Although mainstream oncology will not acknowledge efficacy of IV vitamin C for a variety of diseases, including cancer, these researchers have found (or more like, rediscovered) that it does have anti-cancer activity. It probably sounds like fantasy or something unbelievable to people who don’t venture outside of the orthodox medicine.
And this is because you only hear about expensive, toxic, relatively ineffective pharmaceutical drugs from the mainstream media and the medical ‘authorities.’ Even if those pharmaceuticals did work (which is a dubious claim, at best), most (if not all of them) are extremely expensive.
And even if you’re the most die-hard skeptic, the worst case scenario for vitamin C is that it won’t work because it’s not going to damage you like chemotherapy, radiation, surgery or even the new ‘miracle’ cancer treatment touted by orthodox oncology, immunology.
So much for the ‘objectivity’ of the established scientists and physicians of today…
Vitamin C has a patchy history as a cancer therapy, but researchers at the University of Iowa believe that is because it has often been used in a way that guarantees failure.
Most vitamin C therapies involve taking the substance orally. However, the UI scientists have shown that giving vitamin C intravenously — and bypassing normal gut metabolism and excretion pathways — creates blood levels that are 100 — 500 times higher than levels seen with oral ingestion. It is this super-high concentration in the blood that is crucial to vitamin C’s ability to attack cancer cells.
Earlier work by UI redox biology expert Garry Buettner found that at these extremely high levels (in the millimolar range), vitamin C selectively kills cancer cells but not normal cells in the test tube and in mice. Physicians at UI Hospitals and Clinics are now testing the approach in clinical trials for pancreatic cancer and lung cancer that combine high-dose, intravenous vitamin C with standard chemotherapy or radiation. Earlier phase 1 trials indicated this treatment is safe and well-tolerated and hinted that the therapy improves patient outcomes. The current, larger trials aim to determine if the treatment improves survival.
In a new study, published recently in the December issue of the journal Redox Biology, Buettner and his colleagues have homed in on the biological details of how high-dose vitamin C (also known as ascorbate) kills cancer cells.
The study shows that vitamin C breaks down easily, generating hydrogen peroxide, a so-called reactive oxygen species that can damage tissue and DNA. The study also shows that tumor cells are much less capable of removing the damaging hydrogen peroxide than normal cells.
“In this paper we demonstrate that cancer cells are much less efficient in removing hydrogen peroxide than normal cells. Thus, cancer cells are much more prone to damage and death from a high amount of hydrogen peroxide,” says Buettner, a professor of radiation oncology and a member of Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Iowa. “This explains how the very, very high levels of vitamin C used in our clinical trials do not affect normal tissue, but can be damaging to tumor tissue.”
Normal cells have several ways to remove hydrogen peroxide, keeping it at very low levels so it does not cause damage. The new study shows that an enzyme called catalase is the central route for removing hydrogen peroxide generated by decomposing vitamin C. The researchers discovered that cells with lower amounts of catalase activity were more susceptible to damage and death when they were exposed to high amounts of vitamin C.
Buettner says this fundamental information might help determine which cancers and which therapies could be improved by inclusion of high-dose ascorbate in the treatment.
“Our results suggest that cancers with low levels of catalase are likely to be the most responsive to high-dose vitamin C therapy, whereas cancers with relatively high levels of catalase may be the least responsive,” he explains.
A future goal of the research is to develop methods to measure catalase levels in tumors.
Comment: Intravenous vitamin C does more than just kill cancer cells. It boosts immunity and can stimulate collagen formation to help the body wall off the tumor. It inhibits hyaluronidase, an enzyme that tumors use to metastasize and invade other organs throughout the body and corrects the almost universal scurvy in cancer patients.
We’re always hearing about immunotherapy and other pharmaceutical drugs in the press. But they try to make you sound like a quack idiot if you mention anything about natural treatments or substances. There’s a definite bias against anything that isn’t lauded by Big Pharma and their cronies.
So here’s another promising anticancer agent for your consideration. And for you people with inquiring minds, the LD50 dose for rutin is 4,250 mg/kg by weight. I’d classify that as non-toxic. How about you?
Rutin inhibits proliferation, attenuates superoxide production and decreases adhesion and migration of human cancerous cells.
Biomed Pharmacother. 2016 Dec ;84:1972-1978. Epub 2016 Nov 6. PMID: 27829548
Mohamed Ben Sghaier, Alessandra Pagano, Mohamed Mousslim, Youssef Ammari, Hervé Kovacic, José Luis
Lung and colorectal cancer are the principal causes of death in the world. Rutin, an active flavonoid compound, is known for possessing a wide range of biological activities. In this study, we examined the effect of rutin on the viability, superoxide anion production, adhesion and migration of human lung (A549) and colon (HT29 and Caco-2) cancer cell lines. In order to control the harmlessness of the tested concentrations of rutin, the viability of cancer cell lines was assessed using a 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol- 2-yl)-2,5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay. ROS generation was measured by lucigenin chemiluminescence detecting superoxide ions. To investigate the effect of rutin on the behavior of human lung and colon cancer cell lines, we performed adhesion assays, using various purified extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins. Finally, in vitro cell migration assays were explored using modified Boyden chambers. The viability of cancerous cells was inhibited by rutin. It also significantly attenuated the superoxide production in HT29 cells. In addition, rutin affected adhesion and migration of A549 and HT29 cell. These findings indicate that rutin, a natural molecule, might have potential as anticancer agent against lung and colorectal carcinogenesis.
