Breast Cancer Prevention and Natural solutions
Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. - "Conventional cancer therapy is so
toxic and dehumanizing that I fear it far more than I fear death
from cancer. We know that conventional therapy doesn't work--if
it did, you would not fear cancer any more than you fear pneumonia.
It is the utter lack of certainty as to the outcome of conventional treatment that virtually screams
for more freedom of choice in the area of cancer therapy. Yet most
alternative therapiess regardless of potential or proven benefit,
are outlawed, which forces patients to submit to the failures that
we know don't work, because there's no other choice."
Linda Page, N.D. Ph.D - "Of the women in menopause today,
about half start synthetic hormone replacement, but only half of
those stick with it because of the side effects or fear of
cancer risk. The threat of breast and uterine cancer is dramatically
increased with HRT"
An Australian team from the University of Queensland see little,
if any, benefit in screening women under 50 years of age, but they
do point out some of the serious negative effects - later ill effects
from the radiation they are exposed to during the mammogram, the
possibility that an existing tumor may spread due to the pressure
exerted on the breast during screening, and the anxiety caused by
frequent false- positive results. The Canadian researchers point
out that a false-positive result may not only produce great stress,
but may also lead to unnecessary biopsies and surgery. They also
point out that mammography misses 10-15 per cent of early breast
cancers thus providing a false sense of security.
How Mammography Increases Your Cancer Risk
X-rays and other classes of ionizing radiation have been, for decades, a proven
cause of virtually all types of biological mutations. When such
mutations are not cell-lethal, they endure and accumulate with each
additional exposure to x-rays or other ionizing radiation. X-rays are also an established cause
of genomic instability, often a characteristic of the most aggressive
cancers. Additionally, radiation risks are about four times greater
for the 1 to 2 percent of women who are silent carriers of the A-T
(ataxia-telangiectasia) gene, which by some estimates accounts for
up to 20 percent of all breast cancers diagnosed annually.
When everything is taken into account, reducing exposure to medical
radiation such as unnecessary mammograms would actually likely reduce
mortality rates. The practice of screening mammography itself poses
significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer, especially for
premenopausal women. Making matters even worse, false positive diagnoses
are very common – as high as 89 percent – leading many women to
be unnecessarily and harmfully treated by mastectomy, more radiation,
or chemotherapy. There are instances where mammography may be warranted.
But the fact remains that there are other technologies that are
proven to be more effective, less expensive, and completely harmless,
that can save far more lives.
Now, imagine being able to look inside yourself and be able to
get as much as 10 years warning that something is about to develop,
giving you ample time to PREVENT the cancer from forming in the
first place by taking the appropriate lifestyle changes that can
radically change your health. That technology already exists, and
has been available since the 1960s
Dr. Len Saputo explores the latest findings on the effectiveness
and shortcomings of various detection methods used by the mainstream
medical community, including mammography, clinical breast exams,
ultrasound, and to a lesser extent, magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs)
and PET scans.
Danish researcher Dr. Peter Gotzsche first made this claim in
a study published in "The Lancet" in October 2006. Gotzsche had
re-analyzed the studies originally done on the benefits of mammograms
and found them unconvincing. Since then, other doctors have begun
to assert that in addition to failing to offer protection, mammograms
— which involve exposing patients to radiation —may actually increase
women's risk of cancer. "The latest evidence shifts the balance
towards harm and away from benefits," said Dr. Michael Baum of University
College in London. Gifford-Jones also points to other risks, from
the physical to the psychological. According to some authorities,
the squeezing of women's breasts during mammograms may rupture blood
vessels, causing cancer to spread to other parts of the body and
actually increasing a patient's risk of death. He also pointed to
the trauma suffered by women who receive false positives from their
mammograms, and to the dangerous sense of security felt by those who receive false negatives.
Some years ago a British surgeon blasted American doctors as
"immoral" for screening women under 50 for breast cancer. On a visit
to the Long Island Jewish Hospital Medical Center Dr. Baum said
the screening was "opportunistic" and did more harm than good. "Over
99 percent of premenopausal women will have no benefit from screening.
Even for women over 50, there has been only a one percent biopsy
rate as a result of screening in the United Kingdom. The density
of the breast in younger women make mammography a highly unreliable
procedure." (Medical Tribune, 3/26/92)
A yet unpublished Canadian study even suggests, the rumor goes, that
younger women are more likely to die if they expose themselves to
mammograms instead of just relying on physical breast exams. The
investigators say this earlier finding has not proven to be true
but Dr. Cornelia Barnes of the University of Toronto said: "We will
not say that mammography kills. The conclusion that will be reached
is that younger women do not benefit [by having a reduced mortality]."
Dr. Barnes said the danger of early mammograms is not from radiation
but from false-positive results that can lead to unnecessary biopsies,
resulting in scar tissue that can make subsequent mammograms more difficult to read.
"Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of
breast cancer for premenopausal women. The routine practice of taking
four films of each breast annually results in approximately 1 rad
(radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about 1,000 times greater than
that from a chest x-ray. The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive
to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk
by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk
for each breast over a decade's screening. These risks are even
greater for younger women subject to "baseline screening."
The Breast Stays Put: No Chemo-No Radiation-No Lumpectomy-No Thank You
After running her own successful business in Wellness Alternatives,
Pamela Hoeppner faced the unthinkable. She was diagnosed with a
malignant, fast-growing breast cancer. Pam declined all conventional
treatment and chose an alternative approach with an impressive track
record instead, which resulted in her full recovery. Convinced that
mutilation and toxic treatments are not always necessary she wanted
others to know there ARE options that don't involve devastating
a person's body and their quality of life. In her inspiring book,
The Breast Stays Put, with a delivery all her own, she shares her
courageous story of overcoming a deadly diagnosis, and provides
prevention and treatment information through her informative website
A wonderfully written first-hand account of how one woman overcame
her life-threatening diagnosis of cancer using only alternative
medicine. A must read for anyone diagnosed with breast cancer, but
I highly recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about
treating cancer with alternative therapies. David Brownstein, MD,
Author of Drugs That Don't Work and Natural Therapies That Do All
too often people are frightened into a medical or surgical course
of action, when what they really need is encouragement to take control
of their own health and path to wellness. Pam's story is a testimony
to the benefits of doing just that.
