Showing posts with label Cancer Information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cancer Information. Show all posts

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Grilled Chicken Contains Cancer-Causing Agent

Grilled chicken from seven national restaurant chains contains a dangerous carcinogen called PhIP, prompting the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) to file a lawsuit against the restaurants, the PCRM announced September 28.

The lawsuit was filed under California's Proposition 65 in The Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles to compel McDonald's, Burger King, Chick-fil-A, Chili's, Applebee's, Outback Steakhouse, and TGI Friday's to warn unsuspecting consumers of the carcinogen. PhIP was found in every sample of grilled chicken from these restraurants.

"Grilled chicken can cause cancer, and consumers deserve to know that this supposedly healthy product is actually just as bad for them as high-fat fried chicken," says PCRM president Neal Barnard, M.D. "Even a grilled chicken salad increases the risk of breast cancer, prostate cancer, and other forms of this lethal disease."

2-amino-1methyk-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP), along with three other heterocyclic amines (HCAs), known as 2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f] quinoline (IQ), 2-amino-3,4-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f] quinoline (MeIQ), and 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f] quinoxaline (MeIQx) are listed by the National Toxicology Program in the Report on Carcinogen as reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.

Heterocyclic amines (HCAs) including PhIP are formed by condensation of creatinine and amino acids in animal muscle during the cooking of meat. A high level of the cancer-causing agents can be formed in a cooking process at high temperature for a long time.

HCAs are readily absorbed and distributed in the body. They are metabolized by both phase I and phase II enzymes and become toxic forms, arylnitrenium ions, which ultimately bind to DNA, leading to HCA-induced DNA adducts.

PhIP and other HCAs are more toxic than commonly known carcinogens such as benzo-(a)-pyrene. Studies have already found that among others, intake of PhIP and other HCAs may increase risk of colon, breast and prostate cancer in humans, three most common cancers in the United States which are commonly associated with meat consumption.

To reduce HCAs in cooked meat, meat should be prepared under 392 F or 200 C. Direct heat should not be used to cook meat. Consumers may also use some spices to inhibit the formation of toxic forms of PhIP in the body. Garlic is one of known spices that counteract the cancer-causing effect of PhIP.

In a study presented at the annual meeting of American Association of Cancer Research held on Oct 31, 2005, Ronald D. Thomas, Ph.D. at Florida A&M University in Tallahassee and colleagues reported that garlic compound diallyl sulfide (DAS) antagonizes PhIP-induced alterations in the expression of phase I and phase II metabolizing enzymes in human breast epithelial cells.

"We treated human breast epithelial cells with equal amounts of PhIP and DAS separately, and the two together, for periods ranging from three to 24 hours," said Thomas. "PhIP induced expression of the cancer-causing enzyme at every stage, up to 40-fold, while DAS completely inhibited the PhIP enzyme from becoming carcinogenic."

Another way consumers may try to prevent PhIP-induced cancers is to avoid consumption of meat. Dr. T. Colin Campbell, a retired nutrition professor from Cornell University said in his book "China Study" that consumption of animal protein is linked with elevated activities of enzymes that convert many non-toxic chemicals such as aflatoxin into cancer-causing agents. Dr. Campbell and others have found meat consumption is linked with increased risk of many cancers.

© 2004-2006 by http://foodconsumer.org

About the Author:
David Liu, Ph.D. a freelance writer for http://foodconsumer.org. Foodconsumer.org offers individuals and not-for-profit organizations free license for the republishing of its articles.
This article was posted on October 17, 2006
Article Source: articlecity

Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Natural Supplements vs. Pharmaceutical Drugs: The Politics of Surviving Cancer

It is understandable that a medicinal drug having undergone double blind studies, several years of research, and millions of dollars spent on that research, should have a place of credibility. But what if the entire system was flawed to begin with, money and time wasted on treating a symptom rather than working to find a cure or better yet, prevention of the disease? Or what if the system was more than flawed but in many cases left the person in a less healthy state after having completed treatment using a pharmaceutical drug? With all of our knowledge about how the human body works, knowing its intolerance of unnatural elements, why are we, as medical patients, so accepting of the idea that we should be treating ourselves with synthetic drugs that are virtually poison to our body? To relieve one symptom we acquire two or three new symptoms, a new chronic condition we need to deal with and, of course, another prescription medication to fill each month.

Of course, those involved in the area of holistic medicine can never claim to cure, prevent, or treat a disease, even if that is the intended outcome and regardless of the numerous individuals finding themselves to be in a state of improved health. Only drug companies can make such claims. In fact, they own those words. Whether or not that right is deserved is irrelevant. It is worth noting, however, that most natural supplements have endured centuries of product testing.

Because of my interest in finding a holistic approach to addressing cancer, I recently came to distribute a product called Natural Cellular Defense which is a patented liquid detoxification product made from zeolite technology, marketed by the company of Waiora. Initially it was being researched as a cancer drug, however, because it is all natural, it was instead introduced to the market as a supplement. Studies show Natural Cellular Defense has the ability to remove heavy metals and harmful toxins in a safe and effective manner as well as activate the p21 tumor suppressor gene in cancerous cells. It also happens to be 100% non-toxic and is completely safe for all ages. This natural health product alone could conceivably help alleviate the toxins and waste accumulating in the average person, responsible for many chronic diseases. But no matter how many people are helped by taking this natural supplement, we make no claims. It is not a drug.

For years I have been frustrated by the radical and harmful techniques employed when treating tumors in cancer patients and would like to see non-toxic methods given greater attention and legitimacy. There is also far too much time and effort placed on detection rather than prevention of the disease. Prevention is the key, not detection. Detection means the disease has had a chance to manifest itself and take hold. At the very least we should not be poisoning a body with toxic drugs once a diagnosis has been made.

Here is the list of potential side effects of chemotherapy and you be the judge as to whether this sounds like a viable treatment option: Low hemoglobin, low white blood cells, low platelets, infection, need for blood transfusion, need for platelet transfusion, pain, nausea, vomiting, hair loss, skin injury, heart damage, lung damage, liver damage, kidney damage, loss of hearing, small stature, hormonal problems such as low growth hormone or low thyroid hormone, infertility, second cancer, intellectual decline, worsening of neurological symptoms, ineffectiveness, and death.

To understand better the hypocrisy of cancer treatment, consider the following: One of the largest and most prestigious cancer treatment centers in the world, The McGill Cancer Center in Canada, did a study of oncologists to determine how they would respond to a diagnosis of cancer. On the confidential questionnaire, 58 out of 64 doctors said that all chemotherapy programs were unacceptable to them and their family members. The overwhelming reason for this decision was that they believe the drugs are ineffective and have an unacceptable degree of toxicity. Do you imagine these same doctors are recommending chemotherapy treatment to shrink their patient’s tumors? Yes, indeed they are, as they must if they wish to follow standard protocol. There are alternative, non-toxic treatments available to cancer patients, but you must work to find these natural treatments on your own.

Of course, you may find a natural treatment you would like to pursue only to discover the medical profession standing in the way of implementing your treatment plan. A few years ago, I came across a story which is truly heart breaking. It involves a two year old boy named Alexander who was diagnosed with the most common pediatric brain tumor, medulloblastoma. After substantial consideration and thoughtful research by the parents following Alexander’s two brain surgeries, the parents chose for their son a non-toxic therapy, proven to be highly effective in treatment of brain cancer. However, the FDA denied the parents access to this treatment and the parents were informed by their oncologists that without their state of the art chemotherapy, the cancer would soon return. Alexander completed his third month of chemotherapy in December 1998 and died on January 31, 1999. He was just two and a half years old.

For you see, the state-of-the-art chemotherapy protocol recommended by the oncologists had already proven itself to be ineffective in pediatric brain tumors back four years earlier. The exact same chemotherapy drugs provided to Alexander in 1998 had been administered to children of the same age with the same brain tumor as Alexander with similar results. Of course, the parents were never informed about the failure of this therapy. You should note that when the parents hesitated to bring Alexander in for chemotherapy the oncologists were already preparing to take control by court order. The parents wanted to use a non-toxic treatment alternative, proven to be effective, and yet were forced to use an ineffectual, toxic treatment.

