thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics like health and the environment, reaching millions of readers with information that is saving lives and improving personal health around the world. Adams is an honest, independent journalist and accepts no money or commissions on the third-party products he writes about or the companies he promotes. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a manufacturer of mercury-free, energy-efficient LED lighting products that save electricity and help prevent global warming. He's also a noted pioneer in the email marketing software industry, having been the first to launch an HTML email newsletter technology that has grown to become a standard in the industry. Adams is currently the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a 501(c)3 non-profit, and regularly pursues cycling, nature photography, Capoeira and Pilates.

[cruise4]

http://www.naturalnews.com/016446.html

One of the most effective naturally occurring weapons against cancer is, like most healthy things, something many of us are not getting enough of. The mineral selenium has been shown in multiple studies to be an effective tool in warding off various types of cancer, including breast, esophageal, stomach, prostate, liver and bladder cancers. Not many people get the recommended dose of 200 micrograms a day. Most Americans only get between 60 and 100 micrograms of selenium daily from dietary sources, according to the Life Extension Foundation's Disease Prevention and Treatment. That means daily supplements might be worth considering.

Selenium was first used in conventional medicine as a treatment for dandruff, but our understanding of the mineral has come a long way since then. Today, research shows selenium, especially when used in conjunction with vitamin C, vitamin E and beta-carotene, works to block chemical reactions that create free radicals in the body (which can damage DNA and cause degenerative change in cells, leading to cancer).

Selenium also helps stop damaged DNA molecules from reproducing. In other words, selenium acts to prevent tumors from developing. "It contributes towards the death of cancerous and pre-cancer cells. Their death appears to occur before they replicate, thus helping stop cancer before it gets started," says Dr. James Howenstine in A Physician's Guide to Natural Health Products That Work.

Selenium makes chemotherapy safer, more effective
In addition to preventing the onset of the disease, selenium has also been shown to aid in slowing cancer's progression in patients that already have it. According to the Life Extension Foundation, the use of selenium during chemotherapy in combination with vitamin A and vitamin E can reduce the toxicity of chemotherapy drugs. The mineral also helps "enhance the effectiveness of chemo, radiation, and hyperthermia while minimizing damage to the patient's normal cells; thus making therapy more of a 'selective toxin,'" says Patrick Quillin in Beating Cancer with Nutrition.

A 1996 study by Dr. Larry Clark of the University of Arizona showed just how effective selenium can be in protecting against cancer. In the study of 1,300 older people, the occurrence of cancer among those who took 200 micrograms of selenium daily for about seven years was reduced by 42 percent compared to those given a placebo. Cancer deaths for those taking the selenium were cut almost in half, according to the study that was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

While the study concluded the mineral helped protect against all types of cancer, it had particularly powerful impacts on prostate, colorectal and lung cancers. Jean Carper, in Miracle Cures, called Dr. Clark's findings an "unprecedented cancer intervention study" that "bumped up the respectability of using supplements against cancer several notches."

Food sources of selenium
Although too much selenium can actually be toxic to the system, research indicates the majority of the population is not getting enough of the essential mineral. So, how can we up our intake of selenium and help our bodies fight cancer? The good news is there are some good dietary sources of selenium: Mushrooms, egg yolks, seafood, poultry and kidney, liver and muscle meats contain the mineral. Vegetables -- garlic, onions, broccoli, asparagus, tomatoes and others -- as well as whole grains and seeds can also be good sources of selenium.

However, because the amount of selenium in vegetables and grains depends on the selenium content in the soil in which they are grown, it can be hard for average consumers to know how much of the mineral they are actually getting in their diets. "The selenium content of food is largely dependent on the content of volcanic ash in the soil on which the food was grown, with higher volcanic ash content yielding higher selenium levels. Soil that is irrigated by seawater, such as much of California's cropland, also contains higher levels of selenium," says Sue Gebo in What's Left to Eat. Gebo adds that, in general, soil in the western United States is richer in selenium than soil in the eastern part of the country.

Accordingly, geography can have a significant impact on diet. In Antioxidants Against Cancer, author Ralph Moss PhD, says one theory for why cancer rates are so high in Linxian, China, dubbed "the 'world capital' of cancer," is that the soil is deficient in the essential minerals selenium and zinc. In Earl Mindell's Supplement Bible, Earl Mindell RPh PhD, suggests part of the reason American men are five times more likely than Japanese men to die from prostate cancer could be because, in general, "the Asian diet contains four times the amount of selenium as the average American diet."

Another reason it seems to be difficult for Americans to get enough selenium is the processing many of our foods go through before they make it onto grocery store shelves. Mindell points out, for example, that processing wheat into white flour strips it of a great deal of its selenium. One way to get more selenium in your diet might be to eat more organically grown foods, which some studies have shown to contain more selenium as well as higher levels of beta carotene and vitamin E. These two work together with selenium in cancer prevention, according to Alternative Medicine author Burton Goldberg.

Perhaps a more surefire way to boost your selenium intake is to add supplements to your diet. Mindell advocates the use of supplements, saying, "To me, taking selenium supplements, in addition to eating selenium-rich foods, is good insurance against disease." However, for those who oppose taking pills, Dr. Andrew Weil in Ask Dr. Weil says eating just one shelled Brazil nut -- grown in the selenium-rich soil of central Brazil -- provides 120 micrograms of the mineral, getting you that much closer to the daily target of 200 micrograms.

Although extremely high doses of selenium can have toxic effects, most people are not at risk for such an overdose, and could, in fact, use more of the mineral. Simply adding more selenium-rich foods, such as organically grown vegetables and fruits to your diet, along with supplements, can help reduce your risk of cancer. And another positive side effect of selenium, according to Eat and Heal, by the Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, is that it can actually improve your mood. Those editors write, "People who don't eat enough selenium-rich foods tend to be grumpier than people with a high dietary intake, according to recent research." So, go ahead and crack a Brazil nut open and smile.

The experts speak on selenium and cancer

Selenium Mechanisms
There are several possible mechanisms for the protective effect of selenium. Selenium activates an enzyme in the body called gluthathione peroxidase that protects against the formation of free radicals—those loose molecular cannons that can damage DNA. In this situation, selenium may work interchangeably (and in synergy) with vitamin E. In test tube studies, selenium inhibited tumor growth and regulated the natural life span of cells, ensuring that they died when they were supposed to instead of turning "immortal" and hence malignant. Because of this particular action, the University of Arizona researchers say that selenium could be effective within a fairly short time frame.
Ask Dr Weil by Andrew Weil MD, page 207

Numerous studies suggest that an inverse association exists between selenium levels and cancer incidence (Hocman, 1988; Willett and Stampfer, 1986; Milner, 1985). Associations appear to be particularly strong with cancers that are also associated with high-fat, low-fiber diets (i.e., breast, colon, prostrate, etc.). The mechanism for selenium's reported protective effects is likely due to its function in antioxidant synthesis. Glutathione peroxidase, the primary enzyme that converts hydrogen peroxide to water (and thus prevents lipid peroxidation) is selenium-dependent. Inhibition of lipid or bile acid oxidation may account for its protective role (reviewed by Linder 1991:496-7). Selenium may also act as an immune stimulant. Selenium deficiency inhibits macrophage-mediated tumor destruction, and inhibits tumor necrosis factor-alpha production in animals (Kiremidjian-Schumacher et al., 1992). Dietary supplementation with selenium produced the opposite effects.
Cancer And Natural Medicine by John Boik, page 146

The safest antioxidants are vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium, and beta-carotene. Together, they block the chemical reactions that create free radicals, which can damage DNA and promote a variety of degenerative changes in cells. Chemotherapy and radiation generate free radicals; that is how they kill dividing cells.
Ask Dr Weil by Andrew Weil MD, page 47

At the Yunnan Tin Corporation in China there is a very high rate of lung cancer among the miners. Forty healthy miners were given selenium supplements for a year. The selenium, which increased in their blood, boosted a key detoxifying enzyme system while simultaneously decreasing dangerous lipid peroxide levels by nearly 75 percent. It also protected against cancer-causing substances and ultraviolet radiation. Doctors at the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences concluded that selenium supplements were a safe and effective food supplement for people.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

Numerous mechanisms have been explored to explain the modulation of carcinogenesis by selenium (Medina 1986, El-Bayoumy 1991). The best characterized function of selenium in mammalian cells is as a component of the seleno- enzyme, glutathione peroxi-dase. This enzyme is localized in the cytosol and mitochondrial matrix, and it eliminates organic peroxides from the cell (Medina 1986). However, available evidence suggests that the prevention of carcinogenesis by selenium is not related to its function in glutathione peroxidase (Medina 1986). Other seleno- proteins have been identified, but their impact on carcinogenesis is not defined (Medina 1986). There is some evidence that selenium may alter the metabolism of carcinogens or the interaction of chemical carcinogens with DNA, but there is considerable controversy in the literature (Medina 1986). Additional mechanistic studies suggest that selenium may alter cell proliferation and/or immunologic responses (Medina 1986, El-Bayoumy 1991). Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms whereby selenium prevents cancer.
Carcinogens Human Diet by National Research Council, page 100