'The Breast Stays Put' is a beacon of hope that everyone facing
serious illness should read. Bridget Houston, ND NHE Hoeppner has
achieved something few writers can. She has turned a serious, scary
subject into a fun read while presenting important life-saving information
at the same time. I particularly enjoyed her unique brand of humor
and her gutsy words of wisdom that can't help but infuse the reader
with courage." Tanya Harter Pierce, MA, MFCC, Author of
Outsmart Your Cancer: Alternative Non-Toxic Treatments That Work
After running her own successful business in Wellness Alternatives,
Pamela Hoeppner faced the unthinkable. She was diagnosed with a
malignant, fast-growing breast cancer. Pam declined all conventional
treatment and chose an alternative approach with an impressive track
record instead, which resulted in her full recovery. Convinced that
mutilation and toxic treatments are not always necessary she wanted
others to know there ARE options that don't involve devastating a person's body and their quality
of life. In her inspiring book, The Breast Stays Put, with a delivery
all her own, she shares her courageous story of overcoming a deadly
diagnosis, and provides prevention and treatment information
David Brownstein, MD -
"The Breast Stays Put is a wonderfully written first-hand account
of how one woman overcame her life-threatening diagnosis of cancer
using only alternative medicine. I believe this is a must
read for anyone diagnosed with breast cancer, I highly recommend
it to anyone interested in learning more about treating cancer with alternative therapies."
Keep That Cell Phone Out of Your Bra
For many young women today, tucking cell phones in the bra has
become a cool, hip way to have simple access to these essential
devices. Most of us have no idea that cell phones are small microwave
radios that should not be kept directly on the body.The ways some
people are using their phones today could increase their risk of
developing breast cancer and other diseases tomorrow. Cell phone’s
microwave radiation seeps directly into soft fatty tissue of the breast.
It’s too late for Andrea X, a young active mother of three from
Southern California. For more than six years, this vegetarian and
runner drove her children everywhere, with her cell phone tucked
snugly into her sports bra. She used her hands-free headset and
was on the phone for four to five hours a day. Often her chest or
ear would redden, but she thought little of it. This spring she
developed a malignant tumor right where her phone had sat on her
breast. No one in her family has ever had breast cancer.
Could all this be a coincidence? Of course. But her doctor, and
the physicians of four other women under the age of 40 with similar
stories, are deeply concerned that cell phones can cause cancer
in women who store them on their torsos.
Boosting Glutathione GSH Levels may reduce Risk of Breast Cancer
At the American Association for Cancer Research meeting, researchers
from Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard School of Public Health
released the results of a new study using data from the Nurses'
Health Study. Researchers wanted to find out if there was any correlation
between breast cancer risk and blood serum levels of cysteine -
an amino acid and precursor of glutathione, the intracellular antioxidant
that I've told you about many times. Taking the lead from previous
studies that have shown glutathione GSH to be capable of detoxifying carcinogens, the
Brigham researchers examined blood sample data from more than 700
breast-cancer patients. All patient records were matched with records
of subjects who were healthy and of similar age.
The most dramatic results were recorded among pre-menopausal
women. In this group, women who had the highest levels of cysteine
were more than 75 percent less likely to develop breast cancer than
those with the lowest cysteine levels. And the risk was reduced
even more among women who had normal body weight. Post-menopausal
women with the highest cysteine levels also fared well, reducing
their breast cancer risk by almost half compared to women with the
lowest levels. In the conclusions to the Brigham study, lead author
Shumin Zhang named a specific supplement, known to boost cysteine
levels. Zhang wrote: 'N-acetylcysteine, a synthetic precursor of
cysteine, might have the potential to be chemopreventive against breast cancer.
The specific involvement of GSH in the carcinogenic process is supported
by the major role played by this compound in the detoxification
of carcinogens by conjugation . We demonstrated that feeding GSH-promoting
HNMPI to ice chronically treated with dimethylhydrazine (DMH) significantly
reduces the number and size of colon carcinomas induced by DMH (27,28).
These colon tumors appear to be similar to those found in the human
insofar as the type of lesions and the chemotherapeutic response
characteristics are concerned. HNMPI feeding appears to exert an
inhibitory effect not only on the initiation (27) of cancer, but
also on the progression of tumors. Recently, a direct inhibitory
effect of HNMPI in human cancer cell replication was confirmed.
In other human cancer cell studies, the inhibitory effect ,as found
to be related to the serum albumin component of milk serum and most
recently to @-lactalbumin. Feeding lactoferrin to mice inhibited
the growth of solid tumors and in addition reduced lung colonization
by melanomas. Unlike other proteins, serum albumin ,as found to
exhibit a strong antimutagenic effect in an in vitro assay using
hamster cells. It is therefore noteworthy that in this HNMPI we
have succeeded in concentrating serum albumin, @-lactalbumin, and
lactoferrin, all containing a significant number of GSH precursors.
A possible explanation for these newly discovered properties of
dietary milk serum protein may be found in recent findings on the
role of GSH in tumor biology.
Dr. Jimmy Gutman, M.D - "Clinical evidence links low glutathione levels
to the most common illnesses of our time as well as newly emerging diseases. Glutathione levels diminish as we age and many diseases
normally associated with aging have been linked to glutathione deficiency."
Dr. Allan Somersall M.D - "To raise glutathione levels
is to reduce premature oxidation, to quench destructive free radicals
and help detoxify the poisons inside each cell when it needs to.
Only Immunocal is clinically proven to do that in a safe, effective and convenient way."
Do you have a question about Holistic Health Care for Women’s Vitality and Wellbeing or need assistance?