I am afraid these parents may have been harmed twice over by the medical establishment for there is also the possibility that the brain tumor was caused by vaccinations containing Thimerosal, commonly used in vaccinations at that time and responsible for numerous cases of neurological disorders in children, such as autism, ADD/HD, and brain tumors.

You can learn more about Alexander’s story by visiting http://www.ouralexander.org/index.htm.

Just how dangerous is chemotherapy?

The following excerpt can be found on the University of Iowa’s website. Their protocol for dealing with “chemo spills” conjures images of a rather frightening scene of contamination because it is, in fact, a serious state of contamination. It reads as follows:

Patients and caregivers shall be taught safe, proper, handling and disposal of waste generated during continuous infusions of chemotherapy.

The following procedures should be implemented immediately if a chemotherapy leak or spill should occur:

1. Put on a pair of disposable latex gloves.

2. If chemo has spilled on clothing, remove immediately and take a shower, scrubbing the exposed skin with soap and water. Watch for redness, blistering, or a burning sensation. Contact your nurse to report the spill. She will give you further instructions if necessary.

3. Remove any and all sharp objects, placing them into your sharps container or any can with a lid such as a coffee can.

4. Soak up the spill with an absorbent disposable material, such as paper towels.

5. Disinfect the spill area with soap and water or a household cleaner such as window cleaner, 409, alcohol, bleach, or liquid carpet cleaner.

6. Put the absorbent material and the gloves into a chemotherapy waste container or garbage bag and carefully mark it. It will be picked up later by the pharmacy personnel.

7. If a spill occurs on a patient's or caregiver's clothing or sheets, these articles should be washed separately from regular laundry in hot water.

8. If a spill occurs on unprotected furniture, the area should be scrubbed with soap and water and rinsed with clean water while wearing protective chemo safety gloves.

9. Patients and caregivers should be taught to use care when handling vomitus or excretions of the patient for 48 hours post treatment and to use good handwashing technique.

Now imagine the “spill” they are referring to as chemicals that an individual with cancer will be taking into their body because that is indeed the case.

By no means do I wish to demonize the medical profession as a whole because there are many quality doctors and instances when prescription drugs may be necessary, however, I encourage caution when taking advice that will affect your health. It is important to consider the possibility that sometimes the medical establishment may be leading us down the wrong path. Natural therapies may not be able to claim to cure or treat disease but sometimes you need to just take a step back and perform your own due diligence, take a look at the results and come to your own conclusion.

Copyright 2006 Paula Rothstein

About the Author:
Paula Rothstein has been involved in the natural health industry for over 10 years with a specific emphasis on promoting products and introducing lifestyle changes which address chronic diseases relating to toxic overload. For more information on detoxification, please visit: http://www.medicinefreeliving.com. Comments and questions may be addressed to: Paula.Rothstein@medicinefreeliving.com.
This article was posted on March 24, 2006
Article Source: articlecity

Monday, July 09, 2007

Cancer Smart Bomb Research

Do you remember the Smart Bomb footage of the Gulf Wars on CNN, where the bomb was launched and you watched on full video as the smart munitions flew thru someone’s window and exploded? Well, some really brilliant folks at MIT had an idea. A cancer drug which could go to a cancer cell and penetrate it like a sponge and then seal-a-meal itself in the cancerous region.

Do you remember the Smart Bomb footage of the Gulf Wars on CNN, where the bomb was launched and you watched on full video as the smart munitions flew thru someone’s window and exploded? Well, some really brilliant folks at MIT had an idea. A cancer drug which could go to a cancer cell and penetrate it like a sponge and then seal-a-meal itself in the cancerous region. Then go off and attack the cancerous region without hurting nearby cells. Wow. How did they do it? Using nano-articles, that’s how.

The lethal dose of anti-cancer toxins goes off like the Mother of All Bombs and does not hurt the non-cancerous cells. It has been tested on Melanoma and Lewis Lung Cancer in rats so far. Soon clinical trials and tests will begin on real people, but everyone is very excited and pretty certain this will work very well. It was a group effort at MIT, between nano tech, bio-medicine and cancer researchers. They are confident that it will be better for the patient than the chemotherapy due to the reduction of toxicity to the healthy surrounding tissue cells.

By using this new research and methodology the MIT team hopes to cur off enemy supply lines, while dropping smart anti-cancer drugs on the cancer cells. Similar to starving out enemy insurgents and then attacking them from the air with precision smart bombs, a strategy which is currently ripping the heart out of our enemy. The nano cell or super Navy Seal like team, is like a balloon within a localized grid of the modern net-centric battlespace. A balloon within a balloon, where it releases the treatment, an anti-angiogenic drug thus the blood vessels feeding the tumor then collapse, which means the loaded nanoparticles are trapped in the tumor, and release the chemotherapy. It worked in the mice, now it is time to use this to attack cancerous areas in humans. Eighty percent of the mice survived over 65 days the best so far would have been only 30 days. The untreated mice died at less than 20 days. The nanocell treatment worked best on melanoma than lung cancer, but with a little work the researchers believe they will have an answer for safer treatment for many types of cancers and drastically increase the odds of survival. The future where cancer is conquered is rapidly approaching, that is good news for the World and it means more Lance Armstrong types amongst us. Think on this, because it is all good and it will be here soon.

About the Author:
"Lance Winslow" - If you have innovative thoughts and unique perspectives, come think with Lance www.WorldThinkTank.net/wttbbs
Submitted on 2005-10-05
Article Source: http://www.articlesarea.com/

Friday, June 22, 2007

All You Wanted to Know about Cancer Detox System

The recent cancer researches have revealed a sensational fact: it is our own system that writes out your destiny as to whether you will develop cancer in your life time and if yes when and how. How is this possible? Let's put it simply.

The recent cancer researches have revealed a sensational fact: it is our own system that writes out your destiny as to whether you will develop cancer in your life time and if yes when and how.How is this possible? Let's put it simply.

Following everyday metabolism, a sea of harmful chemicals is manufactured within our own body. Oxygen radicals, superoxide, free radicals, and electrophiles are a few examples of these toxic substances. These chemicals cause most of the cancers in humans. You will not believe it, but this is the fact: every second of your life, these toxic cancer-causing chemicals are produced within the cells of your body.
The outside pollutants like indirect smoking, pollutions in the work place etc stimulate the production process of these harmful chemicals in the body.

But the silver line in the cloud is that: human beings have their own built-in Cancer Detox mechanism that works every moment to protect the cells from the attack of cancer-causing chemicals. All the cells comprising human body are armed with this Cancer Detox System which is the sum total of enzymes, and other anti cancer nutrients. The body's Cancer Detox System combines the processes of oxidation, reduction, conjugation, and hydrolysis.

Let us see what are those nutrients that build up the cancer detox mechanism inside our body.


- There are vitamins such as niacin, riboflavin and vitamins A, C, E, that are the part of body's cancer detox system.
- Among the minerals, selenium, copper, zinc and manganese, are important members of the Cancer Detox mechanism. They act as co-enzyme factors too.
- The elements like carotene, lycopene and tocotrienols along with vitamins A, C, E, support the Cancer Detox System, through their anti-oxidant properties.
- Then there are the extremely helpful enzymes like superoxide dismutase, catalase, glutathione, epoxide hydrolase, and a few more.

Thus it is the body's Cancer Detox System, not the immune system that actually fights against cancer-causing chemicals and protects the cells.

The activities of certain nutrients needs special mention. As for example, the enzyme called glutathione has the most versatile function; with the help of a mineral called selenium it can literally detoxify almost all types of toxic chemical. Glutathione keeps on regenerated by the enzymes called NAD and FAD, which contain niacin and riboflavin.

Then, vitamin C acts as the backbone of the detox system and convert the hydroxyl radicals into harmless substances.

The cancer detox diet is based on the principle of supporting the enzymes that are the part of Cancer Detox System and to replenish the vitamins and minerals that are exhausted through the normal functions of the body and through lifestyle abuses.

As such a cancer detox diet for an average weight person comprises of l5 to 25 grams of proteins inclusive of meat, fish, fowl, cheese, egg, milk, beans, nuts, and lentils, 4 to 7 servings of grain products, 3 servings of vegetables, 3 servings of fruits and 3 servings of dairy products. To get more enhanced effect, you can take multivitamin and mineral supplements along with an anti-oxidant booster.