I don’t mean to sound crass or unsympathetic, but it just appears to me that the bar is set extremely low if it is cause for celebration and accolades that an immunotherapy drug gives someone an extra 4 months of life when compared to chemotherapy.
It would seem that a real cause for celebration would be for something more along the lines of 4 extra years of life with fewer side effects than chemotherapy. Or 14 extra years of life.
I guess that it’s all relative. We know that chemotherapy isn’t a cure. But it’s recommended to the majority of cancer patients. I wonder why that is.
I noticed in the article that they tested the new immunology treatment relative to chemotherapy. They don’t dare test it against something like Essiac or IV vitamin C because it would probably beat Big Pharma treatments so badly that nobody would ever consider using either.
Einstein is attributed to saying that the repeating of something that isn’t working is akin to insanity. Or maybe it’s craftiness. Or an orchestrated strategy to maximize profits by not killing the chemotherapy gravy train with something relatively non-toxic and highly effective in treating cancer.
If you’re like me, you would prefer more objectivity and truth in science. But unfortunately, politics and profits often dictate what it studied and what does and doesn’t get reported. We’d be naïve to deny the effect that bias and other objectives play in science. It’s not a comfortable thing to admit, but it’s the truth.
At this rate, they will never have any cures that aren’t toxic. And they will only have expensive, pharmaceutical-based or expensive procedures that are even more costly than the ones that aren’t cures already. The country will go bankrupt if costs continue to rise. Many patients are already going bankrupt from expensive medical treatments.
Patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer survive four months longer with fewer side effects on an immunotherapy drug called atezolizumab compared to chemotherapy, according to a phase 3 clinical trial published in The Lancet.
The trial enrolled 1225 advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients who have no more treatment options, but this study used an early analysis of the first 850 patients from the trial. Half of the group were given atezolizumab and the other half were given docetaxel chemotherapy, which is the standard treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
Patients given atezolizumab — a drug that blocks the programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) protein — survived for an average of 13.8 months, compared with 9.6 months for those on chemotherapy.
As well as the benefits in survival, atezolizumab also had fewer side effects than chemotherapy with 14.8% (90 of 609) of those given the drug having grade three or four side effects compared with 42.7% (247 of 578) of those given chemotherapy. However, 46 (of 609, 7.6%) of the patients given atezolizumab still gave up treatment due to side effects, as well as 108 (of 578 patients, 18.7%) of those on chemotherapy.
“Lung cancer is the most common cancer affecting 1.8 million people each year worldwide. It is also the leading cause of cancer death worldwide and survival remains stubbornly low. Recently, important advances in the treatment of the disease have come from immunotherapies that target the PD-L1 and PD-1 pathway,” said Dr Achim Rittmeyer, lead author, University Goettingen, Germany. “Atezolizumab reinvigorates patients’ immune systems against cancer, and our trial has shown that this has significant results for their survival.”
Other immunotherapies for non-small-cell lung cancer, such as nivolumab and pembrolizumab, are designed to block PD-L1’s counterpart, the programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) which is located on the immune cell surface. Normally the PD-L1 and PD-1 proteins signal to one another to activate the immune system to attack tumours.
It’s time for people to start using their thinking and reasoning faculties more because at this point there are a lot of profiteering and cronyism going on in science and research, as well as other fields of endeavor. But here we focus on health and how profits can have more impact on your health and treatments than truth.
Many times, scientific conclusions are reached based on political and economic factors more so than on the efficacy of the treatment. That’s how we can have poisons and toxins being used as medicines when there are safer, cheaper, more effective options. The more effective, safer, cheaper options are not profitable for Big Pharma, and they are not under Big Pharma control. So they are not marketed or promoted. Marketing and promotions is literally selling things for a profit. If there’s no profit in cheap cures, they will not be made known to the public. That’s simple business practice.
Just because someone is a scientist or physician doesn’t mean that they have the power to override entrenched financial interests that manipulate the regulation, funding and dissemination of research findings and treatment standards, nor that they necessarily want to. And it also doesn’t mean that patients will receive the best treatments. Unfortunately, patients usually receive the most profitable treatments for Big Pharma.
Big Pharma is highly interested in keeping most people taking vaccines because they make big money on them. But most people don’t know that vaccines also insure that people will be sicker over the long term so that it keeps people paying customers to the Medical Industry. This means that vaccines help raise long term profits for the Medical Establishment.
In it, he reveals how the agency has engaged in massive fraud, misinformation and manipulation of vaccine information. What made Grundvig write such a book?
“A couple of reasons,” he says. “One is I have an autistic son who’s 16 years old now. He’s one of the 5,000 cases kicked out of vaccine court [for] thimerosal poisoning.
Number two, I’m first generation Norwegian-American. Poul Thorsen, the main manipulator — but not the only one — is of Danish descent. I was introduced to an alliance [that asked me] to track down Thorsen over in Denmark, a culture and country I know very well.”
Danish Scientist Charged in Vaccine Research Scam
Thorsen is a major player and an essential character in this real-life drama. In 2011, he was charged with 13 counts of wire fraud and nine counts of money laundering. A federal grand jury alleged Thorsen stole over $1 million from autism research funding between February 2004 and June 2008.