Call 323-522-4521 or 323-989-3372
Routine Breast Screening leads to Alternative Therapy
In April I went for a regular breast screening at the clinic,
and was referred to my own doctor for follow up tests because they
had found a dark area in my left breast and a lump under the same
arm. He scheduled me to see a woman breast specialist and a surgeon.
A biopsy revealed that there was 4 inches of my left breast duct
that was blocked with an overgrowth of tissue and it was full of
fluids. There was a slightly bloody discharge upon aspiration. The
lump under my left arm indicated that the duct was blocked up to
the armpit and must be removed. I WAS FACING LOSING A BREAST!! HOW
DEVASTATING!! I asked for a second opinion before surgery. My doctor
sent me to the man that was to do the surgery. We talked and I asked
for another set of tests, he agreed. I did not tell him WHY! I knew
I needed some time because I had been listening to Dr. Somersall
for over 10 years, also heard many first hand stories at the Toronto
meetings with my upline and believed the recoveries. I understood
there was a decrease in my body’s antioxidant enzymes which protect
my body against free radical damage. I believed the
bio active “glutathione”
in HMS90/IMMUNOCAL were the properties my body needed to fight
this attack of foreign bodies and it would be efficient enough for
I increased the
Immunocal to 4 pouches a day/ the
Vitamins and I also rubbed the
Skin Perfecting Cream on my left breast every night. I took
no other medications during this time; I believed this was a must
for my recovery. Six weeks later I had been through the second set
of tests and was scheduled to visit the surgeon to discuss the operation.
He began to tell me that he was amazed that the lump under my arm
was already smaller in size, that the 4 inches of infected duct
was also decreased in length and there was no trace of blood in
the aspiration; he was happy to tell me that as far as he is concerned
there will be “NO SURGERY” He said, YOU ARE IN A RECOVERY STATE—WHATEVER
YOU ARE DOING –DO NOT STOP!! I was extremely excited and I jumped
off the table and kicked up my heels. Yes!! He asked me “what is
it you are doing anyway?” I spent the next 20 minutes in my surgeon’s
office discussing HMS90/IMMUNOCAL and the products with him. That
beats surgery anytime, I would like to tell you!! When I was done,
he said to me” I can see you have faith in this and you will recover
if you do not stop what you are doing, come back and see me in September.
Here is my email address to tell me more about this Supplement.
Please tell my son too, he is out at the front desk.” He was fascinated
about the value of this dynamic product.
Clinical research revealed that
Moringa helps prevent Mastitis, an inflammation
of the breast caused by the blocking of milk ducts while the mother
is lactating which is a common problem in breastfeeding. This can
cause a painful sensation on the breasts or nipples that may lead
to fever or flu like symptoms. The most common infecting organism
is Staphylococcus Aureus, that can be found anywhere which can be
passed on to the mothers during suckling by their babies. Studies
had shown that the anti bacterial peptide found in Moringa Oleifera
is effective against this bacteria.
Fat Deficiency Kills More People Every Year than Breast Cancer
Omega-3 deficiency is the sixth biggest killer of Americans,
according to a new study. Harvard University researchers looked
at 12 dietary, lifestyle and metabolic risk factors such as tobacco
smoking and high blood pressure, and used a mathematical model to
determine how many fatalities could have been prevented if better
practices had been observed. The study determined that there were
72,000-96,000 preventable deaths each year due to omega-3 deficiency,
highlighting the importance of establishing a dietary reference
intake (DRI) for omega-3 forms such as EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid)
and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid).
Robert Willner, M.D., Ph.D. - "A top European cancer research
scientist, Dr Johanna Budwig,
has discovered a totally natural formula that not only protects
against the development of cancer but people all over the world
who have been diagnosed with incurable cancer and sent home to die
have actually been cured and now lead normal healthy lives." Research
has suggested that omega-3 fatty acids, or essential fatty acids
(EFAs), can help lower cholesterol, regulate heartbeat, and thin
the blood, thereby lessening the risk of heart disease. It's also
possible that the omega-3 group may aid in treating depression,
according to neuroscientist Andrew L. Stoll, MD, of Harvard Medical
School, who has studied the effects of omega-3s on the illness.
Carefully documented descriptions of the cancer process at different
places in the body reveals most cancers have similar stages through
which it passes. The cancers are not really cancer until the cells
start to move by invasion through the nearby connective tissue.
Cells develop abnormalities for a variety of reasons and can continue
to become abnormal all the way up through atypical cells and to
carcinoma in situ. Carcinoma in situ is the dividing line between
the two phases of cancer development. Iodine in correct doses will
reverse all of the changes up to and including the carcinoma in
situ. (Carcinoma in situ: Cancer that involves only the place in
which it began and that has not spread.)
The thyroid hormone
controls connective tissue function. So connective tissue around
organs forms a structural biological barrier to the spread of cancer.
Cancer spread to distant organs only develops in the connective
tissue of those organs. Therefore, if the connective tissue defence
is not strong then the cancerous cell from a distant site can land
there and grow. If however the thyroid hormone level in the connective
tissue is high enough then the connective tissue will perform its
normal defence duties and not allow the cancer cell to enter it
Using these principles, fibrocystic disease
and breast cancer become more understandable. Supplemental iodine
in the correct doses will remove all lesions from carcinoma in situ
back to just an abnormal cell by triggering death of these cells
by apoptosis. Spread of cancer cells in the connective tissue can
be arrested by adequate treatment with thyroid hormone to strengthen
the connective tissue barrier.
Two main thyroid disorders: Hyperthyroid and Hypothyroid.
The thyroid hormones regulate (1) metabolism, (2) growth and developement,
(3) the activity of the nervous system. An under production of these
hormones is a hypothyroid condition, while an overproduction creates
a hyperthyroid condition.