About the Author:
Jason Uvios writes about "All You Wanted to Know about Cancer Detox System" to visit: detoxification diets, detox diet plans and natural colon cleanse kits.
Submitted on 2006-10-22
Article Source: http://www.articlesarea.com/

Friday, May 11, 2007

Overall Risk of Cancer Cut By 37%...

What do you think about this?

* Overall cancer risk reduced by 37%
* Overall reduction in cancer mortality rates by 50%
* 30% reduction of colorectal cancer.

Sounds like the sort of claims someone standing on a soapbox trying to sell snake oil would make... but SURPRISE... these statements are coming from the mainstream... and the results are from simple natural multi-vitamins NOT pharmaceutical drugs!

But that is not all! It is now being said that if everyone over 65 took a multi every day that the US taxpayer would save $1.6 billion over 5 years in Medicare costs due to a reduced incidence of coronary artery disease and other diseases triggered by weak immune systems.

These figures do NOT factor in the financial savings brought about by the reduction of colorectal cancer, diabetes, prostate cancer and a whole host of other ailments that can likely be avoided through proper nutritional supplementation. If these were factored in then the savings would be MUCH greater.

OK... who is saying these things?

Earlier this month there was a conference in Washington DC entitled "Multivitamins and Public Health: Exploring the Evidence."

Presented at this conference were the results of a study just completed by the Lewin Group (a health care consulting firm). It was funded by Wyeth Consumer Healthcare which is part of Wyeth Pharmaceutical Group. This is what the researchers did:

They analyzed more than 125 clinical studies plus scientific literature to determine whether or not multivitamins gave any health benefits and if so, whether these benefits translated into savings in healthcare bills for people 65 years of age or older.

The director of the Lewin Group, Allen Dobson, PhD put the study results into perspective when he said, "finding any cost savings for preventative measures is unusual and finding cost savings of this magnitude ($1.6B) is very rare."

It is a refreshing turn around for someone associated with 'mainstream' medicine to actually concede that preventive measures actually do work. As you have probably noticed over the last couple of years there have been many misleading statements from spokespeople in the 'mainstream' medical field doing their best to discourage people from the use of natural preventive remedies.

More positive 'mainstream' comments...

The positive 'mainstream' comment doesn't end with this study! During the same week that the conference in Washington was held the results of another study was published in the American Journal of Epidermiology which is a 'mainstream' publication. This was a study carried out by Harvard during the last twenty years.

The results will no doubt annoy many opponents of natural preventive medicines but the facts speak for themselves. Here are the highlights:

* The study involved approximately 145,000 middle aged or elderly adults.
* In 1982 these adults were surveyed regarding their multi-vitamin use.
* Their use was reassessed 10 years later in 1992.
* They were then followed up again over the next five years.
* During that period 797 of the participants developed colorectal cancer.

What the researchers found is that after adjusting for 'health conscious' behaviors those participants that had regularly used multi vitamins since the start of the study (at least 10 years) had a 30% decreased risk of developing colon/rectal cancer.

They also found that those people who had only recently started taking supplements had no protection in the short term and that the benefits only manifested themselves over the long term. This is an important point to remember. Start early not later. Increasing your immunity from cancer is a steady building up process over the long term.

This study ties in with another well known study in which selenium (in the correct form) was found to reduce the incidence of all cancers by 37% and overall mortality from cancer by 50%.

These two studies only deal with vitamins and one mineral. They do not include the many reputable studies that have clearly established antioxidants on their own also play a major role in cancer prevention. Unfortunately most people never get to hear about most of these studies. If they did and they acted upon it a lot of pain and suffering could be avoided.

Now here is something to think about!

If the risk of cardiovascular disease and other diseases brought on by poor immunity can be reduced significantly by a simple multi vitamin, and further, that the risk of colon/rectal cancer can be also reduced by 30% through multi-vitamins, and in addition, if the risk of other cancers can be reduced by 37% by just one mineral,selenium.

What would happen to your overall risk profile if you did the following?

* You took all the key nutrients proven in clinical studies to be effective for cardiovascular health
* Digestive health
* Hormonal health
* Key organ health including the brain
* And included selected enzymes and immunity enhancing herbal extracts
* Used the latest scientific knowledge of synergy and metabolic pathways to magnify the effects of the individual substances and you put them all into a capsule or tablet?

I know the answer because we have done just this when we produced Total Balance which was developed firstly for the protection of my own family and secondly for the benefit of our customers world-wide. But... I can't tell you what I believe is the answer because I would get into trouble with the authorities as it is not proven as yet by clinical trials. Instead we can only relate to clinical studies that have been carried out on the individual nutrients that we use.

But... I can leave it to your imagination. To help your iagination whilst pondering on this I can tell you that multi-vitamin products are very weak (but they are inexpensive).

Other vitamin like products such as the quite common alpha lipoic acid are many more times potent that common vitamins. Same thing applies to some of the other amino acids, herbal extracts and enzymes.

I've related to you the results of the studies from a just a few vitamins and one mineral. I think that you would get the picture and understand what I am getting at if you studied the ingredient list of Total Balance.

The efficacy of the Total Balance formula for overall health is not just a few times greater than a typical multi, but hundreds of time more potent. This is not an idle comment but one based on science.

It is important to aim to enter your latter years free from the negative effects of pharmaceutical drugs. It is never too soon to start your prevention program!

About the author:
Warren Matthews is the Chairman of Xtend Life Natural Products, designer and manufacturer of Total Balance, a highly advanced supplement designed to provide complete immune support. Total Balance is the worlds first multi-nutrient supplement featuring an enteric coating. This unique coating allows your body to absorb virtually 100% of it's 74 nutrients.
Available at ... http://www.InstantEnergyBoost.com
Circulated by Article Emporium

Sunday, April 29, 2007

How to Fight Cancer and Win - A book by William L. Fischer

You might find this book interesting. Despite being published in 1992, it remains (as of this writing) among the top 20,000 sellers on a popular book-selling site.

William Fischer worked for pharmaceutical companies in Germany. He later became a writer on natural healing methods and has traveled far to learn the healing methods that exist in different cultures.

In his book, How to Fight Cancer and Win, William doesn't advise you to ignore your oncologist's treatment plan. He does, however, give you plenty of information on how to supplement your fight against cancer. Flaxseed oil is part of that advice.

Fighting cancer can be a tough battle to win. I have met a few people who believe they have beaten their cancer through a powerful system called Falun Dafa.

You can download a book filled with stories of people that have overcome all kinds of illness here: clearwisdom.net/emh/download/publications/health_index.html

If you know of someone who has cancer, perhaps you should let him or her know about both of these resources.

This article is for information purposes only. Nothing in this article is intended to diagnose, treat or prescribe for any health condition. If you have or suspect you have a health condition, contact your physician immediately. That is especially so for something like cancer.

About the author:
Dave Snape is a health, fitness and wellness enthusiast. He maintains a site on that theme: http://tobeinformed.com You may subscribe to his email list: subscribe@tobeinformed.com
Circulated by Article Emporium

Sunday, April 01, 2007

Whiskey: An Antidote For Cancer?

Some scientists believe that whiskey may be one of the keys to preventing the Big C

For a quite a number of years, liquor has been known not only to bring destructive intoxication and addiction upon its patrons, but also as deterrent to a healthy lifestyle. But as a potential weapon against cancer? Sounds controversial.

Rumors that single malt whiskey may be a tool to combat cancer have begun circulating recently. Whether it actually holds any water has yet to be proven. According to one of the theory’s proponents, a consultant to the whiskey industry, Dr. Jim Swan, the antioxidants present in whiskey, particularly ellagic acid, can reduce the risk of developing cancer, since this acid fights the unstable atoms that aid in rapid cell replication. He added that the more cells were produced, the more likely that rogue cancer cells will be born. “Whiskey can protect you from cancer and science proves it,” he said, speaking at the EuroMedLab 2005 conference in Glasgow. Dr Swan explained that ellagic acid, which is in greater concentration in whiskey than in red wine, breaks down the harmful free radicals present in our body.