He stole the money while serving as the principal investigator for a program studying the relationship between autism and exposure to vaccines. At the time, The Copenhagen Post reported that:1
“… [Thorsen] submitted over a dozen false invoices from the CDC for research expenses to Aarhus University … instructing them to transfer the funds to a CDC account, which was in fact his personal account …
Thorsen’s research on autism is widely known in academic circles, where he was until this week a highly respected figure. A paper of his on the subject, which is known as ‘The Danish Study,’ is quoted extensively to refute the autism vaccine connection.”
As of 2014, Thorsen was permanently expelled from Denmark’s university hospital system. Thorsen has been a fugitive for the past five years. Yet his whereabouts are no secret. As noted by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in a 2015 Forbes article:2
“The fact that he is roaming free and is easy to find, despite the U.S. Federal indictment … suggests a lack of enthusiasm by HHS and CDC to press for his capture and extradition.
The agency undoubtedly fears that a public trial would expose the pervasive corruption throughout CDC’s vaccine division and the fragility of the science supporting CDC’s claims about thimerosal safety.”
The Master Manipulator
Thorsen’s spectacular demise was likely the result of an inside tip to Aarhus University. But was he really the sole person responsible for the creation of these manipulated studies? According to Grundvig’s investigation, the CDC appears to have had a clear hand in the deception.
In 1999, Thorsen — who had earned his Ph.D. in Denmark the year before — was invited to the CDC in Atlanta as a foreign visiting scientist. He arrived at a time when there was a lot of discussion between vaccine makers and the CDC to remove thimerosal from vaccines.
Thorsen ended up being hired full-time to conduct five studies on Danish people, as the Danes had a preexisting database covering the entire population.
In the U.S., no federal health authority was collecting this kind of comprehensive vaccination and health data. “That was the beginning of five corrupt Danish studies that were done: four on thimerosal; one on MMR,” Grundvig says.
The Link Between Thimerosal and Autism
To this day, most doctors will tell you the science is settled and there’s no link between vaccines and autism. In reality, the science is FAR from settled. In 2000, two secret meetings took place. The first one, in May, took place in Puerto Rico. This meeting covered aluminum adjuvants in vaccines. The second meeting took place in Simpsonwood5 three weeks later.
“In those meetings, they talked about how they all realized — the scientists within those meetings, from the CDC, from college institutions, from Big Pharma vaccine makers — all agreed that thimerosal is a problem, and aluminum is a problem. But they can’t change overnight and lose that kind of money …
These two meetings produced results from foreign scientists, like Dr. Thomas Verstraeten out of Belgium. The CDC realized they had a major problem on their hands with the general public. They found thimerosal … is dangerous to the brain, especially of babies, infants and children.”
The CDC desperately needed to prove there’s no link between vaccines and autism, and Thorsen ended up being the guy hired to produce that evidence. Had the CDC not covered up the truth, we’d probably have an entirely different discussion on vaccines today.
As noted by Grundvig, some of Thorsen’s studies kept getting extended because the CDC simply wasn’t comfortable with the results; even with manipulation, they kept showing an association between the number of vaccines and the rise of autism.
“What’s amazing is Thorsen coming from Denmark. Thimerosal was banned in Denmark in 1991 — fully enacted in 1992. Vaccines today in Denmark have no thimerosal whatsoever. So, you have Thorsen agreeing to do whatever the CDC wanted to, which was manipulate the data, to lose data, to produce results that would favor [thimerosal],” Grundvig says.
In his book, Grundvig explains how, were the studies done properly using valid scientific criteria, they would have revealed some incredible insights. For starters, they would have shown that autism is in fact correlated with thimerosal exposure. Brian Hooker is one of the researchers who has gone back to re-evaluate Thorsen’s studies. In 2017, Danish scientists will again redo the studies, to hopefully settle the matter.
Thorsen was hardly the only manipulator of data at the CDC, however. Dr. William Thompson, a research scientist at the CDC’s National Center for Immunizations and Respiratory Diseases (NCIR), is another. He co-authored four studies refuting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, as well as thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.
According to Thompson, one of the studies found that African-American boys who received the MMR vaccine before the age of 36 months had an increased risk for autism.8 He also maintains that other CDC studies have found a relationship between thimerosal and tics, which are associated with autism.9
Clearly, there’s no way for the truth to get out unless we have skilled investigative journalists like Grundvig bringing us the full story. After that, it’s a matter of sharing the information, because you can be sure this information will not appear in The New York Times or on your local news station. It’s suppressed by design.
Thimerosal Is Still a Major Vaccine Ingredient
In the early 2000s there was a major push to remove thimerosal from vaccines, but it never took the form of law. Instead, vaccine makers were encouraged to reduce or eliminate thimerosal in their vaccines on a voluntary basis. Some did so, but according to Grundvig, even vaccines that claim to be thimerosal-free are not entirely devoid of it.
“If you read the labels, it says “thimerosal-depleted” … They remove [thimerosal] in the process. It’s filtered out, but it’s not filtered out 100 percent. There’s still thimerosal in all of the thimerosal-containing vaccines as there were before, just a lot less. However, in the flu vaccine, it’s full bore thimerosal.