Breast Cancer Prevention with Vitamin D
vitamin D3 levels among populations worldwide were increased, 600,000
cases of breast and colorectal cancers could be prevented each year,
according to researchers from the Moores Cancer Center at the University
of California, San Diego (UCSD). This includes nearly 150,000 cases
of cancer that could be prevented in the United States alone. The
researchers estimate that 250,000 cases of colorectal cancer and
350,000 cases of breast cancer could be prevented worldwide by increasing
intake of vitamin D3, particularly in countries north of
the equator. Optimizing your vitamin D levels could help you
to prevent as many as 16 different types of cancer including pancreatic, lung, breast,
ovarian, prostate, and colon cancers.
Further, optimal vitamin D levels are also known to positively influence
the following conditions: Heart disease, Diabetes, Inflammatory
bowel disease, Rheumatoid arthritis, Multiple sclerosis and osteoporosis.
Natural Immune Modulator
There is a natural immune enhancing substance that is produced and secreted by a lymphocyte functioning in cell-mediated immunity and that upon incorporation into a lymphocyte which has not been sensitized confers on it the same immunological specificity as the sensitized cell". What this all means, is that when immune system cells have battled with specific disease invaders, they produce a substance that transfers a message of warning on to other immune cells. The newly alerted immune cells "remember" the warning message, producing the same substance, alerting other immune cells. Once alerted, the immune cells always "remember" who the specific enemy is, and how to attack it.
Every mother (human or mammal) that breast feeds her baby, passes
all of the immunity gained throughout her lifetime on to her infant.
There's a natural immune enhancing substance that is not species-specific and can therefore be extracted
from any mammal and then be given to another mammal with the same
efficacy. There are over 3,000 published papers and 50 years
of research on various forms and sources.
Toxic Metals and Breast Cancer: New Research and Development
by E.Blaurock-Busch, PhD
Recent research indicated toxic metals, particularly cadmium,
nickel, and aluminum as another cause of breast cancer. These heavy
metals have been known to have specific effects on several biological
systems. Dr. Maggie Louie, assistant professor in the Department
of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Dominican University of California,
has received a $150,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health
(NIH) in support of breast cancer research at the University. Dr.
Louie's work focuses on the potential role that environmental contaminants
play in the development of breast cancer. Dr. Louie is studying
how the heavy metal cadmium – an environmental contaminant that
enters the body through consumption of contaminated food or water,
or inhalation of cigarette smoke – contributes to the development
of breast cancer. Her preliminary findings not only show that cadmium
breast cancer cell growth, but her lab may have also identified a potential pathway for its action.
An environmental health specialist at Stirling University in
Scotland, Baillie-Hamilton details how toxins may be linked to dozens
of serious health problems, including immune system diseases, neurological
disorders, digestive disorders, hormonal imbalances, cardio-vascular
diseases, cancer, hyper-sensitivity, obesity, musculoskeletal disorders
and childhood health problems. "These chemicals are simply not going
to go away," Institute reports "pesticides are a likely cause
of immune suppression for millions of people throughout the world"
and that 25% of the chemicals in the environment are neurotoxins
linked to increased incidence of brain disease.
Breast Cancer and Omega 3 Oil
The growing incidence of breast cancer can be explained for the
first time in light of Dr Warburg's discovery about lack of oxygen
to the cells. The breasts consist of an exceptionally high amount
of fatty tissue. A typical cell membrane in muscle tissue is half-fat
and contains about one-third EFAs (oxygen transferors). However,
fatty tissue like the breast contains areas of 80-95% fat concentration.
These fatty components of breast tissue require and should have
high EFA concentrations, but because of modern food processing they
don't. Because important organs such as the brain, heart, lungs
and kidneys require EFAs on a priority basis, there may not be enough
left over to ensure that breast tissue receives an adequate amount
Therefore, oxygen deficiency in the breast tissue will be very
significant. Given this premise, we can deduce that breast tissue
should and would be the number-one expected cancer site in women
worldwide, and it is. This conclusion makes so much sense in explaining
the massive rise in breast cancer rates. Harvard's Dr W. C. Willett
gives us the proof. In a study on the intake of parent omega-6 involving
over 80,000 nurses, it was shown that the group with the lowest
intake of linoleic acid (parent omega-6) exhibited the highest incidence
of breast cancer (NEJM 1987; 316(1):22-28).42 Has your ob-gyn
told you that you need this miraculous anti-cancer nutrient? I doubt it; he or she probably doesn't know.
Dr Otto Warburg discovered and clearly stated that the prime,
most basic, cause of cancer is too little oxygen getting into the
cell. "We find by experiment about 35% inhibition of oxygen respiration
already suffices to bring about such a transformation during cell
growth," he stated at a 1966 conference of Nobel laureates in Lindau, Germany.
Breast Cancer: Poisons, Profits, and Prevention
by Liane Clorfene-Casten
The war on cancer, according to investigative reporter and community
activist Liane Clorfene-Casten, seems to be a
losing battle--badly waged and severely mismanaged. Tracking how companies create the
very toxins that cause cancer and then profit from the "cures" they
peddle, Clorfene-Casten takes to task the government, the American
Cancer Society, and various corporate giants to craft a chilling
report on the big business that breast cancer has become.
Why has the focus been on cures rather than prevention? Clorfene-Casten
concludes that, as a result of this improper focus, the population
has been brainwashed and businesses have--quite literally--gotten
away with murder. "Those who will profit," Clorfene-Casten states,
"include chemical companies that make not only the cancer-causing
pesticides but also the chemotherapy drugs used to fight cancer.
Others are major cancer research centers whose well-connected directors
shape the national dialogue on cancer." Breast Cancer educates its
readers about the scourge of breast cancer as it relates to environmental
pollution, even as it encourages us to regard the disease as preventable.
The argument is made compellingly through the actual and composite
experiences of individual patients, resulting in a powerful indictment
against business, government, and research institutions.
Politics of Breast Cancer: What is the Cancer Industry?
