Cancer - Are They Hiding The Cure For Profit?

[deb1]

Part of the problem is how the media reports scientific studies. The media often doesn't tell us who funded the studies, how many people were included, etc. There is no way to decide how much weight to give each study.

The media then reports each study with an air of panic that scares the heck out of everyone.

People overreact and believe that they should cut all offending cancer causing agents from their diet. A new study comes out that the media reports as saying an entirely different food is going to kill us all.

After awhile people begin to ignore these studies and blame the scientist. Most people don't understand that the media reports are what is at fault not the scientific community.

The media makes money from advertisers, scare tactics gain viewers which increase advertising. So instead of reporting the boring news, "If you eat in moderation with emphasis on certain foods, and exercise you can increase your chances of not getting cancer"; the news reports "AHHHH! We are all going to die! "

 

[joebryant]

Gads, I LOVE England; it's so $%^&^% civilized.
One point that you left out about your health care system is that doctors and doctor groups are paid by the number of patients who are registered with them. So a doctor who has a thousand registered patients earns more than a doctor with 500 registered patients. The catch is is that it behooves the one with a thousand to keep his patients healthy so that he won't be swamped with sick people daily; that way he makes more money.

 

[Wifezilla]

Wifezilla, with all due respect - I have taken EVERY biology class under the sun including many many many nutrition classes. NOT diet classes, nutrition classes - as in biochemistry. I also have a masters degree in toxicology. So, I won't get into it with you because it serves no purpose. I respect your beliefs, but I think they are wrong. In addition, when looking for sources, try this database instead of bloggers: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

My information doesn't come from the blogger, but the book and the resources the blogger mentioned. The blogger was linked for convenience. Good Calories Bad Calories follows the history of medical research, dietary recommendations, and the result of those recommendations. It is well referenced. I also linked to several Science Daily articles. This information is also available on Pubmed and peer reviewed medical journals.

Your attitude, though, does illustrate a point Gary Taubes makes in his book. Often people get so wrapped up in a small narrow field that they miss the big picture.

I noticed your link includes Pubmed articles. You may want to start here...
"PURPOSE: Numerous dietary factors elevate serum levels of insulin and insulin-like growth factor I (IGF-I), both potent prostate cancer mitogens. We tested whether varying dietary carbohydrate and fat, without energy restriction relative to comparison diets, would slow tumor growth and reduce serum insulin, IGF-I, and other molecular mediators of prostate cancer in a xenograft model. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Individually caged male severe combined immunodeficient mice (n = 130) were randomly assigned to one of three diets (described as percent total calories): very high-fat/no-carbohydrate ketogenic diet (NCKD: 83% fat, 0% carbohydrate, 17% protein), low-fat/high-carbohydrate diet (LFD: 12% fat, 71% carbohydrate, 17% protein), or high-fat/moderate-carbohydrate diet (MCD: 40% fat, 43% carbohydrate, 17% protein). Mice were fed to maintain similar average body weights among groups. Following a preliminary feeding period, mice were injected with 1 x 10(6) LNCaP cells (day 0) and sacrificed when tumors were >or=1,000 mm(3). RESULTS: Two days before tumor injection, median NCKD body weight was 2.4 g (10%) and 2.1 g (8%) greater than the LFD and MCD groups, respectively (P < 0.0001). Diet was significantly associated with overall survival (log-rank P = 0.004). Relative to MCD, survival was significantly prolonged for the LFD (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.79; P = 0.004) and NCKD groups (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.93; P = 0.02). Median serum insulin, IGF-I, IGF-I/IGF binding protein-1 ratio, and IGF-I/IGF binding protein-3 ratio were significantly reduced in NCKD relative to MCD mice. Phospho-AKT/total AKT ratio and pathways associated with antiapoptosis, inflammation, insulin resistance, and obesity were also significantly reduced in NCKD relative to MCD tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These results support further preclinical exploration of carbohydrate restriction in prostate cancer and possibly warrant pilot or feasibility testing in humans."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...nel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Otto Warburg won a Nobel Prize in the 30's for his research on how cancer cells use sugar...
" In 1924, Warburg hypothesized that cancer, malignant growth, and tumor growth are caused by the fact that tumor cells mainly generate energy (as e.g. adenosine triphosphate/ ATP) by non-oxidative breakdown of glucose (a process called glycolysis). This is in contrast to "healthy" cells which mainly generate energy from oxidative breakdown of pyruvate. Pyruvate is an end-product of glycolysis, and is oxidized within the mitochondria. Hence and according to Warburg, cancer should be interpreted as a mitochondrial dysfunction.