However, Cancer Research UK remains unconvinced. The agency has raised concerns that what Dr Swan and his supporters are pushing might mislead consumers into drinking excessive amounts of whiskey just to avoid cancer. Cancer Research noted that liquor intake can eventually lead to certain kinds of cancer, such as those in the esophagus, throat, mouth, bowel and liver. Dr Swan’s idea that whiskey can prevent cancer also received criticism, owing mostly to an absence of population data supporting them. Contrariwise, according to the agency’s head of cancer information Lesley Walker, there exists evidence that high alcohol consumption does increase cancer risks. Ms Walker noted that while ellagic acid is a formidable antioxidant and may greatly aid in the fight against cancer, its presence in whiskey is not reason enough for people to begin drinking up, especially as ellagic acid can also be found in certain fruits.

The concept that a certain type of alcohol may help deter cancer is novel and, for frequent drinkers, even noble. What liquor patron would ignore this theory? But, still, Dr Swan’s ideas remain untested and there does not exist any known positive link between whiskey and cancer. If there would be something that suggest this is true sometime in the future, then it will be considered revolutionary. However, in the absence of adequate information at present, whiskey as a deterrent to cancer is a dubious thought. While we all hope and pray that an alternative treatment to cancer will surface soon, this is probably not the time to become this optimistic about whiskey’s alleged benefits.

About the author:
Charlene J. Nuble 2005. For up to date links and information about cancer, please go to: http://cancer.besthealthlink.net/or for updated links and information on all health related topics, go to: http://www.besthealthlink.net/
Circulated by Article Emporium

Sunday, February 04, 2007

More Cancer Treatment Failure

At the recent meeting of the American Association of Clinical Oncologists (ASCO), some 25,000 doctors met to discuss advances in cancer therapy. Over 10,000 scientific abstracts were presented.

Surely now, after countless billions have been spent on research since President Nixon's war on cancer was declared in 1971, there must be some dramatic cures. Something must have emerged from this meeting to reverse the growing cancer epidemic and justify the skyrocketing medical costs for cancer treatment.

Surely.

But not so.

The meeting highlighted how that cancer therapy is shifting from conventional cut-burn-poison to a more technologically sophisticated, molecularly targeted pharmaceutical approach. It's a cash cow heyday for drug companies and a wonderful fix for the addicted Rx generation.

A new fleet of drugs include tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as Gleevec and Iressa. Tarvesa is an ingenious pharmaceutical that targets the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in neoplasms. Another category is antiangiogenic drugs, such as Avastin, that inhibit the growth of blood vessels in tumors.

There have been some qualified 'successes' but not without downside serious side effect risks. For example, Avastin causes serious and even fatal bleeding into the lungs (hemoptisis). In one instance 31% of patients experienced this side effect.

But, you might say, so what if there is a good chance of cure? Surprisingly, during this meeting, little discussion could be heard about meaningful results. Everyone was giddy about the science (like kids with new toys), but the take away for the cancer victim was sobering and depressing.

There was a lot of talk about mechanisms of action and theory. There was also many numbers and charts about the effectiveness of the new drugs used alone or in various combinations with others, including conventional chemotherapy. The package presented to attendees was impressively wrapped in science, but what about the results.

In one instance it was found that the new therapies increased survival from 10.8 months to 12.9 months. Progression-free-survival (PFS) was changed in another comparison from 7.2 months to 7.6 months. In another comparison overall survival was changed from 10.2 to 12.5 months and PFS changed from 4.5 to 6.4 months. In yet another comparison the overall survival changed from 5.91 to 6.37 months-- about two weeks. One week was added to remission-free survival.

These pathetic results did not dampen the enthusiasm of pharmaceutical purveyors out in force at the meeting with product booth displays rivaling those at the super bowl half time. One company called their drug a "breakthrough… providing new hope for patients with advanced… cancer." Doctors, looking at only the statistical numbers, concluded that the results were "important" and "exciting" because they were "not due to chance". Of course the mainstream media jumps right on with wild claims about how the cure is now just around the corner.

Please. One week!

What's the cost benefit of this "exciting" new progress? In just two years, spending on cancer drugs will increase from 22 billion dollars to 32 billion. Just adding one of the new drugs, Avastin, to a treatment regimen will increase costs to the patient of $8,000 per month. While these miracle life extensions of a couple months or a week are going on, costs are escalating 500 fold. If you submit to this leading edge cancer treatment miracle, expect to pay about $250,000.

Recently I was talking to a pharmaceutical salesman who was excitedly detailing the benefits of the drugs he represented. He had impressive numbers of how his drug produced results better than competitor's drugs. I asked him how his results compared to no treatment at all. Stunned by the question, he had to admit he had no idea.

That's the first and most obvious question that should be asked before submitting to any potentially toxic or invasive therapy. Those were not the sorts of answers that came out of the ASCO meeting however.

You see, the medical and patient imperative is to 'do something,' meaning medical intervention. Never mind that the disease may be self-limiting or reversible by simple life style, dietary or natural treatment options. Why, it would be unethical to do a study where a comparison group was not treated!

Do you see the failed logic here? Can you see that the bias that cancer is a disease that 'strikes' us ignores real causes—lifestyle and dietary changes that put us out of sync with our genetically adapted to environmental roots?

If you are struck with any disease, before submitting, ask the question and demand the evidence: "What is the proof, my good doctor, that the treatment you are recommending is superior to no treatment at all or to safe and natural lifestyle and dietary changes"?

Modern allopathic medicine is just too risky, dangerous and expensive to just roll over and expose your soft underbelly to them.

One also has to make the decision that if fatality is inevitable, whether extending life in a hospital bed, being a pin cushion, living your last moments in misery from drugs and expending your family's entire savings is worth a couple of months or weeks of life… if even that is true.

The cure for cancer is to prevent it. Learn how to live life healthily and get at it. If it strikes, don't panic and fall victim to the 'something must be done' mania. 'Fighting' cancer is also not surrender to the medical establishment.

True health care means patients must be active partners, not mere passive recipients. The paradigm must be changed such that primacy is given to self-responsibility for prevention, and respecting and encouraging the innate capacity for self-regulation and healing. By engaging, patients gain a feeling of control and emotional strength. The psychological stress of the disease combined with essentially no coping strategies is a primary reason for recurrence.

Modern tumor-based cancer care, on the other hand, is about a love affair with biomedicine and its fragmentation and overspecialization. More attention is paid to lymphocyte counts than to the patient. The result is dehumanization, dependency and disempowerment for patients, and more machines, pharmaceutical reps and money for medicine.

This is not to say there have not been therapeutic successes. Surgically debulking tumors (although surgery can also incite benign to malignant), chemotherapy for some forms of leukemia and skin cancer, are such examples. But that is an embarrassing result in terms of the overall scale of the disease. For the 10 major killing cancers, survival has not improved over the past 50 years.

Your best hope, as always, begins with thinking. Learn think about what there is about your life that caused the disease. Change your life and investigate alternative approaches (See Wysong Resource Directory).

There is hope, but as with anything else in life it resides in what you do to yourself, not what others do to or for you.

Refs.
Cancer – The Missing Point http://www.wysong.net/health/hl_956.shtml
Is Common Sense or Research Needed to Cure Cancer
http://www.wysong.net/health/hl_937.shtml
Research on Pancreatice Cancer... http://www.wysong.net/health/hl_898.shtml
Wysong e-Health Letter Archives http://www.wysong.net/archivesehl.shtml
Wysong Resource Directory "Cancer"
http://www.wysong.net/page/WOTTPWS/PROD/EDUAIDS/MM028
http://lungdiseases.about.com/mbiopagel.htm
R. Moss, PhD., Townsend Letter for Doctors, Aug, 05, p. 44
"New Cancer Drugs Are Driving Up Cost of Care," LA Times, May 14, 2005
Ramirez, A., et al, "Stress and relapse of breast cancer," British Medical Journal, 1989: 298: 291-293
Spiegal D., et al, "Effect of psychosocial treatment on survival of patients with metastatic breast cancer," Lancet 989: 888-889

About the Author:
Dr. R. L. Wysong
For further reading, or for more information about, Dr Wysong and the Wysong Corporation please visit http://www.wysong.net or write to wysong@wysong.net. For resources on healthier foods for people including snacks, and breakfast cereals please visit http://www.cerealwysong.com.
Added: 16 Nov 2006
Article Source: http://articles.simplysearch4it.com/article/42976.html

Saturday, February 03, 2007

Lifestyle Choices May be a Predictor of Bladder Cancer

The thought itself is astounding: a way possibly exists to predict if a person could possibly contract bladder cancer in the future. In recent studies, debate is emerging in regards to one theory – that lifestyle choices and the impact of living life a certain way may be related to bladder cancer. A recent study by the Department of Preventive Medicine of Nagoya University School of Medicine indicates that there might, in fact, be a strong and credible link between lifestyle and bladder cancer.