The Cancer Industry consists of corporations, organizations and
agencies that diminish or mask the extent of the cancer problem,
fail to protect our health, or divert attention away from the need
to prevent cancer by finding the causes. This includes drug companies
that, in addition to profiting off cancer treatment drugs, sometimes
also produce toxic chemicals that may be contributing to the high
rates of cancer in this country and increasing rates throughout
the world. It also includes the polluting industries that continue
to release substances we know or suspect are dangerous to our health,
and the public relations firms and public agencies who protect these
polluters. The Cancer Industry includes organizations like the American
Cancer Society, that downplay the risk of cancer from pesticides
and other environmental factors, and who historically have refused
to take a stand on environmental regulation.
Who Profits from Breast Cancer?
Breast Cancer Awareness month's primary sponsor and mastermind of
the event in 1985 was Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, now known as AstraZeneca.
Zeneca is the company that manufactures the controversial and widely
prescribed breast cancer drug, Tamoxifen. Did you know all TV,
radio, and print media campaigns are paid for and must be approved
It is less known that Zeneca also makes herbicides and fungicides.
One of their products, the organochlorine pesticide, Acetochlor
is implicated as a causal factor in breast cancer. Its Perry Ohio
chemical plant is the third largest source of potential cancer causing
pollution in the U.S., spewing 53,000 pounds of recognized carcinogens
into the air in 1996.
Breast cancer and the use of Anti-Perspirant
by Philippa D Darbre
I challenge you all to re-think your every day use of a product
that could ultimately lead to a terminal illness. As of today, I
will change my use. I showed this to a friend going through chemotherapy
and she said she learned this fact in a support group recently.
The leading cause of breast cancer is the use of anti-perspirant.
What? A concentration of toxins that leads to cell mutations: a.k.a.
CANCER. Yes, ANTI-PERSPIRANT. Most of the products out there are
an anti-perspirant/deodorant combination, check yours! Deodorant
is fine, anti-perspirant is not.
Here's why: The human body has
a few areas that it uses to purge toxins; behind the knees, behind
the ears, groin area, and armpits. The toxins are purged in the
form of perspiration. Anti-perspirant, as the name clearly indicates,
prevents you from perspiring, thereby inhibiting the body from purging
toxins from below the armpits. These toxins do not just magically
disappear. Instead, the body deposits them in the lymph nodes below
the arms since it cannot sweat them out. Nearly all breast cancer
tumors occur in the upper outside quadrant of the breast area. This
is precisely where the lymph nodes are located.
Additionally, men are less likely (but not completely exempt) to develop breast cancer
prompted by anti-perspirant usage because most of the anti-perspirant
product is caught in their hair and is not directly applied to the
skin. Women who apply anti-perspirant right
after shaving increase the risk further because shaving causes almost
imperceptible nicks in the skin which give the chemicals entrance
into the body from the armpit area. PLEASE pass this along to anyone
you care about. Breast cancer is becoming frighteningly common.
This awareness may save lives.
How Bras Affect the Health of your Breasts
David Williams MD - "Wearing a bra at least 14 hours a
day tends to increase the hormone prolactin, which decreases circulation
in the breast tissue. Decreasing circulation can impede your body's
natural removal of carcinogenic fluids that become trapped in the
breast's sac-like glands (lymph nodes). These glands make up the
largest mass of lymph nodes in the upper part of your body's lymphatic system."
The Fiji breast study
The connection between bras and the development of breast cancer
was reinforced in a study conducted on the Fiji Islands. In 1997,
medical anthropologist Sidney Singer compared the incidence of breast
cancer in two groups of women in Fiji. Half of the women wore bras
and the other half went without. The diet, environment and lifestyle
of both groups were the same. Singer discovered that those who wore
bras had the same rate of breast cancer as American women. Those
who went bra-less experienced practically no breast cancer whatsoever.
DRESSED TO KILL: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras
by Sydney Ross Singer and Soma Grismaijer
Can the wearing of bras actually cause breast cancer? Cultural
icon that is rarely viewed as anything but a feminine necessity.
The information is presented in a clear and concise manner with
telling results. This is an important and timely book for everyone
concerned about this terrible disease.
Linda Page, N.D. Ph.D. - "Women who eat a diet high in meats and dairy products have a higher risk.
Many food animals are injected with hormones that add to the environmental estrogens circulating in
a woman's body. Long term synthetic estrogen and/or oral contraceptive
use, and estrogen-containing pesticides are also a risk factor for
breast cancer. Indeed, there is a veritable assault on female hormone
balance from man-made estrogens. (Human breast milk contains more
dioxin, PCBs, DDT and other pesticides than any other food on the
planet!) The largest breast cancer increase is in women who were
born in the years after World War II, an era that ushered in massive
amounts of new chemicals and drugs, like super-strong antibiotics,
hormone therapy, and processed foods into American life. Most were
developed during the press of wartime, without the normal years
of testing for long term health effects. After the war, a great
many of these substances found their way into agriculture and household
products. Most pesticides, household chemicals and common plastics
(the major estrogen imitators) did not exist before World War ll.
Man-made and environmental estrogens alone can stack the deck against
women by increasing their estrogen levels hundreds of times. Only
in the last five years has anyone realized how common synthetic estrogens are in today's world.
False positives in mammography a serious problem
STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN: Swedish medical doctors report that erroneous
diagnoses of breast cancer in women screened with mammography is
a serious and costly problem. Their study involved a total of about
60,000 women aged 40 to 64 years who were screened for breast cancer.
Of the 60,000 women screened, 726 were referred to the oncology
department for follow-up because of the detection of abnormal lesions.