It’s the cheapest and fastest way to make it. I don’t think that vaccine makers are interested in changing the 20th century recipe to making vaccines. It’s cheap and fast. That’s all they care about. They do not care about safety. They don’t care about children’s health. With poor children’s health, they are able to take care of children, on the other end … with drugs and treatments and so forth. They continuously make money off every American citizen out there,” Grundvig says.
We must educate ourselves and understand the political and financial dynamics that underlie the recommendations coming from these agencies. Failing to do so can quite literally be dangerous to your health. In this case, Grundvig has done a remarkable job of explaining the situation at the CDC that has allowed the claim that thimerosal-containing vaccines have no role in autism.
This is not to say that there are no other factors involved in autism. Evidence suggests Roundup and other glyphosate-containing pesticides may play a role. Ditto for other toxic exposures and electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures. Having an unbalanced gut microbiome also appears to influence the outcome. There are many variables that, when combined, can result in autism. Still, that does not mean we should give vaccines a free pass.
Projections suggest that within the next 25 years, half of all children will be autistic. There is no way a culture can survive with half of the population being in the autistic spectrum. We’re looking at the collapse of society if the rise in autism isn’t stopped or reversed, and that means addressing ALL known factors.
This is a testament to the fact that chemotherapy and radiation are very damaging to the body. Although they say in this study that the subsequent heart disease doesn’t lead to higher rates of death, it has to have an adverse effect on your quality of life. What good is a cancer treatment if it gives you heart disease? Wouldn’t a better approach be to use more healthy, non-toxic cancer treatments that don’t give you other diseases?
Also, the article states that there are “downstream illnesses and side effects to an extent never encountered before’ which would seem to indicate that all these new cancer treatments are causing more side effects and illnesses subsequent to treatment. This is just more evidence that these conventional treatments are dangerous. They also go on to state that cancer survivors are 3 times more likely to die of non-heart-related causes. This would appear to support the contention that these cancer treatments are damaging the entire body. We know that chemotherapy and radiation are extremely toxic, so it wouldn’t be surprising that it is causing more death after treatment.
The question is when people are going to stop submitting to poisons masquerading as medicine. We already know that Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment are not going to stop offering their expensive, highly profitable toxic cancer treatments. As long as people keep taking them and paying for them, they will continue to sell them to us. And we will continue to suffer and die from them.
THURSDAY, Dec. 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Cancer survivors are at increased risk for the most severe type of heart attack and require close attention to their heart health, a new study suggests.
Researchers at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., reviewed data on more than 2,300 patients who suffered this type of heart attack, called ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). One in 10 had a history of cancer, the investigators found.
“We’ve watched cancer survivorship increase over the past two-and-a-half decades, which is wonderful. But, it has led to new challenges, such as handling of downstream illnesses and side effects to an extent never encountered before,” said study senior author Dr. Joerg Herrmann. He is an interventional cardiologist at the clinic.
While the study found that cancer survivors had ahigher rate of heart attack, not all of those attacks proved fatal. In fact, cancer survivors did not have a higher risk of death caused by heart attacks, the study authors noted. Instead, they were three times more likely to die of non-heart-related causes.
After their heart attack, patients with a history of cancer were more likely to arrive at the hospital with cardiogenic shock, where the heart suddenly can’t pump enough blood.
These patients were also more likely to receive intra-aortic balloon pump therapy, in which a device is inserted to help the heart pump blood. The need for this treatment may indicate a reduction in the heart’s ability to pump blood, the researchers said.
Cancer survivors were also more likely to be hospitalized for heart failure during follow-up. But those who received proper medical treatment were not at increased risk of dying from heart disease. These patients eventually died from their cancer, the study authors said.
“This study supports the importance of cardiologists and oncologists working together to care for these patients,” Herrmann said. This type of care is known as cardio-oncology.
“Clearly, our goal is that the cancer patients of today do not become the cardiac patients of the future and, if they do, that we comprehensively see them through,” he added.
The study was published Dec. 1 in the journal Mayo Clinic Proceedings.
This is probably one of the best articles I’ve seen on healing, curing and understanding cancer. Dr Sircus speaks on disease and how we as individuals need to start taking more responsibility for our health conditions.
He also speaks of the paradigm shift that is necessary for us to undergo before we can actually find solutions for cancer. His idea is simply to replace pharmaceutical poisons with good substances that actually aid the body and assist the healing process. No disease can ever be cured with pharmaceutical drugs. They’re only great for the people that sell them to the tune of billions and trillions of dollars.
Some of his recommendations may sound ridiculous to people that have been indoctrinated by Big Pharma and Disease Industry propaganda that drones all over the mainstream media incessantly, but what has the Medical Establishment come up with that makes more sense than this? At the rate Big Pharma is going, only wealthy people will be able to afford orthodox medical treatments. And that’s if you don’t think we’re there already, considering that many cancer treatments cost thousands of dollars a month.
You can either take back your power and start to learn how to cure your cancer, or you can become another painful statistic of the Big Pharma meat grinder. Search and find your own truth. Even the so-called successes that survive chemotherapy and radiation usually end up with long-term side effects, one of which is what they call ‘secondary cancers.’