The department studied 258 bladder cancer patients in order to determine if lifestyle choices played a role in allowing medical professionals to prognosticate the possibility that patients might be susceptible to bladder cancer. This was a follow-up study of patients who had suffered from bladder cancer in metropolitan Nagoya, Japan and were recruited for study. Their personal survival information was derived from a database that was maintained by the Nagoya Bladder Cancer Research Group.

After reviewing the tests and their results, researchers were able to pinpoint several key factors that impact the occurrence and reoccurrence of this type of cancer. Univariate analysis showed that there was a significant relationship between 5 year survivorship and the level of education a person possessed, their marital status, drinking habits, and the degree of green tea consumption in males. Additional factors were the age at which the cancer was diagnosed, the histological type and grade of the any tumors, the degree of metastasis, and the state of metastasis in both sexes.

The results were adjusted for age, stage, histology (histological type and grade), and distant metastasis by means of a proportional hazards model.The consumption of alcoholic beverages was also significantly associated with the prognoses of bladder cancer in males. The ratio of adjusted hazard was 0.46 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.26 – 0.79 among males that consumed alcoholic beverages.

Detailed analysis revealed that former drinkers and every level of current drinkers exhibited hazard ratios smaller than unity, although no correlation between dosage amounts was detectable. Other factors, such as smoking habits, uses of artificial sweeteners and hair dye, and consumption of coffee, black tea, matcha (powdered green tea), and cola were detected, leading one to believe that it is reasonable to conclude that drinking any type of beverage, not just alcohol, plays a significant role in the development or reoccurrence of bladder cancer.

The significance of this is vague in terms of prognosis, although that ratio seems to indicate that at least among those who participated in the study and were bladder cancer survivors, drinking alcohol is not a very good idea. Additionally, the study showed that the higher risk factor in regards to bladder cancer and males can be correlated directly to drinking in terms of reoccurrence propensity. If you are male and have had bladder cancer, along with dietary changes and other lifestyle choices, avoiding alcoholic beverages might increase the possibility of avoiding the sickness in the future.

This, however, is not, and should not be considered conclusive, but merely the very compelling result of one specific study. Also, the indication that other factors, such as smoking, did not seem to increase the risk of reoccurrence, should not be construed as rock solid justification for those behaviors.

For instance, the fact that smoking does not apparently increase the risk bladder cancer does not in any way obviate the fact that smoking has been risked to other diseases or maladies such as heart disease, lung cancer, strokes, or degradation of blood circulation. All of these conditions are just as life-threatening as bladder cancer.

One significant factor seems to be that dosage amounts of alcohol do not seem to correlate with the propensity of reoccurrence. In fact, this study seemed to show that among moderate to heavy drinkers, the reoccurrence rate was unaffected. If one were to take this at face value, one could conclude that any drinking at all increases the chances of bladder cancer coming back.

About the Author:
Jon M. Stout is the Chairman of the Golden Moon Tea Company. Golden Moon Tea carefully selects the finest rare and orthodox teas, which are processed slowly and handcrafted with extreme care. At their website, you can learn more about their current tea offerings, including their exceptional green tea, white tea, black tea, oolong tea (also known as wu-long and wu long tea) and chai. Visit http://www.goldenmoontea.com for all details concerning the Golden Moon Tea Company's fine line of teas.
This article was posted on November 28, 2006
Article Source: articlecity

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

What Is Cancer?

Cancer does not just happen. Normal healthy cells don't just spontaneously, metamorphose into abnormal cells unless deprived, debilitated, poisoned and damaged.

Cancer! The BIG C! The very word strikes fear into the patient who has been told that he or she has it. People say, "I got cancer," as if some cancer bacteria or virus had decided to settle into their body at random. They were picked. Bad luck!

Cancer is looked at as a death sentence. And because cancer is not understood, that is often the end result.

What is cancer? If disease is not something we "catch," how does cancer fit into this understanding? Can cancer actually be cured, or avoided altogether?

Cancer is not the beginning of a disease. Cancer is the result of a disease process that has been going on in the body for a long time. Cancer does not just happen. Normal healthy cells don't just spontaneously, metamorphose into abnormal cells unless deprived, debilitated, poisoned and damaged.

Nobody develops cancer, except that over many years their health slowly and progressively succumbed to 20-40-60-80 such causes interacting and working together.

Cancer is the result of the body storing toxins in its effort to survive longer. If the body did not store the toxins, encased in a tumor for example, they would be free to range throughout the body in the bloodstream, thereby causing the death of vital tissues and organs much sooner.

Cancer has a multitude of contributing factors, such as: heredity, beliefs, attitudes, habits, excesses, nutrition, environmental pollutants, and stresses, as well as various carcinogens like radiation, pesticides, toxic chemicals, dioxins, and asbestos - to name a few.

It is an enzyme deficiency and an autointoxication disease. It is a failure of the body's cells to obtain all the building materials essential for their construction and functioning.

It is also the result of excess toxicity, which affects and eventually destroys cells, or transforms them into abnormal, wild, growing cells.

Cancer's Common Denominators

After he lost his brother to cancer, Ron Gdanski began to research the subject, and eventually wrote a book entitled CANCER Cause, Cure, and Cover-up. His research concluded that fermentation of sugars at the cellular level is present in all cancers: Cancer is caused by the cellular environment.

Genetic defects do not create the capacity for human cells to metabolize nutrients without oxygen. Limiting the oxygen supply or disrupting the citric acid cycle leads to fermentation . As soon as oxygen reaches the cells, the citric acid cycle can be reestablished, fermentation stops, and microbial life destroyed.

Cancer, above all else, is a cellular oxygen deficiency disease. The research of Dr. Otto Warburg, a Nobel Prize-winning biochemist in the 1930s, concluded that the prime cause of cancer is impaired cell respiration.

Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes.

Almost anything can cause cancer. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. The prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen (oxidation of sugar) in normal body cells by fermentation of sugar.

All normal body cells meet their energy needs by respiration of oxygen, whereas cancer cells meet their energy needs in great part by fermentation.

In every case, during the cancer development, the oxygen respiration always falls, fermentation appears, and the highly differentiated cells are transformed into fermenting anaerobes, which have lost all their body functions and retain only the now useless property of growth and replication.

Thus, when respiration disappears, life does not disappear, but the meaning of life disappears, and what remains are growing machines that destroy the body in which they grow. Lack of cellular oxygen is directly related to acidity of body systems.

Terminal cancer patients are approximately 500 to 1000 times more acidic than normal healthy people. Cancer will not occur in a pH-balanced body.

About the Author:
Ron Garner, BEd, MSc, is the author of "Conscious Health." Now you can unravel the mystery of how the body operates, restore vitality, and learn how health problems can be reversed the Natural way. Just visit: http://www.conscioushealth.ca
Submitted on 2006-12-01
Article Source: http://www.articlesarea.com/

Sunday, January 28, 2007

Consuming More Calories After Intestine Cancer Leads To A Longer Life

French study by some of its most noted scientists has surprised the professional medical world. Their studies have dismissed the well accepted theory that a diet plentiful in calories plays a factor in promoting the generation of cancer in the intestines.

Through their stringent observations over a five year period of cancer patients with intestinal cancer they found that a calorie rich diet also helps to actually increase the chances of outliving an intestinal cancer that has been removed through an operation.

French researchers in a study with 148 cancer patients proved this connection. Those patients who lived a calorie conscious lifestyle before their cancer diagnosis had a clearly higher mortality rate risk than their suffering counterparts after the operational removal of the tumor.

A negative for the saying a balanced nutrition.