Additional tests confirmed that 224 of the women did indeed have
cancerous lesions while the remaining 502 (70 per cent) were found
to be cancer-free. The proportion of false positive results was
particularly high in women under 50 years; here more than 86 per
cent of the women referred for further testing turned out to be
cancer-free. Of the women who did have cancerous lesions 26 per
cent were found to have ductal carcinomas in situ, a form of breast
cancer which is usually not considered life-threatening. The researchers
point out that false positive mammograms can produce a high degree
of anxiety in the women concerned. The follow-up testing is also
very expensive and often lengthy; in the present study follow- up
of false positive results accounted for almost a third of the cost
of the entire screening programs. The authors conclude that the
benefits of mammography in women under 50 years must be carefully
weighed against the potentially negative aspects. Lidbrink, E.,
et al. Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography
in breast cancer screening: analysis of false positive cases from
the Stockholm trial. British Medical Journal, Vol. 312, February
3, 1996, pp. 273-76
Mammography: A risky procedure?
ABERDEEN, SCOTLAND: Researchers at the University of Aberdeen warn
that the compressive force used in order to obtain useable mammograms
may be a contributing factor to breast cancer. The British standard
for the force used to squeeze the breast as flat as possible corresponds
to placing twenty 1 kilogram bags of sugar on each breast. The researchers
fear that this force may be excessive and enough to dislocate and
spread any existing cancer cells. Animal experiments have shown
that the number of cancer sites can increase by as much as 80% when
tumors are manipulated mechanically. A recent study in Malmo, Sweden
found that the death rate from breast cancer among women under 55
was 29% higher in a group which had been screened with mammography
than in the unscreened control group. The screening procedure used
"as much compression force as the women could tolerate". The Lancet,
July 11, 1992, p. 122
Do you have a question about Women's Health or need assistance?
Call 323-522-4521 or 323-989-3372
Questioning Chemotherapy : A Critique of the Use of Toxic Drugs in the Treatment of Cancer
Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. - "I started as a believer in chemotherapy.
As a science writer at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in
New York, I wrote articles praising the latest advances in chemotherapy.
Because chemotherapy drugs were general cellular poisons, they could
be terribly toxic. They were also very expensive for patients and
for society as a whole. When I learned about the links between the
pharmaceutical industry and the cancer establishment (later detailed
in my book, The Cance r Industry) I understood the commercial reason
that such an inadequate modality was so heavily promoted."
"I started as a believer in chemotherapy. As a science writer
at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York, I wrote articles
praising the latest advances in chemotherapy. Because chemotherapy
drugs were general cellular poisons, they could be terribly toxic.
They were also very expensive for patients and for society as a
whole. When I learned about the links between the pharmaceutical
industry and the cancer establishment (later detailed in my book,
The Cance r Industry) I understood the commercial reason that such
an inadequate modality was so heavily promoted." Ralph W. Moss
In 1987 Dr. Lana Levi, of the University of California wrote,
“Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy... It
does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancer. This fact has
been know for over a decade. Women with breast cancer are likely
to die faster with chemotherapy than without it.”
The National Cancer Institute has recommended chemotherapy for
all breast cancer patients, whether or not they have visible signs
of cancer after surgery. The theory is that projected over thousands
of women, a significant number of lives will be saved. The problem
especially for the 93.7 percent who aren't benefited is the drugs'
crushing side effects. Virtually all chemotherapeutic drugs are
toxic and immunosuppressive. Being unable to distinguish between
cancerous and normal cells, they wind up killing both. Most also
cause secondary cancers, which can show up many years after "successful"
chemotherapy.R. Walters, op. cit. See also H. Vorherr, "Adjuvant
chemotherapy of breast cancer: Reality, hope, hazard?", Lancet (December
19/26, 1981), pages 1413-14
Chemo "therapy" Testimonial
"I was diagnosed with breast cancer 4 years ago. Nobody tells
you that chemo can cause osteoporosis.
I stress fractured my foot twice and had 2 surgeries on my foot
(not including the lumpectomy and hysterectomy also due to the chemo)
in one year. I have been in chronic bone pain due to the Evista
that I was taking for my bones and as a breast cancer preventative.
A dear friend knows what I have been through and offered that I
should try Marine Phytoplankton. I was
in such a desperate position that I was willing to try ANYTHING
to restore my health. I wanted something natural without weird side
effects! It is pretty bad when the cure is worse than the disease!
Shortly after finishing my first bottle, I noticed that I was not
as tired as I have been for years. I started sleeping better at
night and I have even lost some weight. Energy has been an issue
for me for years now. It feels good to be able to keep up with my
husband and Grandbaby! After the 2nd bottle, I went to the oncologist;
during the exam, he asked, "what are you taking?" He could tell
that something had changed. I have atypical hyperplasia with numerous
tender benign cysts. My breast are no longer hard as rocks, painful
and lumpy. The doctor noticed the difference immediately! He is
skeptical that "plankton" works better than tamoxifen, but agreed
with me that "as long as it works! THAT IS WHAT REALLY MATTERS!"
I take 2 oz a day and while it is not an instant cure... it does
make a difference in how I feel. It has changed my life for the
better! I HIGHLY recommend this product to anyone having health
issues. It works!! It is a product that treats the patient as a
complete being; nurishing our depleted, distressed and diseased
bodies! "Thank you" cannot express how strongly I feel about your
product! I seriously think that the combination of exercise, meditation,
prayer, Marine Phytoplankton, tolerable cancer drugs and faith in
myself and body will help my body, mind and spirit beat cancer and
if not... at least I felt good until the end! R. B.
Fish Oil Reduces Breast Cancer
Dr. Mercola - "Exciting evidence that provides a potential
mechanism for how fish oil exerts its protective influence. Sadly,
though, eating most fresh fish, whether from the ocean, lakes and
streams, or farm-raised, is no longer recommended. Mercury levels
in almost all fish have now hit dangerously high levels across the
world, and the risk of this mercury to your health now outweighs
the fish's omega-3 benefits. However, because fish would otherwise
be immensely healthy. You should obtain your
fish oil from supplements"
The researchers evaluated the hypothesis that omega-3 fats protect
against breast cancer. They examined the fat composition from nearly
250 patients with invasive, nonmetastatic breast carcinoma and from
88 patients with benign breast disease in central France. Their
research was quite striking and showed unequivocal relationship
between the omega 6:3 ratio. The lower the ratio the lower the risk
of breast cancer. Anticancer Research 2002 March April;22(2A):537-43.