Selenium is needed to produce glutathione peroxidase, an antioxidant enzyme that protects the body from free radical damage. It is also important in preventing cancer and cardiomegaly an enlargement of the heart that causes premature aging and early death.
Complete Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 11

The best known functions of selenium at nutritionally adequate, but not at excessive, levels are its role as a part of the enzyme glutathione peroxidase and its interaction with heavy metals. Glutathione peroxidase destroys hydroperoxides and lipoperoxides, thereby protecting the constituents of the cells against free radical damage. Ip and Sinha (1981) have shown that selenium, through its function in glutathione peroxidase, could well be involved in protecting against cancer induced by high intakes of fat, especially polyunsaturated fatty acids. Glutathione peroxidase activity in human blood increases with increasing selenium intakes, but reaches a plateau at intakes well below those customary in the United States (Thomson and Robinson, 1980). Thus, if the antitumorigenic effect of selenium is mediated through its function in glutathione peroxidase, attempts to increase the enzyme activity by selenium supplementation, superimposed on an adequate diet in the United States, would not be successful. The second function of selenium is to protect against acute and chronic toxicity of certain heavy metals. Although selenium is known to interact with cadmium and mercury, the mechanism of action is not known. Selenium does not cause an increased elimination of the toxic elements, but, rather, an increased accumulation in some nontoxic form (National Academy of Sciences, 1971). It is conceivable that carcinogenic effects of these, and perhaps other heavy metals, could be counteracted by selenium, in a manner similar to its protection against their general toxicity.
Diet Nutrition Cancer by National Research Council, page 168

Selenium's main function in the body is to convert hydrogen peroxide to water, which is important for cellular health. Herbal Medicine Healing Cancer by Donald R Yance Jr, page 193 All of the body's tissues contain selenium, but it is most plentiful in the liver, kidneys, spleen, pancreas, and testes. Selenium works synergistically with vitamin E to protect tissues and cell membranes, aid in the production of antibodies, and help maintain a healthy heart and liver
Prescription For Dietary Wellness by Phyllis A Balch, page 44

Selenium Dosage/Administration
It has been reported that selenium doses of about 250-300 micrograms a day (diet and supplements) would be helpful in preventing cancer. If an average person consumes 125 to 150 micrograms of selenium a day, an additional supplemental amount of 100 micrograms is unlikely to produce any major side effects.
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 612

Recommendation: Take selenium aspartate in a dose of 100 to 200 micrograms daily..
Doctors Complete Guide Vitamins Minerals by Mary D Eades MD, page 496

Selenium is a mineral with anticancer activity. But the anticancer effects of selenium are greatly reduced when there is an insufficient intake of vitamin E. Rats who receive a normal amount of vitamin E in their diets showed a 45 percent decrease in tumors when they were given selenium. But they only had a 25 percent decrease if their diet was low in vitamin E. In fact, vitamin E was considered more important than selenium in decreasing "oxidant stress" to the fat of the breast.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 74

In the treatment of cancer the dosage is generally about 10,000 micrograms, still nearly one hundred times the National Academy of Science's recommended dose. Revici's treatment is more complicated than just organic selenium. He only uses selenium in patients whom he deems to be in a "catabolic," as opposed to an "anabolic," state. He has devised a number of urine tests to find whether a patient is in one condition or the other. Selenium is given when the urine has a low specific gravity, a high surface tension and a pH above 6.0. The alkalinity of the urine is supposed to reflect the state of the body's defenses against tumors.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

Selenium levels show a U-shaped correlation with prostate cancer. In other words, both low and high blood levels of selenium increase risk. This simply means that we need enough selenium to maintain good health, yet too much can be dangerous. A practical compromise is to use a supplement that provides 100 I.U. of vitamin E (up to 400 I.U. would be fine), and about 50 micrograms of selenium.
20 Natural Ways To Reduce The Risk Of Prostate Cancer By James Scala PHD, page 60

Unlike selenomethionine, which is incorporated into protein in place of methionine, SMSC is not incorporated into any protein, thereby offering a completely bioavailable compound. In animal studies, SMSC has been shown to be 10 times less toxic than any other known form of selenium. The recommended dose of Se-methylselenocysteine (SMSC) is 200-400 mcg a day for cancer patients.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 316

Selenium Sources
You need just three Brazil nuts to get the 200 micro-grams of selenium that studies have shown to have a potent anti-cancer effect. As a bonus, when you eat Brazil nuts, which grow best in the Amazon rain forest, you support the conservation of one of my favorite places on earth. So you're not only protecting your body, you're saving the environment.
Anti-Aging Prescriptions by James Duke PhD, page 90

The Garlic Connection. It has long been noted that people who ate garlic, onion, broccoli, and whole grains had a reduced risk of cancer. It turns out that all of these foods are rich in selenium, in fact, selenium is one of the reasons that these particular foods are so healthful for us.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 77

If you're not fond of popping pills, you can get 120 micrograms of selenium in just one Brazil nut. Buy the shelled kind—they're grown in a central region of Brazil where the soil is richest in the mineral. Other good sources are tuna fish, seafood, wheat germ, and bran.
Ask Dr Weil by Andrew Weil MD, page 207

One good food source is Brazil nuts, which happen also to contain at least one other anticancer substance, ellagic acid. One large nut can provide over 50 mcg of selenium. When Cornell scientist Donald J. Lisk and his colleagues ate six Brazil nuts a day for three weeks, their blood levels of selenium rose between 100 and 350 percent.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 122

Selenium—An essential trace mineral found in fruits and vegetables, selenium helps the body produce functional glutathione peroxidase, an enzyme essential for detoxification. Low dietary levels of selenium have been correlated with a higher incidence of cancer; accordingly, supplementation of this nutrient acts as a deterrent against cancer in general.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 591

Red clover is also rich in calcium, manganese, and selenium, which is a key cancer-fighting antioxidant. I munch the flower heads, but not everyone likes them. Some people dry the flower heads, turn them into a powder, and add them to soups.
Anti-Aging Prescriptions by James Duke PhD, page 61

The debate continues regarding the active ingredients in garlic, but they may include amino acids (like the branched chain amino acids of leucine and isoleucine), S-allyl cysteine, allicin, and organically-bound selenium…Garlic grown on selenium-rich soil was more effective than selenium supplements at inhibiting carcinogen-induced tumors in animals. A study published in the Journal of the National Medical Association referred to garlic as "..a potent, non-specific biologic response modifier."
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 147

A particularly worthy form of selenium is Se-methylselenocysteine, currently available and attracting positive attention. This is the form of selenium found naturally in plants such as broccoli and garlic. A suggested selenium dosage (as a preventive) is 200 mcg a day. The optimal dose for the cancer patient is unknown at this time, but suggestions have ranged from 200-400 mcg a day. Depending upon the selenium content of the soil, foods considered to be good sources of selenium include Brazil nuts, grains, onions, tomatoes, broccoli, chicken, eggs, garlic, liver, seafood, and wheat germ. Americans typically get from 60-100 mcg of selenium a day from dietary sources.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 243

Stephen Cann, associate researcher at the University of British Columbia, gives advice to women who want to fight breast cancer with diet, "Eat different types of seaweed." These include wakame, kombu, and the more common nori — sea vegetables that might fight cancer because of their iodine and selenium. "We think it's very important for the breast," Cann says about iodine. This mineral, he believes, may prevent and even shrink breast tumors by combining with certain fatty acids and stopping cancerous cells from multiplying. And without the selenium, iodine doesn't do its job properly.
Eat and Heal by the Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, page 317

In parts of Europe, pumpkin seeds are the standard treatment for benign prostate enlargement. The seeds are rich in zinc, selenium and other minerals that have been shown to reduce prostate cancer risk. Typical daily dosage: Eat one-quarter cup of the seeds.
Bottom Line Yearbook 2002 by Bottom Line Personnel, page 76

The intake of selenium and other nutrients from plant foods may be influenced by the type of farming practices used. In a preliminary investigation, organically grown foods were, in some cases, nutritionally superior to conventionally grown foods (Smith, 1993).
Cancer And Natural Medicine by John Boik, page 147

The Journal of Nutrition reported that selenium-enriched broccoli is protective against chemically induced mammary and colon cancer in rats (Davis et al. 2002). Note: While selenium is contributing to the lower incidence of malignancy, the anticancer affects of broccoli should also be factored into the defense.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 242

You can find selenium in grains, shellfish, poultry, garlic, and egg yolks.
Natural Cures And Gentle Medicines by The Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, page 266

Commercial preparations of selenium include inorganic selenium (sodium se-lenite) and various organic compounds of selenium. It has been reported that sodium selenite is not absorbed adequately, whereas organic selenium, including yeast-selenium, is absorbed very well. For this reason, yeast-selenium is considered best for human consumption
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 612