"Cancer, above all other diseases, has countless secondary causes. But, even for cancer, there is only one prime cause. Summarized in a few words, the prime cause of cancer is the replacement of the respiration of oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar."--Dr. Otto H. Warburg in Lecture

Warburg continued to develop the hypothesis experimentally, and held several prominent lectures outlining the theory and the data.

The concept that cancer cells switch to glycolysis has become widely accepted, even if it is not seen as the cause of cancer. Some suggest that the Warburg phenomenon could be used to develop anticancer drugs. Meanwhile, cancer cell glycolysis is the basis of positron emission tomography (18-FDG PET), a medical imaging technology that relies on this phenomenon. "

There is a clinical trial going on in Germany using a ketogenic diet to treat terminal cancer patients who have already exhausted traditional treatments. Final results aren't in but German hospitals are already recommended a carbohydrate restricted diet.
http://www.frauenklinik.uni-wuerzburg.de/forschung/ketogenic_english.htm​

 

[meriruka]

I think Americans are somewhat to blame for giving the pharm. industry so much of our hard earned cash.
They offer pills for everything, to loose weight, to sleep, Viagra, there are even pills to grow your eyelashes (?!!!). The scariest thing is the list of possible side effects at the end of the commercials.....far worse than the original complaint.

It's so much easier to take a pill than eat a balanced diet, exercise and avoid all the chemicals that invade everything we buy.

Why hide the cure for cancer when there are so many other things you can get? (Heart disease comes to mind), each generation struggles with something that is killing them, as civilization gets more complicated, there will be a much larger selection of things that can kill you.

But what I really want to know is how many apple seeds per day and do you have to chew them?

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
This is Anne, Joe's wife.

I agree with a good deal of Galen's statement, but I would like to mention a couple of things.

First, my gynecologist told me, when I asked her for information about supplements, that she felt she could not advise me because if she recommended any treatment that was not approved as good practice by the AMA, she would be opening herself up to lawsuits. None of the mainstream doctors I asked for advice on supplements knew a thing about them. My gynecologist did, however, go to the hospital pharmacy and get a list of supplements they approved on the basis of testing.

Second, there have two developments in the United States that point toward movement away from synthetic manufactured drugs. (1) The National Institute of Health now has a department of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. This is due to Senator Tom Harkin, who supported its creation after a successful encounter with an alternative treatment (Sorry, I can't remember the details.) (2) Doctor Andrew Weil, in Arizona, has been working to get medical schools to teach nutrition and complementary/alternative strategies. If doctors are familiar with these things, they will be able to give us better advice.

Our daughter, Kate, is a certified counselor on raw and living foods, so we have learned a lot about nutrition through her. I am really proud of her because she has been interested in nutrition all through her adult life and has bucked the conventional wisdom but still maintained her common sense. She is associated with the Living Foods Institute in Atlanta, Georgia and has many stories who have been helped by changing their diets. To eat 80%l raw and living foods (sprouts, for instance) is more extreme than most of
us want, or even need to go, but people with serious illnesses are willing to use this type of therapy, and the adoption of some of this diet would definitely be good for all of us.

 

[Wifezilla]

Macadamia nuts are very rich in Vitamin B17 and so are bamboo shoots, mung beans, lima beans, butter beans and certain strains of garden peas.