The medical profession from the Marie Christine Boutron Ruault of the Paris Institute studied and evaluated the data of 97 men and 51 women who had their intestinal cancer removed through operations. The researchers particularly studied the eating habits of the patients before they were diagnosed with cancer. This was apart from the age, sex and situation of the tumor within the intestine and was found to be crucial for the chances for survival of the patients.

According to the facts of the researchers 50 of the patients nourished themselves on a calorie rich diet, 48 patients lived an approximate balanced diet and 50 patients were extremely calorie conscious.

Within five years the mortality rate after the intestinal cancer operation within those who had a balanced diet was 46 per cent and/or 22 patients which proved to be the highest. With the patients who led a calorie conscious lifestyle nutrition the ratio was 36 per cent, which corresponded to 18 deaths. Those who clearly ate too sumptuously lived the longest, only six patients or 12 per cent from this group died as the consequences of the intestinal cancer.

Special food which could have affected the mortality rate or alcohol and tobacco consumption was not taken into account and did not seem to play any substantial influence.

The results of this study were surprising to many researchers due to a calorie rich diet long being regarded as jointly responsible for the emergence of intestine cancer but it now quite possibly could be the exact opposite.

Intestinal cancer ranks among the most frequent cancer forms in the western industrialized countries. Usually it is discovered too late which makes the chances of survival very slim. Over half of the patients diagnosed with intestinal cancer die within five years after the initial diagnosis.

Further studies are required in this field to combat this deadly form of cancer, but due to the length of the term of each research study it may be a few more years yet before the human race can finally hope to rid itself of this killer known as intestinal cancer disease.

http://www.cancer-treatment-help.com

About the Author:
John Stone writes exclusively for cancer-treatment-help.com
http://www.cancer-treatment-help.com
Added: 12 Oct 2006
Article Source: http://articles.simplysearch4it.com/article/38983.html

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Cancer and Chlorine

Chlorination of water began in the 1890's and was widely accepted in the U.S. by 1920. Over 75% of homes in America have chlorinated water. The dangers of chlorination far outweigh the supposed benefits. Chlorine even in low levels is an oxidant that causes cellular damage .Most tap water has been found to exceed the recommended 1.6 ppm of chlorine in it.

The American Journal of Health states that chlorine is linked to an increase in certain types of cancer, asthmas and skin irritations. In a 1987 study by the National Cancer Institute, the FDA and EPA found an increased risk of bladder cancer with long term consumption of chlorinated water. The EPA says that chlorine follows cigarette smoke in leading causes of cancer. An experiment done on chickens by adding chlorine to their water caused 95% of them to develop atherosclerosis.

Two-thirds of the harmful chlorine exposure actually comes from showering. A 15 minute hot steamy shower is equivalent to drinking 8 glasses of water because of the vapors inhaled. The EPA states that "Due to chlorine and showering virtually every home in America has a detectable level of chloroform in the air." This is because chlorine vaporizes in steam and combines with other organic compounds into chloroform which is a strong respiratory irritant and causes fatigue. A warm shower opens pores and allows a high rate of absorption. During a shower, 98% of the water goes down the drain, while 70-90% of the chemicals vaporize before the water hits the ground and the vapors remain in the air.

Due to chlorine and the combination of many chemicals used in household cleaning,the average indoor air is 5 times more toxic than outdoor air regardless of whether the home is in the city or a rural area. Cancer has been shown to grow twice as fast indoors than outdoors. Bathing in chlorinated water also strips the natural protective oils in the skin and hair causing scaling and itching and is a major irritant for skin conditions like eczema and psoriasis. It kills the beneficial bacteria on the surface of the skin that offer a natural defense against skin disorders.

About the author:
Dawn Kornels is the technical writer for http://www.ultimatewaterfilter.com which offers water solutions for the whole house.
Circulated by Article Emporium

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Cancer Research UK and TK Maxx collaboration, 'GiveGet'

GiveGet is an annual campaign run by TK Maxx and Cancer Research UK and is one of the biggest charity collection campaigns in the UK. You should be familiar with the concept: collect any unwanted – or unused – clothes, books, music, and DVDs – anything in fact, which you want to donate: even household goods. Donated articles will be sent to Cancer Research UK shops to be sold and proceeds from sales will be used to help those suffering with cancer.

It's a serious problem in the UK, with recent statistics showing that, for example, of the total population in England, one in three will develop cancer during the course of their lives. Now more than ever, we need campaigns like GiveGet to help alleviate the suffering cancer causes.

Which isn't to say that everything about the campaign needs to be serious to get its message across – this year's GiveGet campaign will have as its figurehead Rachel Hunter. Miss Hunter will no doubt inject a bit of glamour into proceedings and help the GiveGet campaign achieve on at least one of its targets: that of being this Spring's most important fashion collection.

TK Maxx and Cancer Research UK will be handing out GiveGet donation bags in their thousands this March, with the official opening date for the campaign set for Saturday the 18th, the GiveGet campaign will run up until Sunday the 2nd of April. You can take your GiveGet donation bag to any TK Maxx (www.tkmaxx.com ) or Cancer Research UK store in the UK to be collected and used to raise funds – each full GiveGet bag could be worth up to £30 for Cancer Research UK.

The more you give the better it is, as Cancer Research UK rely heavily upon public for donations and a campaign on the scale of the GiveGet campaign can make a huge impact on the fundraising efforts of the organisation.

It's an annual affair, the GiveGet collaboration between Cancer Research UK and TK Maxx, and they are aiming to beat all previous donation targets this year, with the £2 million mark in their sights this year. It's an achievable target, with the value of donations last year reaching £1.28 million – more than double the original target.

So get ready for GiveGet, and this 18th of March you can do a spot of Spring cleaning, de-cluttering, and just straightforward donating by giving those GiveGet bags filled and into TK Maxx stores or Cancer Research UK stores nationwide. You shouldn't forget about GiveGet either, as the cries of 'sort it out', 'bag it up', and 'drop it off' get louder as the 18th of March approaches.

Disclaimer
All information contained in this article is for general information purpose only and should not be construed as advice under the financial Services act 1986. You are strongly advised to take appropriate professional and legal advice before entering into any binding contracts.


About the Author:
Michael Hanna is a keen writer, and internet marketer living in Scotland: Contact details: E-mail: samqam@googlemail.com Phone: 0131 561 2251
Michael's Website: Belfast Taxis
Added: 04 Mar 2006
Article Source: http://articles.simplysearch4it.com/article/22724.html

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Breast Cancer Awareness Bracelet: Support A Noble Cause!

Breast cancer is a major health threat to women around the world. The number of women affected by breast cancer is shooting up every year. The sad thing is early diagnosis and treatment can lead to an almost 100 per cent cure rate among those affected by this illness.

Often the problem is not the unavailability of treatment for breast cancer, but late diagnosis. Awareness of the symptoms of breast cancer is the only way to assure that every person with the disease will get an early diagnosis. Many charities and cancer foundations have launched breast cancer awareness programs with this fact in mind.

The mass appeal of the LiveStrong yellow cancer bracelets from the Lance Armstrong foundation led breast cancer foundations to launch the breast cancer awareness bracelets. Pink was chosen as the color for these bracelets as an expression of the feminine character. Currently millions of dollars are being generated from the sale of pink ribbons and breast cancer awareness bracelets, which is going towards supporting cancer research and for spreading awareness of the disease.

What makes breast cancer insidious is that there are no clear cut symptoms or criteria that help predict this illness. It doesn’t matter if you have a family history or not, whether you are young or old, you can still get breast cancer. Though age increases the risk of breast cancer, more than 20 per cent of the affected women are those under 50 years.

Even though breast cancer awareness bracelets first came out in pink color, they now come in a variety of colors and materials. Usually the rubber and the silicone awareness bracelets sell for around $1. These bracelets can also be made of pearl, cats eye or any other suitable material and sell for around $30. These metal and pearl bracelets can be used as jewelry, and at the same time they support a cause.

Custom-made breast cancer awareness bracelets on which you can stamp any message that you want are also available. These messages can be of hope, or endurance, or success. Often, the friends and family of the cancer patients wear these bracelets to show their support to the struggling person.