Throughout history and around the world, people from Mexico to Russia have given mushrooms magical powers. In reality, there's nothing miraculous about these fungi at all, but they can make you healthier. Although mushrooms are largely made up of water, they are also high in protein, carbohydrates, and fiber. They are a potent source of vitamin D, riboflavin, and niacin, plus minerals like potassium, selenium, and copper.
Eat and Heal by the Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, page 252

In addition, some foods, such as lima beans, soy beans, and other soy products, seem to have medicinal capabilities because of the presence of isoflavones and phytoestrogens, or plant estrogens. These substances actually curb the activity of the excess estrogen in the body's tissues. Phytoestrogens can also be found in other vegetables and in fruits, along with useful amounts of nonsoluble fiber, beta-carotene, and selenium.
Complete Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Gary Null PhD, page 72

A new approach is now being explored: how to enrich our food with antioxidant and protective agents. The simpler approach is to add antioxidant vitamins to basic foods. Studies address the genetic engineering of food to prevent heart disease and cancer [105], and such measures as growing garlic with selenium fertilization [95]. The authors of these studies state that "in view of the impossible task of persuading the public to eat only those foods that are presumably good for their health . . . the time has come to enrich our foods with known cancer preventive agents so that their benefit can be realized fully over the life span of the individual."
Every Persons Guide To Antioxidants by John R Smythies MD, page 103

Plentiful in poultry, selenium may help to protect against cancer, cataracts, heart disease, and macular degeneration. Dark-meat turkey is particularly high in this mineral (3 ounces of cooked turkey have 35mcg of selenium, or 50% of the Daily Value).
Fight Back With Food by Readers Digest, page 73

To get more selenium in your diet, try tuna; a three-ounce can serves up a full 99 micrograms. Or treat yourself to an ounce of baked tortilla chips for a whopping 284 micrograms.
Healing With Vitamins by Alice Feinstein, page 64

Selenium comes from the soil, and fruits and vegetables that come from selenium-rich soil are more likely to contain the mineral.
Natures Medicines by Gale Maleskey, page 363

If you eat a normal diet with plenty of unprocessed foods, you should be fine. You'll find selenium in many grains, nuts, and vegetables; meat, especially organ meats like liver; and seafood.
Natural Cures And Gentle Medicines by The Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, page 242

A new form of selenium is Se-methylselenocysteine (SeMC), a naturally occurring selenium compound found to be an effective chemopreventive agent. SeMC is a selenoamino acid that is synthesized by plants such as garlic and broccoli.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 277

Essiac formula was given to nurse Rene Caisse more than 80 years ago by a woman whose breast cancer had been healed by this Ojibway Indian herbal preparation. The formula is composed of four herbs (burdock root, slippery elm, sheep sorrel, and Indian rhubarb). The burdock root contains inulin, which improves the function of white blood cells. This root also contains Vitamin A and selenium, which scavenge free radicals and chromium which regulates blood sugar levels.
A Physicians Guide To Natural Health Products That Work By James Howenstine MD, page 156

Selenium Anti-Cancer Effects
Some forms of cancer are the result of free radical oxidation that destroys or damages the part of the DNA that regulates cell multiplication. When that happens, the cells can begin to multiply abnormally, damaging the healthy tissue until your whole body is invaded by these wildly proliferating cells. Since selenium can protect you from free radical oxidation, one way to minimize your risk of developing this type of cancer is to eat selenium-rich foods like whole grains or their products with each meal. If you already have cancer, selenium may be useful in slowing its progression. A way to get it in even more concentrated doses than in foods is to take brewer's yeast or supplements.
Complete Guide Health Nutrition by Gary Null, page 483

Laboratory studies have shown that selenium can inhibit the growth of breast, cervical, colon, and skin cancer.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 79

Regular intake of yellow and green vegetables, as well as foods containing calcium, selenium and other micro-nutrients, lowers the risk of colon cancer.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 197

Selenium is protective against many types of cancers, promotes apoptosis, is a powerful antioxidant, and improves quality of life during aggressive cancer therapies According to P.D. Whanger (professor of agricultural chemistry), nearly 200 animal studies have been conducted to evaluate the effects of supernutritional levels of selenium on experimental carcinogenesis using chemical, viral, and transplantable tumor models. Two thirds of the studies found that high levels of selenium reduced the development of tumors at least moderately (14-35% compared to controls) and, in most cases, significantly (by more than 35%) (Whanger 1998).
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 242

Selenium has been used in combination with vitamin A and vitamin E to reduce the toxicity of chemotherapy drugs, particularly Adriamycin (Faure et al. 1996; Vanella et al. 1997). The synergistic effect of vitamin E and selenium together to enhance the immune system is greater than either alone. A new form of selenium is Se-methylselenocysteine (SeMC), a naturally occurring selenium compound found to be an effective chemopreventive agent. SeMC is a selenoamino acid that is synthesized by plants such as garlic and broccoli. SeMC has been shown to induce apoptosis in certain ovarian cancer cells (Yeo et al. 2002) and to be effective against breast cancer cell growth both in vivo and in vitro (Sinha et al. 1999). SeMC has also demonstrated significant anticarcinogenic activity against mammary tumorigenesis (Sinha et al. 1997). Moreover, a study has demonstrated that SeMC is one of the most effective selenium chemopreventive compounds, inducing apoptosis in leukemia HL-60 cell lines (Jung et al. 2001a). Some of the most impressive data suggest that exposure to SeMC blocks clonal expansion of premalignant lesions at an early stage. This is achieved by simultaneously modulating certain molecular pathways that are responsible for inhibiting cell proliferation and enhancing apoptosis (Ip et al. 2001). Unlike selenomethionine, which is incorporated into protein in place of methionine, SeMC is not incorporated into any protein, thereby offering a completely bioavailable compound for preventing cancer. Therefore, 200—400 mcg of SeMC a day is suggested for cancer patients. Please note that selenium also possesses antioxidant properties, so its use before, during, or immediately after chemotherapy could theoretically inhibit the actions of certain chemotherapy drugs.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 277

Scientists have confirmed that vitamins C and E along with the mineral selenium afford some prostate cancer prevention. This is not surprising to anyone who understands diet, biochemistry, and how antioxidants work. Glutathione peroxidase destroys free radicals and superoxides. Its name means that it destroys peroxides (the potent oxidants that form in tissues) and uses glutathione as a helper. Glutathione requires selenium to function; and wherever selenium is at work, vitamin E can't be far away because they function together.
20 Natural Ways To Reduce The Risk Of Prostate Cancer By James Scala PHD, page 54

For prostate cancer management, stay on a low fat diet, eat tomato products often, take a multivitamin, vitamins C, E and selenium.
A Physicians Guide To Natural Health Products That Work By James Howenstine MD, page 151

Men with higher intakes of antioxi-dants such as vitamin C, vitamin E, and the trace mineral selenium have lower levels of prostate cancer.
Alternative Cures by Bill Gottlieb, page 519

Selenium Statistics
In a December 1996 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Larry Clark presented evidence that supplemental selenium could reduce cancer death rates by as much as 50%. 1,312 patients were given 200 mcg. of selenium daily. The patients receiving selenium had a rise of 67% in their blood selenium level.
A Physicians Guide To Natural Health Products That Work By James Howenstine MD, page 148

The patients receiving selenium had a 67% decrease in cancer of the prostate, a 58 percent decrease in colon or rectal cancer and a 45% decrease in lung cancer. This suggests that possibly up to 100,000 lives a year might be saved in the USA by the simple addition of selenium to the diet.
A Physicians Guide To Natural Health Products That Work By James Howenstine MD, page 149

An article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) by Clark et al. (1996) showed that 200 mcg of supplemental selenium a day reduced overall cancer mortality by 50% in humans compared to a placebo group not receiving supplemental selenium. This 9-year study demonstrated that a low-cost mineral supplement could cut the risk of dying from cancer in half in certain individuals.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 1255

In a recent five-year study of nearly 30,000 rural Chinese people, researchers from the NCI found that daily doses of these three nutrients reduced cancer deaths by 13%.
Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 590

But what if you already have cancer? Again, the research shows a prolongation of lifespan with proper supplementation. In a study in Cancer Letters (Evangelou et al. 1997), animals with malignant tumors given high doses of vitamins C and E and selenium manifested a significant prolongation of the mean survival time. Complete remission of tumors developed in 16.8% of the animals.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 1256

Dr. Raymond Shamberger was also among the first to discover the link between low selenium content in the soil and increasing numbers of deaths from cancer. In 1976, he pointed out that the cities and states with high selenium content in the soil also had significantly lower rates of cancer, especially of the digestive and urinary systems.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 77

A Powerful Antioxidant "selenium is a crucial mineral in the battle against prostate cancer," says Dr. Schachter. In one study of hundreds of men, a daily intake of 200 micrograms of selenium cut the incidence of prostate cancer by 60 percent.
Alternative Cures by Bill Gottlieb, page 518