Imagine that. The cancer treatment causes cancer. This is the level of thinking that modern cancer treatment/oncology finds itself. They can only get away with it because most people don’t know, or are too trusting or confused to figure out what’s really going on with this. This is really pathetic. Profits over people and maintaining disease instead of either curing it or preventing it from happening. And the rapid and thorough destruction of anyone who doesn’t tow the Big Pharma line. Whoever said cancer treatments, cancer research, journal publications, the mainstream media and health care don’t have a huge dose of politics, cronyism, profiteering and dogma inside hasn’t done their homework.
Through the last ten years, as I have developed Natural Allopathic Medicine, I have introduced new principles and practices to treat cancer and other diseases. I have constantly sought to increase the healing power of doctors and other health care practitioners as well as give power to the patients themselves. It has been a challenge to lay down new tracks through the mountain passes of confusion, lies, deception and even perceptual blindness that arise from medical paradigms that cannot glean wisdom from other competing paradigms.
My medical revolution is simple. Replace dangerous, ineffective, expensive pharmaceuticals with more effective, safe and inexpensive basic medicinals. However, the mainstream world of medicine is stubborn and profit driven choosing to remain with the dangerous, expensive and ineffective medicines—no matter how many people die from these hazardous medications.
Bottom line principle to healing and recovering from cancer: The lazier we are the more it will cost and the longer it will take to recover. The real power to heal and cure lies within each one of us and for a cancer patient application of that power starts with water, then the breath. In fact, the best and most important cancer cures cost little to no money and we should use them no matter how much money we have to throw at our problems.
Disease is not a mistake, it is a natural consequence of many factors coming together, not all of which we have control over. Disease is often a consequence of mistakes we have made in the past that we have to rectify in the present and in the future. Disease is also a matter of ignorance for most of us are not even aware of what we are doing wrong so we can start doing things right. Moreover, even when our life depends on it we are fed misinformation, which just maintains our ignorance and uncertainty of will.
Fastest Way to Winning the War against Cancer – Water Fast
Few of us are into fasting and even fewer of us appreciate the healing power of water. However, it behooves us to understand to have a reference point to what is possible if we really bring our will into play when attempting to heal ourselves from cancer.
Cancer cells differ from healthy cells in the way they create energy. In cancer cells, damaged mitochondria and low oxygen conditions force cells to use fermentation to get their energy meaning they are completely hooked on high levels of glucose. This glucose comes mainly from carbohydrates. If you starve your body of glucose, you effectively starve cancer cells to death.
Dr. Philipp Mergenthaler and Dr. Andreas Meisel showed that depriving a cell of glucose, while giving it plenty of oxygen at the same time, blocks glycolysis and therefore forces the cell to revive its mitochondria and use the Krebs cycle for energy or just die.
In 2008 a group led by Dr. Valter Longo, a biologist at the University of Southern California (USC), published a paper suggesting that a short, sharp course of fasting—not eating at all for a few days, as opposed to months of eating much less than normal—could make ordinary, non-cancerous cells more resistant to the side-effects of chemotherapy, at least in yeast and mice. He also asserts that fasting will strengthen the immune system and help unleash its wrath on cancer cells.
Dr. Longo asserts that fasting can actually make cancerous cells more susceptible to chemotherapy than they otherwise might be. Cancerous mice treated with a combination of chemotherapy and fasting had better survival chances and smaller tumors, for several different types of cancer, than those treated with either fasting or chemotherapy alone. In some cases, the combination treatment eradicated even metastasized cancers completely.
An increasing number of medical scientists know that the most logical, effective, safe, necessary and inexpensive way to treat cancer is to cut off the supply of food to tumors and cancer cells, starving them with a lack of glucose. The therapeutic strategy for selective starvation of tumors by dietary modification is one of the principle forms of therapy that is necessary for cancer patients to win their war on cancer.
Researchers at Huntsman Cancer Institute in Utah were one of the first to discover that sugar “feeds” tumors. The research published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences said, “It’s been known since 1923 that tumor cells use a lot more glucose than normal cells. Our research helps show how this process takes place, and how it might be stopped to control tumor growth,” says Don Ayer, Ph.D., a professor in the Department of Oncological Sciences at the University of Utah.
Dr. Thomas Graeber, a professor of molecular and medical pharmacology, has investigated how the metabolism of glucose affects the biochemical signals present in cancer cells. In research published June 26, 2012 in the journal Molecular Systems Biology, Graeber and his colleagues demonstrate that glucose starvation—that is, depriving cancer cells of glucose—activates a metabolic and signaling amplification loop that leads to cancer cell death as a result of the toxic accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS).
Depriving your body of calories effectively treats cancer and nothing will do that better than a water fast. Normal cells respond to fasting by going into survival mode. They slow down, conserve resources and go into healing and regeneration mode.
Cancer cells on the other hand plow full steam ahead and this leaves them vulnerable. When denied food, they do not have the ability to slow down their metabolism until food becomes available again. They need a constant flood of glucose – i.e. blood sugar, which is the product of metabolizing carbohydrates. Without their favorite growth food, tumor growth slows and cancer cells die.
The ketogenic (no-carb) diet, the Gerson diet, and the macrobiotic diet all work because they practically starve you of carbohydrates. Many decades ago The American Cancer Society said, “Cancer is not caused or cured by any known diet.” Nothing has changed in all these years meaning oncologists are working with their patients with blinders on. The American Diabetes Association maintains a similar position with diabetes yet what we eat and refrain from eating is incredibly important to life and health.