Fish oil and margarine don't go together
Fish oil supplements containing EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) have
an anti-inflammatory effect and may benefit people suffering from
rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis. This beneficial effect is significantly
reduced when the diet is high in linoleic acid. A seven week controlled
experiment involving 30 male volunteers was recently completed in
Australia. Margarine and polyunsaturated oils had an inhibiting
effect and should therefore be excluded from the diet in order to
obtain maximum benefit from fish oil. Cleland, Leslie G., et al.
Linoleate inhibits EPA incorporation from dietary fish-oil supplements
in human subjects. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol.
55, February 1992, pp. 395-99
Seeing Deception is your Only Protection: The Breast Cancer Awareness Month Story
A useful perspective to have when attempting to reconcile
what one hears in the lay press and how to develop a proactive breast
cancer prevention strategy. (Excerpts from Dr. Mercola's website)
Each year 180,00 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer and
44,000 will die of the disease. The US has one of the highest breast
cancer rates in the world. Fifty years ago the incidence for a woman's
life time risk was one in twenty. Now it has skyrocketed to one
in eight. When it comes to the environmental carcinogens found in
pesticides, herbicides,plastics and other toxic chemicals, there
is booming silence by all Breast Cancer Awareness Month programs.
Did the alarming increase of breast cancer rates just mysteriously
happen? When it comes to the environmental
carcinogens found in pesticides, herbicides,plastics and other toxic
chemicals, there is booming silence by all Breast Cancer Awareness
Month programs. Did the alarming increase of breast cancer rates
just mysteriously happen? The pesticide -breast cancer link was
stunningly highlighted in research from Israel which linked three
organochlorine pesticides detected in dairy products to an increase
of 12 types of cancer in 10 different strains of mice. After public
outcry in 1978 forced the Israeli government to ban the pesticides
- benzene hexachloride, DDT, and lindane - breast cancer mortality
rates which had increased every year for 25 years, dropped nearly
8 per cent for all age groups and more than a third for women ages
25-34 in 1986.
National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences listed substances
that are known to cause cancer. Tamoxifen was included in that list!!
It is known that tamoxifen causes uterine cancer, liver cancer and
gastrointestinal cancer. After just two to three years of use, tamoxifen
will increase the incidence of uterine cancer by two -three times.
The treatment for uterine cancer is an hysterectomy. In addition,
tamoxifen increased the risk of strokes, blood clots, eye damage,
menopausal symptoms, and depression. The journal Science published
a study from Duke Universtiy Medical Center in 1999 showing that
after 2-5 years, tamoxifen actually initiated the growth of breast
Be proactive and make a difference!
Women can make the difference in eliminating breast cancer. The
breast cancer epidemic is not some great mystery. The causes of
cancer are already known. Toxic diets, toxic lifestyles, toxic environments,
toxic drug treatments and toxic diagnostic techniques cause cancer.
Corporations are only interested in increasing their profits and
ensuring their tentacles of control not in actual solutions.
The National Cancer Institute (NCI) was warned in 1974 by professor
Malcolm C. Pike at the University of Southern California School
of Medicine that a number of specialists had concluded that "giving
a women under age 50 a mammogram on a routine basis is close to
unethical." (P2) The experts in the government were told. The warnings
were ignored and Mary Lasker's advertising campaigns pounded the
media calling for American women of all ages to get mammograms.
The Director of the NCI at the time of this massive abuse of
the public trust later left government service and took a high paying
position at American Cancer Society (ACS) (sort of a payoff?).
By the early 1980s, NCI and ACS jointly issued another wave of
guidelines promoting annual breast X Rays for women under age 50.
"...doctors and their patients assumed that there was good evidence
supporting those recommendations. But at the time, only one study
showed positive benefit and the results were not significant." (P3)
In 1985, British medical journal The Lancet, published an article
that exposed the original onslaught by ACS NCI in the early middle
1970s against a quarter million unsuspecting American women and
reviled the continuing 1980s ACS NCI propaganda: "Over 280,000 women
were recruited without being told that no benefit of mammography
had been shown in a controlled trial for women below 50, and without
being warned about the potential risk of induction of breast cancer
by the test which was supposed to detect it...in women below 50...
mammography gives no benefit..." (P4)
But the media and the "health officials" in the government stayed
silent! The mammography policy pushed by the ASC (to fill its bank
account?) remained the U.S. government policy for ten more years.
A large Canadian study showed X raying the breasts of women younger
than age 50 provided no benefit and probably endangered their lives.
In February 1992 Samuel Epstein, professor at the University
of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago, a tireless opponent of the
"cancer establishment," along with 64 other distinguished cancer
authorities, warned the public about the ACS NCI propaganda. The
ACS and NCI termed Dr. Epstein's reference to the breast studies
as "unethical and invalid."
The next month, the Washington Post broke the story into the
mainstream media (finally!). It published an article by Dr. Epstein,
saying: "The high sensitivity of the breast, especially in
young women, to radiation induced cancer was known by 1970. Nevertheless,
the establishment then screened some 300,000 women with Xray dosages
so high as to increase breast cancer risk by up to 20 percent in
women aged 40 to 50 who were mammogrammed annually"..."For most
cancers, survival has not changed for decades. Contrary claims are
based on rubber numbers." (P5)
In December of 1992, the New York Times published facts about
the Mammography scam. The story included the following: "Dr.
I. Craig Henderson, director of the clinical cancer center at the
University of California in San Francisco, said, 'We have to tell
women the truth' ...
"Dr. Robert McLelland, a radiologist at the University of North
Carolina School of Medicine, said... 'In our zeal to promote mammography,
we as radiologists and I'm one of them haven't looked at the evidence.'