The statistics for breast cancer are particularly striking. "The higher the selenium, the lower the breast cancer," said Prof. Ladas. Similar associations have been found with leukemia, as well as cancers of the intestines, rectum, ovary, prostate, lung, pancreas, skin and bladder. In Yugoslavia, scientists studied 33 patients with breast cancer. These women had selenium levels in their bloodstream only half those of healthy volunteers.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

Although the study failed to show the effectiveness of selenium in altering the course of either basal or squamous cell carcinoma, selenium impacted the incidence of other types of malignancies with amazing success (Clark et al. 1996). The overall reduction in cancer incidence was 37% in the selenium-supplemented group; a 50% reduction in cancer mortality was observed over a 10-year period. The following are the site-specific reductions in cancer incidence observed in the study: colon-rectal cancers (58%), lung cancer (46%), and prostate cancer (63%). A selenium deficiency appears to increase the risk of prostate cancer fourfold to fivefold. It was determined that, as the male population ages, selenium levels decrease, paralleling an increase in prostate cancer (Brooks et al. 2001).
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 242

In a study published in the journal of the National Cancer Institute, the relationship between serum levels of selenium and the development of upper digestive tract cancer was explored (Mark et al, 2000). The relative risk of esophageal cancer was 0.56 in individuals in the highest quartile of selenium level compared with those in the lowest quartile. The corresponding relative risk of gastric cardia cancer was 0.47. Based on the data, the researchers calculate that 26.4% of esophageal and gastric cardia cancers are attributable to low selenium levels.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 242

Selenium Recommendations
The Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) is 50 to 100 micrograms (not milligrams) but few people get even that much. Selenium is so important that I believe that practically every adult should take a 200 microgram selenium supplement every day. This is readily available in health food stores at a minimal price. Organic selenium derived from yeast may be better absorbed man the mineral form, sodium selenite. Very high doses of either can be toxic, however, and should only be taken under a doctor's prescription. To summarize: selenium has a strong ability to prevent cancers, especially of the internal organs. There is no evidence that selenium interferes with chemotherapy, radiation or a combination of both. On the contrary, there is evidence that it decreases the side effects of such treatments
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 81

The supplements that I'd recommend for cancer prevention are the antioxidants: vitamins C and E, beta-carotene, and the mineral selenium.
Anti-Aging Prescriptions by James Duke PhD, page 90

Moderate doses of zinc, beta-carotene, selenium and vitamin E are safe and inexpensive. I believe these results are valid and are an accurate reflection of what antioxidants can do. The finding that two terrible cancers could be prevented by a few pennies worth of supplements received little attention in the mainstream media.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 83

The National Academy of Sciences advises that no more than 150 micrograms of selenium be taken orally daily. But Revici's "bivalent negative selenium"— a combination of the mineral with various organic substances, such as the fatty acids of sesame oil—is said to be so non-toxic that huge amounts, up to one million micrograms, have been injected (in the treatment of drug addiction), apparently without any ill effects. In the treatment of cancer the dosage is generally about 10,000 micrograms, still nearly one hundred times the National Academy of Science's recommended dose.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

But in the meantime, I will continue to take my 200 micrograms of selenium a day—the same dose used in the study—and I suggest that you do, too. Excess selenium has been associated with toxicity, so don't go overboard. If you're not fond of popping pills, you can get 120 micrograms of selenium in just one Brazil nut. Buy the shelled kind—they're grown in a central region of Brazil where the soil is richest in the mineral. Other good sources are tuna fish, seafood, wheat germ, and bran.
Ask Dr Weil by Andrew Weil MD, page 207

While everyone needs selenium on an everyday basis, there are certain situations in which the human need for selenium may be increased, or in which additional selenium may be helpful in the treatment of a disease. If you are a male, your selenium needs are greater than if you are female. If you suffer from heart disease or muscular disorders, additional selenium may help you. The same can be said if you suffer from cataracts, diabetes, cystic fibrosis, liver necrosis, iron deficiency anemia, joint problems, heavy metal poisoning, or cancer.
Complete Guide Health Nutrition by Gary Null, page 479

Now, Dr. Mark A. Nelson, a professor and researcher at the Arizona Cancer Center, says, "The Nutritional Prevention of Cancer (NPC) Trial tripled the intake and suggests that higher levels of selenium may be necessary for cancer prevention." Until nutritionists conduct more research, though, no one can recommend the best, safest amount you should get. Experts warn selenium is a toxic mineral, which means too much of it, especially from supplements, is unsafe.
Eat and Heal by the Editors of FC&A Medical Publishing, page 98

Doctors at the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences concluded that selenium supplements were a safe and effective food supplement for people. There have also been a number of reports of selenium's toxicity or even its alleged ability to cause cancer. There is no question that excess selenium in the soil (in the form of its compounds, selenite or selenate) can kill grazing animals and could probably in sufficiently large doses kill humans as well. The symptoms of selenium poisoning are readily apparent without a doctor's assistance, according to Dr. Gerhard Schrauzer, a world expert on the topic. These symptoms include a heavy garlic odor, pallor, nervousness, depression, a metallic taste, skin eruptions, irritability, discolored teeth and hair loss. There is some doubt about the carcinogenicity studies. For instance, one study showed toxic effects for inorganic, but not organic, forms of the mineral.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

General / History of Selenium
Selenium (Se) is a metal that is chemically similar to sulfur. It was first discovered in 1817 and because of its silvery color was named for Selene, the ancient goddess of the moon. Selenium is an essential component of two important antioxidant enzymes and is also the helpmate of vitamin E.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 76

Initially, selenium's importance in human health was underrated. In fact, its main use in conventional medicine was as a treatment for dandruff!
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 76

Strange as it may seem, toenail levels of selenium are considered a good indicator of long-term selenium intake. They found that the people whose toenails had the highest levels of selenium had half of the rate of lung cancer compared with those whose toe-nails were low in selenium.
Healing With Vitamins by Alice Feinstein, page 143

Emmanuel Revici, MD based his treatment on correcting an imbalance between fatty acids and sterols in the cancer patient; called "biological dualism". Revici was considered a very dedicated physician and developer of selenium as an anti-cancer agent. -Ewan Cameron, MD, a Scottish surgeon first popularized the use of high dose vitamin C in terminal cancer patients.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 45

Some scientists still do not accept the need for selenium supplements and argue against its protective effect against cancer and other diseases. Others endorse the value of moderate amounts of selenium added to the diet. In the laboratory, selenium has shown a wide range of anticancer effects.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 109

Aside from Revici's work, little has been done to investigate the use of this mineral as a cancer treatment. In 1911, Prof. August von Wasserrman achieved growth inhibition, shrinkage and eventually the disappearance of tumors by injecting selenium directly into mouse tumors. Four years later, two doctors caused the shrinkage and the eventual disappearance of small tumors in cancer patients, although larger tumors failed to respond.
Cancer Therapy by Ralph W Moss PhD, page 112

After critically examining this book, I came to the conclusion that Dr. Revici is an innovative medical genius, outstanding chemist and a highly creative thinker [emphasis added]. I also realized that few of his medical colleagues would be able to follow his train of thought and thus would be all too willing to dismiss his work. Because of my own professional interest in selenium, let me merely focus on this aspect of his work. Selenium containing medications were introduced into cancer therapy as early as 1911 by none less than the great physician August von Wasserman. Working with experimental animals, von Wasserman was able to show his selenium compounds produced liquefactive necrosis of solid tumors, an unheard of event at the time, hailed as a major success. However, von Wasserman's compounds were too toxic and thus could not be employed in the treatment of human cancer. Dr. Revici deserves credit for having discovered pharmacologically active selenium compounds of very low toxicity. The same was achieved years later by one other great physician, Dr. Klaus Schwarz, in collaboration with a leading organic chemist, Dr. Arne Fredga, of Uppsala University. The National Cancer Institute has recognized the importance of selenium only within the past few years. Would one thus not have to conclude that Dr. Revici, in this one instance, was 40 years ahead of his time? The same could be said for many of his other researches which form the basis of his therapy.
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 614

Dr. Gerbhard Schauzer, a biochemist at the University of California in San Diego, … believes that if every woman in America began taking selenium supplements today or followed a diet high in selenium, the breast cancer rate in this country would decline drastically in a few years.
Miracle Medicine Herbs by Richard M Lucas, page 16

Asia has considerable quantities of selenium in its soil, making the Asian diet rich in the mineral; not surprisingly, cancer and heart disease occur considerably less often in Asian cultures than in the West.
Optimum Health by Stephen T Sinatra MD, page 123

Additional Benefits of Selenium
Antioxidants, like beta carotene, vitamin C, vitamin E, and selenium appear to enhance the effectiveness of chemo, radiation, and hyperthermia while minimizing damage to the patient's normal cells; thus making therapy more of a "selective toxin." An optimally nourished cancer patient can better tolerate the rigors of cytotoxic therapy.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 18