Many studies on diet and cancer prove the connection between a no-carbohydrate diet and dramatically reduced cancer growth rates. Add fasting to whatever else you are doing, and you starve cancer cells even faster.
Fasting can heal many common diseases, because it allows the body to rest, detoxify, and concentrate all its energy on healing instead of digestion. Fasting can be as recharging for the organism as sleeping. During a longer fast, the body reaches out for all degenerative and foreign tissues in the body like fibroid tumors, moles, bacteria, viruses and any other sick and unnecessary tissues.
Precautions: I am not making a universal prescription for water fasts for all cancer patients at all stages of the cancer process. Generally, up to 3 day fasting should be safe for most people, but I recommend to start slowly – first skipping just one meal, then one day of fasting per week and only then go to 3 day fasting. If you have any doubts about fasting or wish to fast longer, please consult with your health practitioner. If your doctor is totally against fasting, you can find naturopathic doctors or other alternative practitioners.
Choose the type of fast that works best for you. If you are going through chemotherapy, remember that fasting not only makes your chemotherapy more effective, it can also reduce your side effects. Better yet, choose a natural form of chemotherapy like hemp oil and blast your healthy cells and the cancer cells both with waves of oxygen, voltage and alkalinity. There is not a cancer cell alive that will enjoy increases in oxygen, voltage and alkalinity while healthy cells will rejoice.
If you are eating a Western Diet/Standard American Diet, rich in meat, dairy, refined sugar, salt, oils, and processed junk food, you are putting toxins in your body faster than it can eliminate them. Over time, these toxins accumulate inside you until there is a tipping point at which your body is so overloaded that essential systems and functions begin to break down. This accumulation of toxins from an unhealthy diet and our environment are major contributors to chronic disease including cancer.
Fasting on water is not generally recommended for late stage cancer when a patient is already suffering from glucose deficiency. Cancer eventually eats it all leaving a person to starve.
Make Sure Your Water is Clean
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) each year lead in drinking water contributes to 480,000 cases of learning disorders in children and 560,000 cases of hypertension in adult males. In 1994 and 1995, 45 million Americans drank water from water systems that fell short of SDWA standards.
We should know that pure water is one of the most basic medicines we have and if one is going to do a water fast it better be done with high quality drinking water. Successful treatment of any disease today depends on adequate intake of good water. Water is our body‘s only means of flushing out toxins.
The more water we drink, and the purer and more alkaline that water is, the more we allow our body to purify itself. Money is well spent on filtering our water. Bottled water, in most instances, is a poor and insecure substitute for the care we must individually put into our own water supplies.
Before we even begin to get sophisticated with multilevel treatments, we have already the nuclear core of an exceptionally powerful anticancer protocol that would probably cost about 1000 dollars for two to three months’ worth of treatment. With people in the third world in mind this cost could be cut further with the most basic and powerful therapies staying in the virtually no cost area.
My recomendation is for you to make sure that you pay attention to your body, and that you also become as knowledgeable as you can about health and fitness. The bottom line is that YOU are responsible for your level of health, not the doctor. You’re the one who is with your body 24 hours a day. The doctor might see you for 10 minutes at the appointment if you’re lucky. If you adhere to the major principles of health, you will minimize your chances of contracting a disease.
It’s only been recently that doctors even admitted that your diet had a relationship to your heart health. And to this day, doctors get very minimal training on the impact of diet on health. But alternative doctors have been preaching about diet for many decades.
You can learn about health. Do your own research. Start doing things that will improve your health, and taking things that can help you reduce or eliminate cancer. They are out there.
Almost half of women with ovarian cancer were initially misdiagnosed, a charity has found.
And four in ten patients with the cancer said their symptoms were not taken seriously by dismissive GPs.
Research found that women were ‘dying needlessly’ because they were fobbed off by doctors who attributed symptoms to other issues such as digestion problems, the menopause or stress.
About 46 per cent of patients were initially referred for tests for something other than ovarian cancer, delaying their diagnosis and treatment.
Annwen Jones, from the charity Target Ovarian Cancer, which carried out the study, said: ‘Women with ovarian cancer are being failed at diagnosis, in access to trials and effective drugs, and they lack support. They deserve better than this.’
A fifth of sufferers aged 50 or above were first told they had irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) despite official guidelines stating older women with symptoms of IBS should be screened for ovarian cancer.
And 40 per cent of patients said their GP had not considered their symptoms to be serious, with nearly one in ten told they may have a mental health problem instead. A further 41 per cent of women had to visit their doctor at least three times before being referred for cancer tests, according to the research.
Even when women were referred for tests, three quarters were not told they might have ovarian cancer.
The cancer is often misdiagnosed or diagnosed late because of a lack of awareness about the symptoms among both the public and doctors. Signs include persistent stomach swelling, appetite loss and pelvic or abdominal pain.
Every year 7,300 women are diagnosed with the disease and 4,100 die. Only a third of women survive for ten years after diagnosis and 15 per cent die within two months.
Target Ovarian Cancer interviewed 396 ovarian cancer patients, as well as 504 GPs and 41 nurses for its annual Pathfinder survey.