In July 1995, The Lancet revealed the ACS NCI mammography scam
to global awareness: "The benefit is marginal, the harm caused
is substantial, and the costs incurred are enormous..." (P7)
The ASC furiously fought attempts by federal agencies that sought
to restrict the number of mammography examinations for individual
women or to extend the age at which a woman had her first one with
their continuted slogan "a check and a checkup".
By 1999, even celebrity poet Maya Angelou was shamefully and
ignorantly promoting Mammography in public service ads on television,
parroting the American Cancer Society's propaganda spiel.
In September 1999, the full depth of the decades long deceit
was explicitly described in an article in the journal Alternative
Medicine. It reached few American women who had been and were being
brainwashed through the mainstream media and pliable state and federal
legislators representatives (of the people?): "Mammograms
increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk
of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth,' says Dr. Charles
B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology
at the National Cancer Institute.(P8)
Should we look again at the cancer empire's tyranny and threat
to whatever is left sacred in America. Bureaucracy is the form of
government in which everybody is deprived of political freedom,
of the power to act. It enables everybody to get together with peers,
to act in concert, and to reach for self-interested goals and enterprises.
P1. H.L.Newbold, Vitamin C Against Cancer, 1979.
P2. Daniel Greenberg, "XRay Mammography Background to a Decision,"
New England Journal of Medicine, September 23, 1976.
P3. "Mammograms Don't Help Younger Women," Spectrum News Magazine,
March/April 1993, p. 22. (Spectrum, 61 Dutile Road, Belmont, N.H.
P4. Petr Skrabanek, "False Premises and False Promises of Breast
Cancer Screening," The Lancet, August 10, 1985.
P5. Samuel S. Epstein, "The Cancer Establishment," Washington Post,
March 10, 1992.
P6. Gina Kolata, "New Data Revive the Debate Over Mammography Before
50, " New York Times, December 16, 1992 (Health Section).
P7. C.J. Wright and C.B. Mueller, "Screening Mammography and Public
Health Policy," The Lancet, July 1995.
P8. "How Mammography Causes Cancer," Alternative Medicine, Sep.
1999, p. 32 (21 Main Street, Upper Level, Tiburon, CA 94920).
P9. Hannah Arendt, "Reflections on Violence," The New York Review
of Books, Feb 27, 1969.
P10. "Thermal Image Processing: Breast Cancer Detection Years Earlier,"
Alternative Medicine, September 1999, pp. 2935 (21 Main Street,
Upper Level, Tiburon, CA 94920).
Breast cancer saved my life
Dr. Talia Miller, M.Ed., D.S.
For me, breast cancer became a wake-up call. Before being diagnosed,
I was stuck in a passionless marriage, a highly stressful career
which demanded long hours, a pessimistic attitude and unhealthy
eating. My life was boring, filled with stress, overwork and unconscious
behaviors. I saw no options.
I was numb to my feelings. I knew nothing about the power of
the mind to create the life I wanted. I did not even know there
were fundamental Laws of the Universe, that when practiced, would
make my life so easy, rich and rewarding. At the time, I felt like
a victim - powerless and unhappy.
Through the prompting of friends and my own inner knowing I decided
to participate in a four week holistic treatment program, Getting
Well - Mind-Body Health for a New You! as part of my cancer treatment.
Of course insurance didn't cover the cost, so it was a huge commitment
on my part.
Little did I know at that time that the recovery treatment program
would not only help me to heal breast cancer, but more importantly,
would help me to heal my LIFE ! I left my old values, beliefs and
behaviors, and began moving to greater health, joy and fulfillment.
Suddenly, I had options! Complete recovery was possible!
Seeing how fragile and potentially fleeting life could be, I
could no longer tolerate being half alive. My work in the program
got me started on my journey from an unintegral, unfulfilling, non-participatory
victim consciousness, to a whole new way of co-creating my life
- making authentic choices in every moment...being in the "Now".
Through the years I discovered how my limiting childhood beliefs
had been keeping me locked inside a keg of painful rage. I learned
the fascinating keys to successful living, extraordinary living...I
become empowered, fulfilled and transformed. I began a journey of
discovering Who I Really Am. And I love what I found.
I've learned so much. he most important outcome of the cancer
recovery treatment program and the ensuing work I did, was that
I stopped recurrence of breast cancer. I've been cancer-free for
over twelve years now. I recovered. I become a thriver. And I developed
the phenomenal program From Survivor to Thriver -
The Breakthrough Program
to Beat Breast Cancer so you can recover too. In addition
to excellent health, I transformed so many aspects of my life -
relationships, career, finances, friends, my relationship with Source
Energy - my entire outlook on life.
Breast Cancer Recovery Coach, Dr. Talia Miller, tells her story
of becoming a cancer victor, and how she created the Breakthrough
Program for Beating Breast Cancer. She empowers survivors to become
thrivers through the use of many cutting-edge healing techniques
all used by PHONE with clients throughout the US and Canada.
Breast Cancer survivor
since 1992, healthier than ever!
The Breast Cancer Support Center's mission is to eradicate breast
cancer as a life-threatening disease through the advancement of
education, training and preventative treatment. Based on the power
of PNI, psychoneuroimmunology, body-mind-spirit integration, the
Breast Cancer Support Center offers retreats and occasional scholarships
for phone coaching, to help breast cancer survivors become thrivers,
so they no longer worry about the recurrence of cancer.
Successful no-drugs nutritional methods and detoxification.
In February 1992 I discovered a lump in one breast, I was 54
years old at that time. I had an operation the same month, and they
removed the lump. Only the lump, not my breast. Then I was on radiation
treatment for 3 months, until May. I was extremely weak and
sick from the radiation treatment, I had to lie in bed for months
after the treatment ended. At one point I just didn't know what
I was going to do, I was so sick, and at Christmas 1992 I couldn't
even open my Christmas presents. I was lying in bed, I was just
too weak and always having these chest coughs and all of this stuff.
I thought I would never get well again.