Patients with advanced rectal cancer were treated with a combination of selenium, the drug 5-FU, and radiation. Scientists reported a protective effect of selenium on quality of life.
Antioxidants Against Cancer by Ralph Moss PhD, page 80

Selenium-deficient animals have more heart damage from the chemo drug, adriamycin.43 Supplements of selenium and vitamin E in humans did not reduce the efficacy of the chemo drugs against ovarian and cervical cancer. Animals with implanted tumors who were then treated with selenium and cisplatin (chemo drug) had reduced toxicity to the drug with no change in anti-cancer activity. Selenium supplements helped repair DNA damage from a carcinogen in animals. Selenium was selectively toxic to human leukemia cells in culture.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 56

While most nutritionists agree on the importance of growth (proliferative) nutrients, few nutritionists respect the importance for anti-proliferative nutrients. For every force in the body, there must be an opposing force to regulate that mechanism. There are agents that cause fluid loss from the kidneys (diuresis) and other agents that stem this fluid loss when it is excessive (anti-diuretic hormone). Just as there is a need for nutrients to augment growth, there is a need for nutrients to control excessive growth and shut down the process. Selenium, fish oil, garlic, Cat's claw, Maitake D-fraction, vitamin E succinate, vitamin K, quercetin, genistein, and bovine cartilage all may assist the cancer patient in this manner.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 80

Vitamin E and selenium supplements in animals helped to reduce the heart toxicity from adriamycin. Selenium and vitamin E supplements were given to 41 women undergoing cytotoxic therapy for ovarian and cervical cancers, with a resulting drop in the toxicity-related rise in creatine kinase.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 107

One of the foremost selenium investigators, Gerhard Schrauzer of the University of California at San Diego, says: Apart from its functions as an essential micronutrient, selenium also appears to have other physiological functions in which it acts as a physiological resistance factor [emphasis added]. Its cancer protecting effects fall into this category. In addition, selenium protects against free radicals, mutagens, toxic heavy metals and certain bacterial, fungal and viral pathogens. The selenium requirement increases under stress, just as the requirement for certain vitamins increases during infections. Selenium, according to Schrauzer, is most effective as a form of nutritional cancer prophylaxis. In animal research, its protective effect is greater the earlier in life it is given, and its shielding effect against virally induced cancer disappears if the nutrient is no longer fed to the animal. Nevertheless, selenium does have an effect on slowing the rate of growth of established spontaneous or transplanted breast tumors in animals, and in reversing the development of some malignant cell lines when used at pharmacological levels. Further, selenium has shown a general capacity to stimulate the immune system in several animal models, which may add to its anticancer effects. It is of special relevance to cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy that selenium "has by now been shown to prevent or retard tumorigenesis induced by virtually all the major known carcinogens," probably, Schrauzer believes, "by modulating the rate of cell division."
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 612

Just as selenium protects you against toxic metal poisoning, it can also protect you against radiation, whether you are exposed to it through the environment or more directly through medical treatments. A particularly effective form of selenium for this purpose is selenoaminoacid compounds (selenium plus amino acids). Selenium also protects you against compounds called epoxides, as it breaks them down. What are epoxides? Formed when an enzyme named aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase binds with a carcinogenic substance, epoxides could be called the immediate cause of cancer. The carcinogens cause your body to produce them, and then cancer may ensue.
Complete Guide Health Nutrition by Gary Null, page 483

Reports from Germany indicate that selenium supplementation in patients undergoing radiation therapy for rectal cancer improved quality of life and reduced the appearance of secondary cancers (Hehr et al. 1997) It appears that selenium acts as an immunologic response modifier, normalizing every component of the immune system (Life Extension Report 1995).
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 243

Macrophages—those garbagemen of the bloodstream—are capable of keeping your body clear of tumor cells. Also, since they produce interferon, they can help eliminate the viruses that cause some forms of cancer. But to do their job properly, they need adequate selenium.
Complete Guide Health Nutrition by Gary Null, page 483

Some of the known natural compounds that can reduce insulin resistance include omega-3 fatty acids, curcumin, flavonoids, selenium, and vitamin E. Dietary risk factors must be managed. Therefore, besides restricting dietary sugars, individuals should eat an adequate amount of fruits and vegetables because phytochemicals in fruits and vegetables act as potent anticancer agents.
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 598

Selenium can prevent solar damage, pigmentation and dark spots, but because the selenium content of soil varies across the country, not everyone is getting enough to be beneficial," says Dr. Burke, citing the Southeast in particular as an area deficient in selenium. To quench the free radicals caused by sun exposure and to prevent skin damage, Dr. Burke recommends daily supplements of 50 to 200 micrograms of selenium in the form of 1-selenomethionine, depending on where you live and your family history of cancer. Selenium can be toxic in doses exceeding 100 micrograms, so if you'd like to try this therapy to protect your skin, you should discuss it with your doctor.
Healing With Vitamins by Alice Feinstein, page 64

The importance of selenium to cardiovascular health was demonstrated in the provinces of China where the mineral was deficient. This correlation can be seen throughout the world. Ray Shamberger, M.D., and Charles Willis, M.D., of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, reported in 1976 that people who live in low-selenium areas have three times more heart disease than those living in areas where the soil and water are rich in the mineral.
Saturated Fat May Save Your Life by Bruce Fife ND, page 142

Selenium also appears to help stimulate antibody formation in response to vaccines. This immunostimulating effect is also enhanced by vitamin E; the presence of these two nutrients can increase antibody formation by 20-30 times, as shown by research.
Staying Healthy With Nutrition by Elson M Haas MD, page 213

Selenium may also aid in protein synthesis, growth and development, and fertility, especially in the male. It has been shown to improve sperm production and motility. Thus, selenium may prevent male infertility; however, we do not know whether selenium deficiency will actually cause male infertility. These are only some of the conjectures about other selenium functions.
Staying Healthy With Nutrition by Elson M Haas MD, page 213

Selenium Interactions
Certain metals such as lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury and silver block the action of selenium. . . . Recent laboratory experiments have shown that high doses of zinc block the action of selenium. Therefore, one has to be careful about taking excessive amounts of zinc (over 20 milligrams per day from diet and supplements) while taking selenium [emphasis added].
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 619

I think the selenium and saffron complement one another. Selensaff, a product made by Scientific Botanicals (see Resources), is used in cancer therapy to create a redox effect—a process of improving cell function by enhancing both oxygen uptake and the excretion of oxygen waste.
Herbal Medicine Healing Cancer by Donald R Yance Jr, page 148 Zinc is important because it is an antagonist to selenium and may in itself enhance or inhibit different tumors. Selenium in minute quantities is essential to human health. According to Prasad, among the minerals, "only selenium has been shown to have a role in cancer prevention":
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 619

Vitamin E and selenium protected animals against the potent carcinogenic effects of DMBA from tobacco.
Beating Cancer With Nutrition by Patrick Quillin, page 164

Selenium acts as an antioxidant and strengthens the body's immune defense system. Thus, many of the effects which are produced by vitamin E deficiency can be reversed or prevented by selenium. Some laboratory experiments have suggested that the combination of vitamin E and selenium is more effective in preventing cancer than either of them alone.
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 619

However, one experiment has demonstrated increased susceptibility to DMBA-induced tumors when selenium deficiency was aggravated by high dietary levels of polyunsatu-rated fatty acids, and protection by a physiological supplement of selenium (0.1 pg/g) to the diet (Ip and Sinha, 1981). The interpretation of these results is further complicated because of the varied protocols used in these experiments and the knowledge that selenium interacts with many other nutrients, such as heavy metals in the diet.
Diet Nutrition Cancer by National Research Council, page 169

In some experiments, dietary zinc exceeding nutritional requirements has been shown to suppress chemically induced tumors in rats and hamsters, but when given in drinking water it counteracts the protective effect of selenium in mice...While the evidence on the effect of zinc on tumor development is complex, it strongly suggests that, in general, one should be cautious about taking zinc supplements if one has cancer. And since selenium has a wide spectrum of demonstrable anticancer effects, cancer patients should be particularly cautious with zinc, since it is a selenium antagonist. I have seen many cancer patients taking moderately large amounts of zinc as part of a comprehensive megavitamin nutritional supplement program. In view of the available scientific evidence, this is another critical example of an area where uninformed nutritional supplementation may do harm.
Choices In Healing by Michael Lerner, page 612

In addition, statistically significant protection from high levels of selenium and alpha-tocopherol occurred only when gamma- tocopherol concentrations were also high (Helzl-sourer et al. 2000).
Disease Prevention And Treatment by Life Extension Foundation, page 258

Selenium and co-enzyme Q-10. Exhibits anticancer activity especially in blocking development of colon cancer and spread of breast cancer.

[cruise4]

Cancer's Sweet Tooth

http://www.newhope.com/nutritionsciencenews/NSN_backs/Apr_00/cancer.cfm

by Patrick Quillin, PHD, RD, CNS
photo by Robert Morrissey/Dot for Dot

SweetsDuring the last 10 years I have worked with more than 500 cancer patients as director of nutrition for Cancer Treatment Centers of America in Tulsa, Okla. It puzzles me why the simple concept "sugar feeds cancer" can be so dramatically overlooked as part of a comprehensive cancer treatment plan.