Over the years the sale of breast cancer awareness bracelets has helped many. There are many discussion and information groups online on cancer that are supported by money from the sale of these bracelets. There are ‘fund-free mammogram’ facilities available for those who cannot afford the diagnostic procedure, funded by the sale of these breast cancer awareness bracelets.

Be it a $1 or a $ 30 breast cancer awareness bracelet, it can go a long way in spreading breast cancer awareness.


About the Author:
Lisa Hyde-Barrett, a registered nurse and wellness advocate, understands the relationship between awareness and prevention and make breast cancer awareness a top goal!
Please visit her site: www.buy-awareness-bracelets-online.com
Article Source: http://www.articles2k.com

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Seeking a better way to balance cancer risk and pain

I see my oncologist tomorrow. You know the drill, the usual check in. I have to talk to him about a better way. I am having trouble distinguishing between aging and Arimidex. My joints hurt, and now that I have been on Arimidex for six months, more is accumulating in my system. At least that’s what I think because the pain and stiffness is very apparent every day. It is difficult to use my hands in the morning and my feet make it unbearable to “jump out of bed” like I used to do.

I am concerned that something is going on that will be more of an issue later on. After two or three years on this stuff, I truly think about the long-term effects. Will I be crippled from an arthritis condition 10 or 20 years down the road? Then I start to wonder, would anyone really have an answer to that for such a new drug?

The reality is that it is a balance between cancer risk and pain. I need to really determine if one outweighs the other. After all, it has to be about quality of life. The only drawback about that argument is that many of us are too young to be risking disease for quality of life. These are things I need to talk to my oncologist about.

Have you thought this through for your own treatment? Is there a better way? I could use your input.

About the Author:
Kathy-Ellen Kups
Kathy's blog can be found at blog.healthtalk.com/breastcancer/ For more information, articles and programs about Breast Cancer and other cancers please visit healthtalk.com/cancer/
Article Source: http://www.articles411.com

Friday, December 22, 2006

Protect Your Baby - Talc Is Extremely Dangerous

Before using body powder on you or your baby, consider that not all body powder products are baby-safe. Body powders as well as baby powders, having talc as main ingredient may do more harm to you and your baby than good.

1. Talc Is Like Abestos!

Talc is a rock that is mined and processed by crushing and grinding, drying the grinded materials, and then milling them. Through processing, a number of trace minerals are eliminated, but some minute fibers that are comparable to ABESTOS are not separated. Talc, as it is cheap and widely available, is the main ingredient of most baby powders, perfumed body powders and medicated body powders. You put yourself and your baby at risk when you inhale these products. Body powder is used after bath to keep skin smelling good or to relieve irritated skin. Plenty of individuals are still unaware of the inextricable connection between talc and asbestos. In fact, these two chemicals are very much alike.

2. Talc Causes Cancer!

Particles of talc can cause lung and ovarian tumors. Studies have clearly shown that constant and repeated use of powder in the female’s genital area lead to cancer! Talc is able to move inside the reproductive system becomes lodged along the ovary lining. Studies show that talc particles are found in the ovarian tumor and researchers say that women with ovarian tumors have the habit of using talcum powder on their genital area.

3. Powder Inhalation Causes Deaths!

Since the early 1980’s, records prove that several infants die each year due to accidental baby powder inhalation. Talc is a household hazard. It is used on babies to prevent diaper rash and to absorb moisture in the skin, keeping babies fresh. Evidently, dusting with baby powder endangers your infant’s lungs as there is great possibility of inhaling the product. It is dangerous to expose your baby to this carcinogen. Swelling and irritation of the lungs may occur when the powder is inhaled, and therefore may lead to breathing difficulties. Also, if talc gets in contact with baby’s rash or broken skin, inflammatory reaction may take place and that could be very uncomfortable.

4. Use A Substitute!

- Instead of powder, use petroleum jelly on babies bottoms every diaper change. It is very effective in preventing diaper rash, because it provides the skin with a film, keeping wetness off the skin.
- Use medicated ointments to treat rashes on babies and on your skin.
- Ask your pediatrician about other options and products that you can safely use as a baby powder substitute.
- Cornstarch mixed with baking soda is a great and safer alternative, to keep you and your baby fresh. It is much coarser than body or baby powder, and you can also add fragrance in it, if you want to smell good after applying it.

5. Products Worth Checking Into

- Neways body and baby powder
- Natural body powder
- Dermaglow Natural body and baby powder
- Lady Emily’s Talc-free body powder
- Johnson’s cornstarch baby powder
- Burt’s bee dusting body powder
- PuriSorb. Very mild, good for all types of skin and formulated with chitosan, aloe vera, tapioca starch, and vitamin E.

6. Guidelines

- Check and read the label. The product MUST be talc-free.
- Check the date on the container and make sure that the product is fresh. Powder that is stored too long can breed bacteria and contaminate your or your baby’s skin.
- Don’t apply baby powder directly from the container. Pour it first on your palm and gently pat it unto baby’s bottom. Keep powder away from baby’s face.
- Likewise, be gentle in applying body powder to yourself. Never dust it on your face and neck directly, to avoid inhaling it, as this can lead to throat irritation.
- Don’t use body powder on both your and your baby girl’s genital area, as well as to areas surrounding it.
- Avoid putting powder on baby’s skin creases, as the powder cakes can build up and encourage bacteria growth and can cause fungal infection.
- If you have sensitive skin, an unscented body powder will be best for you.
- During diaper change, never let your baby play with the powder; it can accidentally spill on his face, causing him to choke, or that he will inhale too much powder and lead to serious lung complication.

About the Author:
John Morris
For more great baby powder related articles and resources check out http://bodypowder.bathnbodyhq.com
Article Source: http://www.articles2k.com

Monday, December 04, 2006

Finding Valuable Cancer Information

Cancer, as everything else, has been largely discussed on the Internet. There are many sites dedicated to cancer diseases, to people suffering from cancers, to their friends and families. The Internet is a good source of valuable cancer information, but there is more to it than that. It is a means to integrate the suffering into a network of virtual friends and supporters, which doesn't let them feel isolated and alone.

The Internet helps friends and families of deceased people to realize that they are not alone with their pain, and that many people are going through the same terrible plot. One of the best traits of cancer information sites is that they unite people and help them overcome their grief.

There are a variety of forums and online discussions meant to bring people together. Cancer is a topic of great interest for many people. Anyone can read and respond to, there are options for instant messages with fellow cancer patients, cancer survivors, and cancer supporters.

One useful site for friends and family members of ill patients is Cancer and Careers.com's "What You Can Do as a Friend". It props you up with information about what your behavior in front of the ill friend should be. You shouldn't talk about certain things, neither be too optimistic, nor be too negative in your expectations.

Your main duty as a friend should be supportive and encouraging. This cancer information is very helpful at the beginning. Another essential book for friends may be Facing Cancer Together: How to Help Your Friend or Loved One by Pamela N. Brown. It can help a lot in guiding your attitude towards your ill friend.

Valuable cancer information can be found at cancernews.com. There is a large list of directories meant to give orientation to people for any local cancer support groups. Most of them can also be found at the Cancer Information Network. There are many organizations supporting cancer hotlines-- one of them is The National Cancer Institute, their site being reached at cancer.gov, others are Y-ME National Breast Cancer Organization (Their site is: y-me.org/hotline), the RA Bloch Cancer Foundation Cancer Hotline (1-800-433-0464), and the Lung Cancer Alliance Toll-free Hotline (1-800-298-2436).

There are also a lot of specific information sites about different types of cancers: see Mesothelioma-net ( a site, designed to offer cancer information on the specific types of mesothelioma, its treatment, and coping strategies and so on). Another site which presents you a list of all cancers is The Cancer Information Network (at cancerlinksusa.com); and, of course, The American Cancer Society (cancer.org). The latter one gives you information on everything from prevention and early detection strategies, as well as treatment and cancer information by type. There are great statistics and investigations included, which offer you information from the past 100 years.

About the Author:
Morgan Hamilton offers expert advice and great tips regarding all aspects concerning health and research. Learn more at Cancer Information
Submitted: 2006-09-07
Article Source: GO Articles

Monday, November 20, 2006

The Truth About Heart Disease And Cancer

Heart disease and cancer are closely intertwined due to the fact that cancer treatments put a risk for heart disease...