I think I'll skip the apple seeds. Ummmmmmm Macadamia Nuts....

 

[meriruka]

Quote:
There is a woman named Crescent Dragonwagon who wrote a cookbook that has recipes for a macrobiotic diet, she had some form of cancer that was cured by eating this way. Mainly, you eat foods as close to their natural state as possible and stop eating dairy products, (which I could only do if the only other choice was oblivion). So, there are alternative treatments for some but getting those tests to detect any problems early is critical and it seems that the health care industry is promoting this and insurance companies are also starting to get on board, we just need to take advantage of all the free testing available and all the checkups our insurance will pay for.

 

[joebryant]

Quote:
This is Anne (Joe's wife) again.

Absolutely right. We should use all the tools available.

As far as eating raw and living foods, there is a logical reason for this. It's the same reason that eating too much red meat and fried food can lead to illness.

If your body is expending all of its energy digesting heavy foods that don't give the cells the vitamins, minerals, and enzymes they need, it doesn't have enough energy left to keep itself well.

 

[Rosalind]

Quote:
Interesting you mention those two.

Patrick Swayze had pancreatic cancer, which typically kills people within 6 months of diagnosis because pancreatic cancer causes few symptoms until it's fairly advanced. He lived for two whole years after using chemotherapy, surgery, and standard treatment.

Farrah Fawcett, in comparison, had rectal cancer, and eschewed chemotherapy. She went to a clinic in Germany for the nutritional therapies and the so-called "natural" therapies many have described here. She lived for three years after diagnosis, which is about average for the stage described in the media, stage IV.

Apparently 70% of the worlds top oncologists would NOT have chemo if they had cancer,

Please provide a reference. Which cancer type precisely, when and where the survey was carried out. In 1950, when there weren't very many chemo drugs and they weren't very good...okay, maybe I can see that. In modern times? No. Definitely not the case.

Natural products and diets can't be patented.

Please check your facts. Most pharmaceutical companies do, in fact, have a very large and interesting Natural Products library which they use more and more often. There is also an entire Natural Products section of the US Pharmacopeia. Additionally, many of the supposedly uncorrupted herbal supplement companies are owned by pharmaceutical companies. One thing you might wish to consider is how much money is made by the helpful supplement companies and the folks selling Radio Shack LED garage door openers as "zappers". It is a nontrivial amount, in fact a multibillion dollar industry unto itself.

Otto Warburg won a Nobel Prize in the 30's for his research on how cancer cells use sugar...
" In 1924, Warburg hypothesized that cancer, malignant growth, and tumor growth are caused by the fact that tumor cells mainly generate energy (as e.g. adenosine triphosphate/ ATP) by non-oxidative breakdown of glucose (a process called glycolysis). This is in contrast to "healthy" cells which mainly generate energy from oxidative breakdown of pyruvate.

This is the basis of ALL chemotherapy, both the old highly-toxic kind as well as the new, targeted kind. Cancer cells have higher metabolic demands because of their rapid replication, so they use both metabolic pathways--although all cells, especially muscle cells when you exercise, are able to use both pathways in emergency. The difference is, cancer cells are always in a state of emergency, as it were.

Since 1924, we've also found out that the metabolic cycles can go backwards: the carbon pieces involved in the oxidation of pyruvate can be put back together to form glycogen, which can be reserved in liver and muscle tissues for later glycolysis. Or, if the glycogen warehouses are full, as it were, the Krebs cycle intermediates can be synthesized into fatty acids, hormones, pigments, all kinds of things.

Yet, liver cancers and muscle cancers are relatively rare, compared to epithelial tissue cancers. Why do you think that might be?​

 

[tonini3059]

My mother was just diagnosed with Liver/Bile duct cancer and she never smoked/drank/or did drugs. She did have her gallbladder taken out 15 yrs ago, went for routine exams and checkups. She also ad a decent diet and was very active all of her life. I don't really think anything prevents it or makes you more susceptible to it.