Of the 4 million cancer patients being treated in America today, hardly any are offered any scientifically guided nutrition therapy beyond being told to "just eat good foods." Most patients I work with arrive with a complete lack of nutritional advice. I believe many cancer patients would have a major improvement in their outcome if they controlled the supply of cancer's preferred fuel, glucose. By slowing the cancer's growth, patients allow their immune systems and medical debulking therapies—chemotherapy, radiation and surgery to reduce the bulk of the tumor mass—to catch up to the disease. Controlling one's blood-glucose levels through diet, supplements, exercise, meditation and prescription drugs when necessary can be one of the most crucial components to a cancer recovery program. The sound bite—sugar feeds cancer—is simple. The explanation is a little more complex.

The 1931 Nobel laureate in medicine, German Otto Warburg, Ph.D., first discovered that cancer cells have a fundamentally different energy metabolism compared to healthy cells. The crux of his Nobel thesis was that malignant tumors frequently exhibit an increase in anaerobic glycolysis—a process whereby glucose is used as a fuel by cancer cells with lactic acid as an anaerobic byproduct—compared to normal tissues.1 The large amount of lactic acid produced by this fermentation of glucose from cancer cells is then transported to the liver. This conversion of glucose to lactate generates a lower, more acidic pH in cancerous tissues as well as overall physical fatigue from lactic acid buildup.2,3 Thus, larger tumors tend to exhibit a more acidic pH.4

This inefficient pathway for energy metabolism yields only 2 moles of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) energy per mole of glucose, compared to 38 moles of ATP in the complete aerobic oxidation of glucose. By extracting only about 5 percent (2 vs. 38 moles of ATP) of the available energy in the food supply and the body's calorie stores, the cancer is "wasting" energy, and the patient becomes tired and undernourished. This vicious cycle increases body wasting.5 It is one reason why 40 percent of cancer patients die from malnutrition, or cachexia.6

Hence, cancer therapies should encompass regulating blood-glucose levels via diet, supplements, non-oral solutions for cachectic patients who lose their appetite, medication, exercise, gradual weight loss and stress reduction. Professional guidance and patient self-discipline are crucial at this point in the cancer process. The quest is not to eliminate sugars or carbohydrates from the diet but rather to control blood glucose within a narrow range to help starve the cancer and bolster immune function.

The glycemic index is a measure of how a given food affects blood-glucose levels, with each food assigned a numbered rating. The lower the rating, the slower the digestion and absorption process, which provides a healthier, more gradual infusion of sugars into the bloodstream. Conversely, a high rating means blood-glucose levels are increased quickly, which stimulates the pancreas to secrete insulin to drop blood-sugar levels. This rapid fluctuation of blood-sugar levels is unhealthy because of the stress it places on the body (see glycemic index chart).

Sugar in the Body and Diet
Sugar is a generic term used to identify simple carbohydrates, which includes monosaccharides such as fructose, glucose and galactose; and disaccharides such as maltose and sucrose (white table sugar). Think of these sugars as different-shaped bricks in a wall. When fructose is the primary monosaccharide brick in the wall, the glycemic index registers as healthier, since this simple sugar is slowly absorbed in the gut, then converted to glucose in the liver. This makes for "time-release foods," which offer a more gradual rise and fall in blood-glucose levels. If glucose is the primary monosaccharide brick in the wall, the glycemic index will be higher and less healthy for the individual. As the brick wall is torn apart in digestion, the glucose is pumped across the intestinal wall directly into the bloodstream, rapidly raising blood-glucose levels. In other words, there is a "window of efficacy" for glucose in the blood: levels too low make one feel lethargic and can create clinical hypoglycemia; levels too high start creating the rippling effect of diabetic health problems.

The 1997 American Diabetes Association blood-glucose standards consider 126 mg glucose/dL blood or greater to be diabetic; 111­125 mg/dL is impaired glucose tolerance and less than 110 mg/dL is considered normal. Meanwhile, the Paleolithic diet of our ancestors, which consisted of lean meats, vegetables and small amounts of whole grains, nuts, seeds and fruits, is estimated to have generated blood glucose levels between 60 and 90 mg/dL.7 Obviously, today's high-sugar diets are having unhealthy effects as far as blood-sugar is concerned. Excess blood glucose may initiate yeast overgrowth, blood vessel deterioration, heart disease and other health conditions.8

Understanding and using the glycemic index is an important aspect of diet modification for cancer patients. However, there is also evidence that sugars may feed cancer more efficiently than starches (comprised of long chains of simple sugars), making the index slightly misleading. A study of rats fed diets with equal calories from sugars and starches, for example, found the animals on the high-sugar diet developed more cases of breast cancer.9 The glycemic index is a useful tool in guiding the cancer patient toward a healthier diet, but it is not infallible. By using the glycemic index alone, one could be led to thinking a cup of white sugar is healthier than a baked potato. This is because the glycemic index rating of a sugary food may be lower than that of a starchy food. To be safe, I recommend less fruit, more vegetables, and little to no refined sugars in the diet of cancer patients.

What the Literature Says
A mouse model of human breast cancer demonstrated that tumors are sensitive to blood-glucose levels. Sixty-eight mice were injected with an aggressive strain of breast cancer, then fed diets to induce either high blood-sugar (hyperglycemia), normoglycemia or low blood-sugar (hypoglycemia). There was a dose-dependent response in which the lower the blood glucose, the greater the survival rate. After 70 days, 8 of 24 hyperglycemic mice survived compared to 16 of 24 normoglycemic and 19 of 20 hypoglycemic.10 This suggests that regulating sugar intake is key to slowing breast tumor growth (see chart).

In a human study, 10 healthy people were assessed for fasting blood-glucose levels and the phagocytic index of neutrophils, which measures immune-cell ability to envelop and destroy invaders such as cancer. Eating 100 g carbohydrates from glucose, sucrose, honey and orange juice all significantly decreased the capacity of neutrophils to engulf bacteria. Starch did not have this effect.11

A four-year study at the National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection in the Netherlands compared 111 biliary tract cancer patients with 480 controls. Cancer risk associated with the intake of sugars, independent of other energy sources, more than doubled for the cancer patients.12 Furthermore, an epidemiological study in 21 modern countries that keep track of morbidity and mortality (Europe, North America, Japan and others) revealed that sugar intake is a strong risk factor that contributes to higher breast cancer rates, particularly in older women.13

Limiting sugar consumption may not be the only line of defense. In fact, an interesting botanical extract from the avocado plant (Persea americana) is showing promise as a new cancer adjunct. When a purified avocado extract called mannoheptulose was added to a number of tumor cell lines tested in vitro by researchers in the Department of Biochemistry at Oxford University in Britain, they found it inhibited tumor cell glucose uptake by 25 to 75 percent, and it inhibited the enzyme glucokinase responsible for glycolysis. It also inhibited the growth rate of the cultured tumor cell lines. The same researchers gave lab animals a 1.7 mg/g body weight dose of mannoheptulose for five days; it reduced tumors by 65 to 79 percent.14 Based on these studies, there is good reason to believe that avocado extract could help cancer patients by limiting glucose to the tumor cells.

Since cancer cells derive most of their energy from anaerobic glycolysis, Joseph Gold, M.D., director of the Syracuse (N.Y.) Cancer Research Institute and former U.S. Air Force research physician, surmised that a chemical called hydrazine sulfate, used in rocket fuel, could inhibit the excessive gluconeogenesis (making sugar from amino acids) that occurs in cachectic cancer patients. Gold's work demonstrated hydrazine sulfate's ability to slow and reverse cachexia in advanced cancer patients. A placebo-controlled trial followed 101 cancer patients taking either 6 mg hydrazine sulfate three times/day or placebo. After one month, 83 percent of hydrazine sulfate patients increased their weight, compared to 53 percent on placebo.15 A similar study by the same principal researchers, partly funded by the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Md., followed 65 patients. Those who took hydrazine sulfate and were in good physical condition before the study began lived an average of 17 weeks longer.16

In 1990, I called the major cancer hospitals in the country looking for some information on the crucial role of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) in cancer patients. Some 40 percent of cancer patients die from cachexia.5 Yet many starving cancer patients are offered either no nutritional support or the standard TPN solution developed for intensive care units. The solution provides 70 percent of the calories going into the bloodstream in the form of glucose. All too often, I believe, these high-glucose solutions for cachectic cancer patients do not help as much as would TPN solutions with lower levels of glucose and higher levels of amino acids and lipids. These solutions would allow the patient to build strength and would not feed the tumor.17

The medical establishment may be missing the connection between sugar and its role in tumorigenesis. Consider the million-dollar positive emission tomography device, or PET scan, regarded as one of the ultimate cancer-detection tools. PET scans use radioactively labeled glucose to detect sugar-hungry tumor cells. PET scans are used to plot the progress of cancer patients and to assess whether present protocols are effective.18

In Europe, the "sugar feeds cancer" concept is so well accepted that oncologists, or cancer doctors, use the Systemic Cancer Multistep Therapy (SCMT) protocol. Conceived by Manfred von Ardenne in Germany in 1965, SCMT entails injecting patients with glucose to increase blood-glucose concentrations. This lowers pH values in cancer tissues via lactic acid formation. In turn, this intensifies the thermal sensitivity of the malignant tumors and also induces rapid growth of the cancer. Patients are then given whole-body hyperthermia (42 C core temperature) to further stress the cancer cells, followed by chemotherapy or radiation.19 SCMT was tested on 103 patients with metastasized cancer or recurrent primary tumors in a clinical phase-I study at the Von Ardenne Institute of Applied Medical Research in Dresden, Germany. Five-year survival rates in SCMT-treated patients increased by 25 to 50 percent, and the complete rate of tumor regression increased by 30 to 50 percent.20 The protocol induces rapid growth of the cancer, then treats the tumor with toxic therapies for a dramatic improvement in outcome.