It found nearly half of cancer nurses did not think their unit had enough staff to care properly for patients, while two thirds of the nurses surveyed did not have time to explain the symptoms of recurrent ovarian cancer.
Only one in four patients were involved in a clinical trial, despite more than half saying that they would like to be involved in one.
The report authors wrote: ‘Too many women continue to think cervical screening protects them against ovarian cancer and many have a false confidence in their ability to spot the symptoms of ovarian cancer.
‘Women continue to face repeat visits to their GP before being referred for diagnostic tests and many GPs still falsely believe symptoms only present themselves in the later stages of the disease and continue to be unaware of the importance of family history on both sides of the family.’
Professor Michael Peake, from the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service, who oversaw the research, said the results showed ‘where women’s lives could be saved if the quality of services were to be improved and, where necessary, investment made’.
This is just more evidence of how we’re being bombarded by toxic chemicals. These chemicals cause a myriad of diseases and damage to our bodies. Breathing in this particulate matter can cause lung cancer and heart disease. It’s probably impossible for us to remove 100% of toxic chemicals from our environment today but we should probably be taking some steps to reduce the impact of these pollutants.
And we’re not even talking about the toxic chemicals in our personal care products, our foods and drinks, or other ways in which we get inundated with all these toxins. We’re talking literally thousands of different chemicals that we are drowning in. Pharmaceutical drugs count towards this chemical mix because they are known to be in wastewater.
Even though we can’t eliminate toxic chemicals, the most important thing we can do is to regularly detoxify our bodies. That should reduce the negative effects of these toxins on us. There are a number of ways to run a detox on yourself.
Air pollution is causing around 467,000 premature deaths in Europe every year, the European Environment Agency (EEA) has warned.
People in urban areas are especially at risk, with around 85% exposed to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) at levels deemed harmful by the World Health Organization (WHO).
These particles are too small to see or smell, but have a devastating impact.
PM2.5 can cause or aggravate heart disease, asthma and lung cancer.
How big is the problem?
It’s pretty bad. Within the European Union (EU), more than 430,000 people died prematurely due to PM2.5 in 2013, the most recent year with figures available.
According to the EEA’s Air quality in Europe – 2016 report, the toxic gas nitrogen dioxide (NO2) – released by vehicles and central heating boilers – has an impact equivalent to 71,000 premature deaths a year.
Ground-level ozone (O3) is also killing people – an estimated 17,000 annually in the EU.
Unlike the protective ozone layer in the stratosphere, ground-level ozone is harmful, formed when emissions like NO2 react with other pollutants and “cook” in heat or sunlight.
The European countries with the worst levels of PM2.5 are Bulgaria, Poland and the Czech Republic.
Nations like Poland where coal is a major source of electricity production tend to rank at the bottom of air quality measures, according to the EEA.
What are PM 2.5 particles?
Particulate matter, or PM2.5, is a type of pollution involving fine particles less than 2.5 microns (0.0025mm) in diameter
A second type, PM10, is of coarser particles with a diameter of up to 10 microns
Some occur naturally – eg from dust storms and forest fires, others from human industrial processes
They often consist of fragments that are small enough to reach the lungs or, in the smallest cases, to cross into the bloodstream as well
A build-up of PM2.5 in the lungs has been associated with causing respiratory illnesses and lung damage
What’s the damage?
PM particles may contain smoke, dust, soot, metals, nitrates, sulphates, water and rubber from tyres.
They can get deep into your lungs, causing irritation and inflammation, and some may make it into your bloodstream.
Heart disease and lung conditions are most commonly linked to inhaling air pollution, but your liver, spleen, central nervous system, brain, and even reproductive system can also be damaged.
PM2.5 and PM10 can increase susceptibility to viral and bacterial pathogens, triggering pneumonia in vulnerable people.
Children are most susceptible to illness from air pollution. A major study conducted over six years found that children living in highly polluted parts of cities have up to 10% less lung capacity than normal, and the damage can be permanent.
Is Europe worse than elsewhere?
Probably not. According to WHO data released two months ago, nine out of 10 people on the planet now breathe polluted air.
Around three billion people still cook and heat their homes using solid fuels like wood or animal dung on open fires, and 4.3 million a year die prematurely from illness attributable to the resulting “household air pollution” – mostly from strokes, heart disease or lung deficiencies.
Country-by-country data showed that Turkmenistan has the highest death rate connected to outdoor air pollution.
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan and Egypt rounded out the top five.
“Rich countries are getting much better in improving the quality of the air,” Dr Carlos Dora from the WHO told the Associated Press.
“Poorer countries are getting worse. That is the overall trend.”
Europe is lagging behind North America, however, mostly because it depends more on diesel fuel and farming practices that create ammonia and methane.
China, the country with the sixth-highest death rate linked to air pollution, is relatively wealthy, but is plagued by smog in its cities and polluted air from industrial sources.
India has generated the most troubling smog headlines in recent months. Smoke from fireworks set off during Diwali, the Hindu Festival of Lights, sent Delhi’s PM2.5 levels soaring to more than 90 times the level considered safe by the WHO.
Toxic air is a leading cause of premature death in India, where 620,000 people perish every year from pollution-related diseases.
To be sure, just because we haven’t YET found the science that supports the effectiveness of some alternative treatments doesn’t mean that they don’t work. Remember, gravity worked before Newton wrote his treatise on it!
