Disclaimer for Shirley's Wellness Cafe

Breast Cancer Prevention, Are Mammograms Safe?

"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. In addition, mammography provides false tumor reports between 5 and 15 percent of the time. False positive results cause women to be re-exposed to additional X rays and create an environment of further stress, even possibly leading to unneeded surgery

Contact Shirley for Assistance

Natural Care and Solutions for Breast Health

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.> In a new study published in the British Medical Journal researchers led by Dr. Philippe Autier from the University of Strathclyde Institute of Global Public Health, show that mammography does little to reduce either deaths or advanced breast cancer over a period of 23 years in a Netherlands study. Instead, they found that the X-ray based test designed to pick up tumors led to over diagnoses 60% of the time. The study involved all Dutch women who were screened with mammograms every other year between 1989 and 2012—about 8 million women in all.

How Mammography Increases Your Cancer Risk

Mammography Increases Your breast 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.

Mammography Madness

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)

Home base business opportunityA 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]." (Emphasis added.)

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."

Page Divider

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 including chemotherapy 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 www.TheBreastStaysPut.com.

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

Woman putting cell phone in 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.

Page Divider

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.

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 bioactive “glutathione” in HMS90/IMMUNOCAL were the properties my body needed to fight this attack of foreign bodies and it would be efficient enough for me.

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 the miracle plant 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.

Page Divider
Cancer Process

Carefully documented descriptions of the cancer process at different places in the body reveals most cancers have similar stages 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 defense 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 defense duties and not allow the cancer cell to enter it and develop.

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.

Thyroid Disorder

Two main thyroid disorders: Hyperthyroid and Hypothyroid. The thyroid hormones regulate (1) metabolism, (2) growth and development, (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 CaBreast Cancer Prevention with Vitamin D

If 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.

Page Divider

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

Toxic Overload 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 promotes 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.6>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 of EFAs.

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.

Page Divider
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 by Zeneca?

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.

Page Divider

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
Dressed to Kill 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

Page Divider

Virtually all chemotherapeutic drugs are toxic and immuno-suppressive

Questioning Chemotherapy 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 immuno-suppressive. 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 nutrition. 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; nourishing 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.

Page Divider
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
Adelaide, Austrailia

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 cancer!

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.

Page Divider

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.

Need Help? 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.' " (P6)

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 continued 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. 032202525)
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).

Page Divider
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.