The irrefutable role of glucose in the growth and metastasis of cancer cells can enhance many therapies. Some of these include diets designed with the glycemic index in mind to regulate increases in blood glucose, hence selectively starving the cancer cells; low-glucose TPN solutions; avocado extract to inhibit glucose uptake in cancer cells; hydrazine sulfate to inhibit gluconeogenesis in cancer cells; and SCMT.

A female patient in her 50s, with lung cancer, came to our clinic, having been given a death sentence by her Florida oncologist. She was cooperative and understood the connection between nutrition and cancer. She changed her diet considerably, leaving out 90 percent of the sugar she used to eat. She found that wheat bread and oat cereal now had their own wild sweetness, even without added sugar. With appropriately restrained medical therapy—including high-dose radiation targeted to tumor sites and fractionated chemotherapy, a technique that distributes the normal one large weekly chemo dose into a 60-hour infusion lasting days—a good attitude and an optimal nutrition program, she beat her terminal lung cancer. I saw her the other day, five years later and still disease-free, probably looking better than the doctor who told her there was no hope.

Patrick Quillin, Ph.D., R.D., C.N.S., is director of nutrition for Cancer Treatment Centers of America in Tulsa, Okla., and author of Beating Cancer With Nutrition (Nutrition Times Press, 1998).

References

1. Warburg O. On the origin of cancer cells. Science 1956 Feb;123:309-14.

2. Volk T, et al. pH in human tumor xenografts: effect of intravenous administration of glucose. Br J Cancer 1993 Sep;68(3):492-500.

3.Digirolamo M. Diet and cancer: markers, prevention and treatment. New York: Plenum Press; 1994. p 203.

4. Leeper DB, et al. Effect of i.v. glucose versus combined i.v. plus oral glucose on human tumor extracellular pH for potential sensitization to thermoradiotherapy. Int J Hyperthermia 1998 May-Jun;14(3):257-69.

5. Rossi-Fanelli F, et al. Abnormal substrate metabolism and nutritional strategies in cancer management. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1991 Nov-Dec;15(6):680-3.

6. Grant JP. Proper use and recognized role of TPN in the cancer patient. Nutrition 1990 Jul-Aug;6(4 Suppl):6S-7S, 10S.

7. Brand-Miller J, et al. The glucose revolution. Newport (RI) Marlowe and Co.; 1999.

8. Mooradian AD, et al. Glucotoxicity: potential mechanisms. Clin Geriatr Med 1999 May;15(2):255.

9. Hoehn, SK, et al. Complex versus simple carbohydrates and mammary tumors in mice. Nutr Cancer 1979;1(3):27.

10. Santisteban GA, et al. Glycemic modulation of tumor tolerance in a mouse model of breast cancer. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 1985 Nov 15;132(3):1174-9.

11. Sanchez A, et al. Role of sugars in human neutrophilic phagocytosis. Am J Clin Nutr 1973 Nov;26(11):1180-4.

12. Moerman CJ, et al. Dietary sugar intake in the aetiology of biliary tract cancer. Int J Epidemiol 1993 Apr;22(2):207-14.

13. Seeley S. Diet and breast cancer: the possible connection with sugar consumption. Med Hypotheses 1983 Jul;11(3):319-27.

14. Board M, et al. High Km glucose-phosphorylating (glucokinase) activities in a range of tumor cell lines and inhibition of rates of tumor growth by the specific enzyme inhibitor mannoheptulose. Cancer Res 1995 Aug 1;55(15):3278-85.

15. Chlebowski RT, et al. Hydrazine sulfate in cancer patients with weight loss. A placebo-controlled clinical experience. Cancer 1987 Feb 1;59(3):406-10.

16. Chlebowski RT, et al. Hydrazine sulfate influence on nutritional status and survival in non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1990 Jan;8(1):9-15.

17. American College of Physicians. Parenteral nutrition in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. Ann Intern Med 1989 May;110(9):734.

18. Gatenby RA. Potential role of FDG-PET imaging in understanding tumor-host interaction. J Nucl Med 1995 May;36(5):893-9.

19. von Ardenne M. Principles and concept 1993 of the Systemic Cancer Multistep Therapy (SCMT). Extreme whole-body hyperthermia using the infrared-A technique IRATHERM 2000—selective thermosensitisation by hyperglycemia—circulatory back-up by adapted hyperoxemia. Strahlenther Onkol 1994 Oct;170(10):581-9.

20. Steinhausen D, et al. Evaluation of systemic tolerance of 42.0 degrees C infrared-A whole-body hyperthermia in combination with hyperglycemia and hyperoxemia. A Phase-I study. Strahlenther Onkol 1994 Jun;170(6):322-34.

[cruise4]

I'll Have My Cosmetics with a Side of Infertility, Please

By Heather Gehlert, AlterNet. Posted October 25, 2007.

Author Stacy Malkan reveals the dangerous truth about everyday products we put in our hair and on our skin.
Tools
email EMAIL
print PRINT
75 COMMENTS
20071025story

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also in Top Stories

Swim Against the Current: Ordinary Americans Can Make Change Happen
Jim Hightower, AlterNet

Vets Break Silence on Iraq War Crimes
Aaron Glantz, IPS News

Will Hillary Clinton Spoil the Party?
Robert B. Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

Candidates' Focus on Mandates Hinders Health Care Reform
Jacob S. Hacker, Campaign for America's Future

Why Torture Made Me Leave the APA
Jeffrey S. Kaye, Ph.D., Invictus

Death Row Lotto
Sarah Kelley, Nashville Scene

The Great Texas Dildo Wars of 2008
Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon

Coming Soon ... The Carbon Economy
Kelpie Wilson, TruthOut.org
More stories by Heather Gehlert

RSS icon Main AlterNet RSS Feed
Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!


Advertisement

Carcinogens in cosmetics? Petrochemicals in perfume? If only this were an urban legend. Unfortunately, it's a toxic reality, and it's showing up in our bodies.

In 2004, scientists found pesticides in the blood of newborn babies. A year later, researchers discovered perchlorate, a component of rocket fuel, in human breast milk. Today, people are testing positive for a litany of hazardous substances from flame retardants to phthalates to lead.

In her new book, Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry, Stacy Malkan exposes the toxic chemicals that lurk, often unlabeled, in the personal care products that millions of American women, men and children use every day.

AlterNet spoke with Malkan about these toxins and her five-year effort with the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics to get the beauty industry to remove them from its products.

Heather Gehlert: There are so many environmental issues you could've written a book about. Why cosmetics?

Stacy Malkan: I think cosmetics is something that we're all intimately connected to. They're products that we use every day, and so I think it's a good first place to start asking questions. What kinds of products are we bringing into our homes? What kinds of companies are we giving our money to?

It has something pretty interesting in common with global warming too.

It does. I think of it as global poisoning. I think that the ubiquitous contamination of the human species with toxic chemicals is a symptom of the same problem (as global warming), which is an economy that's based on outdated technologies of petrochemicals -- petroleum. So many of the products we're applying to our faces and putting in our hair come from oil. They're byproducts of oil.

Many cosmetic products on the market right now claim they are pure, gentle, clean and healthy. But, as you reveal in this book, they're far from it. Toxic chemicals in these products are showing up in people. What were some of the most surprising toxins you discovered in cosmetics?

Lead in lipstick was pretty surprising. We (the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics) just released that report last week. Many personal care products have phthalates, which is a plasticizer and hormone disruptor. That's why we started the cosmetics campaign -- because we know that women have higher levels of phthalates in their bodies, and we thought that cosmetics might be a reason. But, I think overall, the most surprising thing was to know that there's so much that we don't know about these products. Many, many chemicals are hiding in fragrance. Companies aren't required to list the components of fragrance. Products also are contaminated with carcinogens like 1,4 dioxane and neurotoxins like lead that aren't listed on the label. So it's difficult for consumers to know what we're using.