The question becomes one of whether or not you’re going to wait (and possibly die) before the news about some of these alternative cancer treatments is announced on CNN or are you going to do your own investigation and possibly reap the benefits from them. In an perfect world, it wouldn’t have to be this way. But this is the world we live in, so you’re going to decide what you’re going to do to increase your chances of beating cancer. Personally, I would look into everything I possibly could to save myself from the ravages of cancer and the associated risks that come along with it.
Chinese olive fruit has promising potential in cancer treatment.
The methanol-ethyl acetate partitioned fraction from Chinese olive fruits inhibits cancer cell proliferation and tumor growth by promoting apoptosis through the suppression of the NF-κB signaling pathway.
Food Funct. 2016 Nov 21. Epub 2016 Aug 21. PMID: 27869910
Chinese olives (Canarium album L.) have historically been used for medicinal purposes rather than commercially for oil. In this report, we reveal that the methanol-ethyl acetate partitioned fraction from Chinese olive fruits (MEO), of which ellagic acid accounted for 12%, exhibited profound anti-proliferative activities in the human colon cancer cell line, HCT116. Additionally, oral administration of MEO remarkably inhibited the tumor growth of subcutaneously implanted CT26 cells, a mouse colon carcinoma cell line, in BALB/c mice. Treatment with MEO induced a significant increase in the percentage of apoptotic cells and resulted in poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) cleavage, suggesting that MEO inhibits cancer cell proliferation by promoting apoptosis. Our study also showed that MEO exerted the most potent effect on the inhibition of NF-κB-mediated signaling among the partitioned fractions from Chinese olives. This process employed the use of reporter-based bio-platforms that are capable of detecting the activation of NF-κB. In addition, phosphorylation of NF-κB signaling-associated proteins, IKKα/β, IκBα, and p65, was reduced in MEO-incubated cancer cells, indicating that MEO suppresses NF-κB activation. Moreover, MEO treatment significantly suppressed lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced cancer cell proliferation, demonstrating that MEO promotes cancer cell apoptosis through the inhibition of the NF-κB signaling pathway. In summary, our findings demonstrate that the methanol-ethyl acetate partitioned fraction from Chinese olive fruits inhibits cancer cell proliferation and tumor growth by promoting apoptosis through the suppression of NF-κB signaling. Therefore, the Chinese olive fruit has promising potential incancer treatment.
Despite the endless claims of Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment that they are feverishly searching for the cure for cancer, it hasn’t materialized. And even worse, we’re not significantly closer to any true cures than we were 100 years ago. All of this despite numerous decades of research and work. And in spite of billions of dollars donated to cancer charities.
If you analyze the situation, you will come to understand that Big Pharma is only interested in treatments that are extremely profitable. So even if Big Pharma was to find a non-toxic cancer cure (or treatment for any other disease), they would actively work to hide it, discredit it, or suppress it. It would be the only things they could do to protect their profits. And them, along with the Medical Establishment and others that profit from the status quo work to protect their profits. They’re all in it together when it comes to profiting from the cancer merry-go-round.
Worse yet, anybody (insider or outsider) who threatens profits gets summarily dealt with. And the dirty bag of tricks comes into play. Lies, propaganda, fake research, rigged research trials, spiked research, skewing of results to give desired outcomes, and any other way they can insure that chemo, radiation and any other pipe dream profitable cancer ‘treatment’ is the only one that is approved for medical use. Here are some of the Best Alternative Cancer Web Sites right here…
Some of the tangible signs that Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment are not sincere in their ‘search’ for cancer cures (and cures to other profitable diseases that they treat) are:
They focus intense research on the minutiae of cancer etiology, disease process, and related topics instead of on the big picture.
Even when they do research natural substances, they don’t recommend their use even though they are usually very non-toxic and have a very low downside to their use along with a huge upside if they do happen to work.
Notice that health care professionals aren’t interested in finding out how cancer patients who successfully get better results than what would be expected (i.e., they don’t get side effect from chemo or radiation, or they get much better results in eradicating the cancer/tumors) or in what these patients are doing to get those great results.
Health care professionals (esp. doctors and scientists) feel that they have a patent on truth, and that nobody else can possibly find a cure (or non-toxic, effective treatment) for cancer.
Most people act like there is no politics, corruption, and other intrigue in science, and that the entire scientific and medical profession is beyond reproach, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Scientists & health care professionals do not admit the truth that chemicals, GMOs, vaccinations, diet, etc., have a huge effect on disease incidence.
Businesses (like Big Pharma) are not charitable organizations, and are only concerned about profits, and the hell with the effects on society and individual patients (as they prove by their actions, repeatedly).
A cheap cure would put the entire cancer industry out of business.
If they admit that a non-establishment person did something that they couldn’t do, it would be a monumental embarrassment to the Medical Establishment, and would prove that they were wasting massive resources on BS research.
They often dismiss treatments with no evidence except their own status and opinion.
I don’t think most people like these things, including many health care professionals. But it is a reality for most people. I think that we can win if we start being more honest about things and begin to work together. Scientists, doctors and other health care professionals and everybody has a stake in improving the health care system. It may hurt profits to Big Pharma in the short-term to admit the truth, but it will be better in the long run for everybody when we embrace the truth about cancer and most other things. Do your own research and see what you find.