Heart disease and cancer are closely intertwined due to the fact that cancer treatments put a risk for heart disease. Having cancer can predispose one to heart disease, the number one known killer. Not only does chemotherapy drugs affect the heart, but further research shows that cancer survivors are more likely to face heart and other cardiovascular diseases as these cancer therapy, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, tend to be toxic to heart muscles and organs as well as killing not only cancer cells but also other cells in the body.

Although at present the number seen on these cases are small, it presents a large potential future risk. Women who have been treated for breast cancer may even be at a higher risk since the treatment takes place close to the heart. However, some solutions may be coming, as a clinical trial for the FDA approved new ExAblate system for treating non-cancerous uterine fibroids is being studied as a treatment for breast and other cancers. This system combines magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound that potentially makes it a more heart-friendly treatment for cancers and other tumors.

Another fact that links heart disease and cancer is that they are perhaps two of the most feared problems in modern society. Emory University in Atlanta, GA scientists shows new research which sheds light on a new class of enzymes that may be both active in both of the illnesses. This enzyme converts oxygen to a destructive form called reactive oxygen and shows to play a role in abnormal cell growth in both heart disease and cancer. This destructive form reactive oxygen has been connected with damage to cells as well as damage to DNA.

The research studied a member of the new class of enzymes called Mox1 and found that it serves as a growth promoter to cells that produce the reactive oxygen. This oxygen in turn causes a quicker than normal division of cells, which is seen in some forms of heart disease and most common in cancer.

This abnormal cell growth results to a devastating effect in both diseases. In cancer it results to the formation of tumors, while in heart disease it results to the formation of plaques on vessel walls.

The experiment on Mox1 involved the cloning of the Mox1 gene which was inserted to mice cells. It showed that once inserted, the cells started to divide more quickly taking on the characteristic of abnormal cells. Tumors resulted when these cells were inserted into mice.

Before this research, reactive oxygen was not known as a causative agent for cancer and through the research it demonstrated that reactive oxygen can be a cause of cancer and the Mox1 enzyme can produce the reactive oxygen. However, scientists also found out that by removing reactive oxygen from the cells will reverse the process. They are hopeful that this new findings will lead to a new way of treating the two.

About the Author:
Joann
Read More On The Truth About Heart Disease And Cancer
Submitted on 2006-08-29
Article Source: http://www.articlesalley.com/

Monday, November 13, 2006

The Cause Of Cancer

Cancer is the disease of the cells. It is an abnormal growth of cells, which tend to reproduce in an uncontrolled way and, in some cases, spread or metastasize. A cancerous growth or tumor is also known as a malignant growth or tumor. A growth or tumor, which is non-malignant is called benign. Such tumors are not cancer.

Cancer is not a single disease. It is a group of more than hundred different and distinctive diseases. It is not contagious. Cancer can involve any tissue of the body and have many different forms in each body area. Most cancers are named for the type of cell or organ in which they start. If a cancer spreads (metastasizes), the new tumor bears the same name as the original(primary) tumor.

Cancer is the Latin word for crab. The ancients used the word to mean a malignancy, doubtless because of the crab-like tenacity a malignant tumor sometimes seems to show in grasping the tissues it invades. Cancer may also be called malignancy, a malignant tumor, or a neoplasm (literally, a new growth).

In medicine, common term for neoplasms, or tumors, that are malignant is known as Cancer. Like benign tumors, malignant tumors do not respond to body mechanisms that limit cell growth. Unlike benign tumors, malignant tumors consist of undifferentiated, or unspecialized, cells that show an atypical cell structure and do not function like the normal cells from the organ from which they derive. Cancer cells, unlike normal cells, lack contact inhibition; cancer cells growing in laboratory tissue culture do not stop growing when they touch each other on a glass or other solid surface but grow in masses several layers deep.

Cancer results from mutations of certain genes that allow the cells to begin their uncontrolled growth. These mutations are either inherited or acquired. Acquired mutations are caused by repeated insults from triggers (e.g., cigarette smoke or ultraviolet rays) referred to as carcinogens. There is usually a latency period of years or decades between exposure to a carcinogen and the appearance of cancer. This, combined with the individual nature of susceptibility to cancer, makes it very difficult to establish a cause for many cancers.

The most significant avoidable carcinogens are the chemical components of tobacco smoke. Dietary components, like excessive consumption of alcohol or of foods high in fat and low in fiber rather than fruits and vegetables that contain antioxidants and necessary micronutrients, have also been linked with various cancers. Some cancers may be triggered by hormone imbalances. For example, some daughters of mothers who had been given DES (diethylstilbestrol) during pregnancy to prevent miscarriage developed vaginal adenocarcinomas as young women. Aflatoxins are natural mold byproducts that can cause cancer of the liver.

Certain carcinogens present occupational hazards. For example, in the asbestos industry, workers have a high probability of developing lung and colon cancer or a particularly virulent cancer of the mesothelium (the lining of the chest and abdomen). Benzene and vinyl chloride are other known industrial carcinogens.

Risk to humans from carcinogens depends upon the dose and a person's biologic susceptibility. Factors influencing a person's biological susceptibility to cancer include age, sex, immune status, nutritional status, genetics, and ethnicity.

About the author:
Canro Dicausa is the owner of RUS Cancer which is a premier resource for cancer information. for more information, go to http://www.ruscancer.com
Circulated by Article Emporium

Friday, November 10, 2006

Fight Cancer Naturally

A sobering fact, cancer is the second leading cause of death in this country. It strikes men, women, and children. Cancer is caused by a variety of factors, including exposure to environmental toxins, smoking, an unhealthy lifestyle, and genetic predisposition.

However, the most staggering statistic is that improper diet accounts for almost 70% of cancers and is one of the main causes of death among human beings. Diet and cancer experts are beginning to identify more and more nutrients that may help reduce cancer risks and contribute to a longer, healthier lifestyle.

Healthy weight and good nutrition are important elements in the fight against cancer. Making some minor changes in your diet and lifestyle can greatly reduce the probability of getting cancer.

Suggested Dietary Guidelines to Lower Cancer Risk:

+Eat a primarily plant-based diet rich in a variety of vegetables and fruits, beans and peas, and minimally processed starchy foods.

+Eat five or more portions a day of a variety of vegetables and fruits, all year round.

+Eat at least three portions a day of a variety of cereals, whole grains, beans and peas, and root vegetables. Minimally processed foods are preferable.

+Limit consumption of refined sugar.

+Alcohol consumption is not recommended. If consumed, limit alcoholic drinks to less than two drinks a day for men and one for women.

+If eaten at all, limit intake of red meat to less than 3 ounces daily. It is preferable to choose fish and poultry in place of red meat.

+Limit consumption of fatty foods, particularly those of animal origin. Choose modest amounts of appropriate vegetable oils.

+Limit consumption of salted foods and use of cooking and table salt. Use herbs and spices to season foods.

+Do not smoke or use tobacco in any form.

Exercise and Fitness:

+Maintain a healthy weight. If you are overweight, lose weight. Obesity is now a leading cause of some cancers.

+Be physically active. If occupational activity is low or moderate, take a brisk walk or similar aerobic exercise daily. Swimming, elliptical training, and jogging are also excellent ways to move your body. Exercise vigorously for a total of at least two hours a week.

The consumption of a predominantly plant-based diet, when matched with regular physical exercise and the avoidance of tobacco, can decrease cancer risk by as much as 70%. A truly healthy body is far less vulnerable to cancer and more able to fight off its ravages. The guidelines listed above can help you in your fight against cancer.

About the Author:
Chris Chenoweth, author of the DO-IT-YOURSELF HOME HEALTH & MONEY GUIDE, writes articles pertaining to nutrition, health issues, and household budgeting tips: http://mysiteinc.com/djtrevayne/guide.html
A wonderful resource on alternative cancer treatments, CANCER TREATMENTS THAT WORK, reveals over 350 gentle & non-toxic cancer treatments that no one else will tell you about and that could save your life: http://www.ezniche.com/data/article.php?l=41
Added: 16 Aug 2006
Article Source: http://articles.simplysearch4it.com/article/34273.html