As a consumer I just want to know what ingredients to avoid, but you say in the book, protecting myself is not as simple as that. Why not?

There are no standards or regulations like there are in, for example, the food industry, where if you buy organic food or food labeled "natural," there's a set of standards and legal definitions that go behind those words. We might like to see those be stronger, but nevertheless, there are meaningful legal definitions. That's not the case in the personal care product industry, where companies often use words like "organic" and "natural" to market products that are anything but. And some of the most toxic products we've found actually had the word "natural" in their name, like natural nail strengtheners that are made with formaldehyde.

Generally speaking, risk assessment involves two factors: a hazard and people's exposure to that hazard. Could you explain some of the unique challenges to assessing risks with cosmetics?

That's a good question. Risk assessment is an extremely oversimplified way of pretending we have enough information to know how much chemicals we can tolerate in our bodies. A risk assessment equation will say, "How hazardous is a chemical, how much are we exposed to it from this one product, and is that harmful?" There's a lot of information left out of that picture: studies that haven't been done to determine impacts on fetuses, the fact that we're exposed to so many of these chemicals in so many places every day, and the fact there have been no -- or very few -- studies about chemical mixtures.

In chapter 2, you say that toxic cosmetics should raise concern for men too, regardless of whether they use any themselves. How so?

Well, men do, first of all, use personal care products. When I ask a group of people what products they've used today, the men will be keeping their hands down and eventually, reluctantly, raising their hands because they're using shampoo, conditioner, deodorant, cologne, lotion.

So it's not just a makeup problem.

No, it's not just a makeup problem. It's all products. And we know that some chemicals in these products are particularly problematic for men. We're all exposed to phthalates, and phthalates interfere with the production of testosterone, and they're linked to health effects like lower sperm counts, birth defects of the penis, testicular tumors.

You've had to struggle with some scary health problems. Tell us about that.

Like many of us, I've had bizarre health problems that nobody can explain: benign lumps in my breasts and thyroid, which is quite common among young women to have thyroid problems. And then also infertility, which is something that's becoming an increasingly common experience for people. And so many of us have heard from our doctors, "Well, we don't know why; we can't tell you why." But I think that's an interesting disconnect that we're looking at how to treat disease, but we're not looking at how to prevent disease.

You admit in the book that you used to be addicted to makeup and so-called personal care products. Do you think that could be related to the health issues you've had?

Well, who knows, and we can never say what caused what and so that's why risk assessment is not a useful tool to -- how do I want to say this -- that's why, in my opinion, we need to get rid of toxins wherever we possibly can in makeup, shampoo and lipstick is obviously a place where they don't need to be. But, yes, I did use a lot of cosmetic products -- 200 chemicals a day just in those products. And I also grew up in a very industrialized neighborhood near one of the largest incinerators in Massachusetts, near oil refineries. And we really didn't talk about these issues at all.

Do you think part of the problem with creating awareness around this issue is that the effects from toxins are often not that immediate? People don't say, Oh, I've been to this toxic site and now I have a rash all over my body.

Right, and that's what we hear from the cosmetics companies when they say, "Well, my product is safe if used as directed, and you can't prove otherwise." Which is true. We can't say that use of X product led to X disease because we're talking about long-term diseases with contributing factors. Doctors usually can't tell us why we got cancer, because it could be due to multiple factors in our pasts. We also know that exposures during critical windows of development -- babies in the womb, even teenagers -- can lead to later-life diseases.

Can you give me an idea of how many chemicals one product can contain? Earlier you said you were exposed to 200 chemicals a day during your youth, but that's not all from one product.

No, I used about 20 products a day. The average woman in the U.S. according to our survey uses 12 products a day with about 180 chemicals. And men use about six products with 80 chemicals combined. But it depends on the product. Some products have dozens of chemicals -- fragrances can have dozens or even hundreds of chemicals that aren't listed on the label. And even fragrance-free products can have a masking fragrance.

Talk a little about the history of the cosmetics industry. When did it come about and why is it so unregulated?

The cosmetics industry has fought really hard to keep itself unregulated for the last 30 years. It was first regulated under the Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act of 1938. That is a 350-page law with about 1.5 pages that address cosmetics. But it didn't give the FDA the power to require testing (cosmetic) products before they go on the market. The FDA can't require follow-up health monitoring; they can't even recall products. Basically, the FDA has to prove in court that a product is harmful before it can take action. There were several attempts to regulate the industry over the years, and the most well-known was in the 1970s with Thomas Eagleton, a senator from Missouri. He proposed that cosmetics should be regulated more like drugs, where there's a rigorous testing protocol that has to happen before products go on the market, but that was shot down and co-opted. What the industry has done is propose voluntary regulations every time a regulatory threat arises. And so the system that we have now is an industry-sponsored and run panel called the Cosmetics Ingredients Review Board, which is in charge of determining the safety of ingredients in cosmetics. We found lots of problems with that panel. They rushed through ingredients quickly, they hadn't looked at most of the ingredients or actually used these products and, most of the time, they find things to be safe. Even when they do make recommendations to restrict or eliminate ingredients, the industry is free to ignore them and sometimes does.

You say in the book that some companies have different formulations of the same products. Some, with harmful toxins removed, go to Europe, and others, with toxins, go to the U.S. Why is that?

Well, it's outrageous, but Europe has much better health protection laws, and they really take a precautionary approach. The European Union has banned 1,100 chemicals from cosmetics that are thought to cause cancer or reproductive harm, and so they take a precautionary approach by saying, "We know these chemicals are hazardous." Nobody argues about that. Instead of arguing about at what level are they safe in products, we need to take them out of the products and figure out how to make products without them. The United States, on the other hand, says, "We need to be able to prove that an ingredient in this product causes harm before we're going to do anything about it. Consequently, there are lots of known toxins in consumer products. It's not just cosmetics. Another example is formaldehyde in kitchen cabinets -- perfectly legal in the United States. You can buy kitchen cabinets, and they're wafting the carcinogen formaldehyde into your kitchen. You can't sell those cabinets in Europe, in Japan, even in China.

Is it really expensive for companies to reformulate their products to remove toxic chemicals?

It's not expensive to reformulate; many companies have already done it because they had to do it if they want to sell in the European market.

When did you begin working on cosmetic issues? How has the industry changed since then? What's the future outlook?

Well, we started the cosmetics campaign in 2002, when we were concerned about phthalates and found out they were in the majority of cosmetic products. At that time, we started to contact companies to try to have a dialogue with them about the chemicals they were using. ... Overall, I would say the mainstream companies have been incredibly resistant to any kind of change, but we have seen a big change in some products in the last few years. Because Europe banned phthalates, we were able to use that to pressure companies to remove phthalates from some U.S. products, particularly nail products. So we've seen a major shift in the formulation of nail products in the last few years because of the campaign (formaldehyde, toluene, and dibutyl phthalates have been removed from most nail products). So, it's possible that companies can change. They are changing, but not enough and not fast enough.

One thing that struck me about this book is that it's not just a story about cosmetic hazards. It's a story about activism. What was the thinking behind that?

Well, activism is fun, first of all. I think it's the best job in the world. And the inspiring stories from so many people from moms to former models who are speaking out, to the teenagers who have lobbied in Sacramento to get bills passed and now realize they have a political voice that they want to keep using, to nurses who have come together to pressure companies to pass protective policies. I think that's all so positive, and I think that people are coming together in ways that we haven't before.

What practical advice can you give to people wanting to clean up their cosmetics bags?

My best advice is that simpler is better. Really, fewer ingredients, fewer products. For instance, hair color and bubble bath are two things that I've given up. But there are a lot good (nontoxic) products out there on the market, and I would say start by switching out the ones that you use the most frequently like shampoo and deodorant that we're putting by our breast tissue, experiment with different kinds of natural products and just make changes as you can. You can also use the skin deep database to research your products. ... The onus at this point is on consumers to do our own research.

Anything else you'd like to add?

I think it's really important, especially for women in this culture, to recognize that the beauty industry is all about profit and bottom-line thinking. It's not concerned about our health issues. It is not concerned with telling the truth about its products.

To learn more and take action, visit safecosmetics.org. To find out what toxins are in your personal care products, go to www.cosmeticdatabase.org. And to buy the book, check out notjustaprettyface.org.

[oztronix]

It's likely 100 F (as 100 C will burn it all)
Other than that - he is in U.S., and there's Farrenheit.
Also, if you'd put Dandelion root on 100 C in an incubator:
it will fry the incubator AND Dandelion in it, and you'll also
need a fire extinguisher handy. 100 C is just too much, so,
it's definitely 100 Farrenheit. (which is, by the way the temperature
of egg incubation for Ducklings, and Chickens, coincidence ?,
doubt it - good numbers like that are, as you see, good for
anything else...).

Perhaps a strange question, but when the man from the article talks about 100 degrees... does he mean Celsius or Fahrenheit? :confused: