Hormone Therapy For Cancer Treatment In India At Affordable Cost

Hormone Therapy For Cancer Treatment In India At Affordable Cost

 

Hormone Therapy

Hormone treatments are treatments using natural body chemicals called hormones, or drugs that block hormones. Hormones are chemicals made in one part of the body, that travel in the bloodstream to make something happen in another part of the body. Some cancer cells need hormones to grow, or are encouraged to grow more quickly by hormones. These cancers are said to be ‘hormone sensitive’ or ‘hormone dependent’….

 

What hormones are ?

Hormones are natural substances made by glands in our bodies. The network of glands that make hormones is called the endocrine system. Hormones are carried in our bloodstream and act as messengers between one part of our body and another. They control the growth and activity of certain cells and organs.

 

What hormone therapy is ?

Hormone treatments use the sex hormones produced by our bodies, or drugs that block them, to treat cancer. Not all cancers respond to hormone therapy. Doctors might use hormone therapy for people with cancers that are ‘hormone sensitive’ or ‘hormone dependent’. This means that the cancer needs the hormone to grow…

 

Types of hormone therapy

There are a number of different types of hormone therapy. Which one you have depends on a number of factors, including your type of cancer.

 

There is information below on :

Breast cancer hormone therapy Prostate cancer hormone therapy Womb cancer hormone therapy Breast cancer hormone therapy

 

Aromatase inhibitors

These are a relatively new type of hormone therapy. You can only take them if you have been through the menopause. After menopause, your ovaries stop producing oestrogen. But your body still makes a small amount by changing other hormones (called androgens) into oestrogen. You need an enzyme called aromatase to make this change happen…

]]>

 

Pituitary down regulators

A gland in the brain, called the pituitary gland, controls the amount of sex hormones made by the ovaries. Pituitary down regulators are drugs that prevent the ovaries making oestrogen or progesterone. They do this by blocking the signal from the pituitary gland to the ovaries.

You will only have this treatment if you haven’t yet had your menopause. After menopause, your ovaries don’t produce hormones so this type of drug won’t help. Pituitary down regulators include goserelin for breast cancer (Zoladex) and leuprorelin…

 

Prostate cancer hormone therapy

Prostate cancer depends on the male hormone testosterone for its growth. Hormone therapy aims to reduce or stop the body making testosterone and slow down or stop the growth of the cancer…

 

Digestive system

Hormonal therapies can affect your digestive system in different ways.

You may feel sick. This is usually mild and settles down after a few days to weeks. Your doctor can prescribe anti-sickness tablets, which should help.

You might have constipation or diarrhoea – this is usually mild and easily controlled with diet or drugs.

You may lose your appetite a bit, or have an increased appetite – this might lead to weight changes…

 

Menopausal symptoms

If you haven’t already been through your menopause, it may start when you begin hormone therapy. This could be either temporary or permanent. If you are taking a pituitary down regulator, your periods will stop. If you are taking tamoxifen, and are still having periods, they may stop or become lighter.

 

Muscle and bone changes

You may develop pains in your joints. This often settles down after a few weeks. You can take a mild painkiller to help control any pain you have.

Some hormonal therapy can cause thinning of your bones. Weight bearing exercise can help to protect your bones, such as walking, running, cycling or exercise in the gym. But check with your doctor before starting any new form of exercise, especially if you have not exercised for a while.

Tamoxifen doesn’t cause bone thinning and can have some protective effect on your bones…

 

Please log on to : www.indiahospitaltour.com

Send your query : Get a Quote

 

We Care Core Values

We have a very simple business model that keeps you as the centre.

Having the industry’s most elaborate and exclusive Patient Care and Clinical Coordination teams stationed at each partner hospital, we provide you the smoothest and seamless care ever imagined. With a ratio of one Patient Care Manager to five patients our patient care standards are unmatched across the sub continent.

 

Welcome to World Class Treatment and Surgery by We Care Health Services, India.
Contact Us :
www.indiasurgerytour.com ||

E-mail us on : info@indiahospitaltour.com ||

Contact Center Tel. :(+91) 22 28950588 / (+91) 22 28941902 (24 hrs.)

The surgery and medical treatments offered by We Care Health Services at JCI Accredited / ISO Certified Hospitals are vast and varied; ranging from Heart Surgery in India, Cardiology to Cardio Thoracic surgery, Total Knee / Hip / Ankle / Shoulder Joint Replacement Surgery in India including ACL reconstruction Surgery to Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Surgery in India , Spine Surgery in India like Discectomy / Laminectomy Surgery, Cervical Decompression to Anterior / Posterior Spinal Fusion Surgery in India, Chemotherapy, Radiotherapy, Cancer surgery, Sterotactic Radiotherapy, Autologous / Allogenic Bone Marrow Transplant Surgery to Breast Cancer treatments, Near relative Kidney Transplant Surgery to Dialysis and Kidney Biopsy, Low Cost Liver Transplants Surgery, Hysterectomy (Vaginal / Abdominal) to Ovarian Cystectomy, Hernia repair Surgery to Cholecystectomy, Advanced Neurosurgery in India, Bariatric surgery, Gastric Bypass Surgery in India, Eye Surgery in India, Cornea Transplant, Cataract Surgery to LASIK Eye care Surgery, IVF, ICSI, Egg Donor to Surrogacy, Minimally Invasive surgery or Laparoscopic Surgery to Cochlear Implants, Breast Lift / Tummy Tuck, Face Lift to Low Cost Rhinoplasty Cosmetic Surgery, multi specialty Hospitals in India offering first world treatments with board certified highly qualified medical consultants in attendance at third world prices..

PDF Creator    Send article as PDF   

Cancer – One in Two Men and One in Three Women Will Get It. What to Do?

Cancer – One in Two Men and One in Three Women Will Get It. What to Do?

There is nothing that puts more fear in people than a diagnosis of Cancer. Statistically speaking, we now have one in two chances (male) or one in three chances (female) of getting cancer before the end of our life (American Cancer Society statistics for the year 2003). At the beginning of the 20th century, statistics gave us one in 500 chances of getting cancer.

All cancers considered, if you have a primary cancer (in one location only) the most optimistic statistics only give you 28% chances of recovery. If you have metastatic cancer (in more than one location) then your chances of recovery are 0.1% or in other words, one chance in one thousand to recover – (statistics from Dr Philip Binzel book “Alive and Well” published by American Media).

The news is bleak to say the least. However, as we will see later on, this need not be the case.

Ever since I can remember, I have read newspaper articles, heard claims on TV or radio, reporting new “wonder” cures on the war against cancer. Victory against this terrible disease was, according to these reports, just around the corner. Why is it then that so many people are still dying from this disease? Are the 600 UK cancer charities (The largest UK charities being Imperial Cancer Research Fund, Cancer Research Campaign and Institute of Cancer Research) lying to us?

The “American Cancer Society” is the richest charity in the world. All debts paid, it would still have half a billion dollars in the bank!

Linus Pauling, the winner of two Nobel prizes, seemed to think so when he said: “Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.”

What is Cancer?

Modern researchers have for many years been exploring the virus connection at a cost of billions of dollars and pounds. The pitiful result is that “no cancer that was incurable 25 years ago is curable today and that, for the most common cancers that kills 90% of patients today chemotherapy is no better than snake oil” (The Cancer Handbook. What Doctors don’t tell you publication. By Lynne Taggart).

When you are diagnosed with cancer, what the doctor is really saying is that you have one or several tumours in your body and that at least one of the tumours contains some cancer cells. They see the tumours as the enemy that has to be fought and destroyed and all their efforts are directed against eradicating the tumours.

]]>

What is a tumour though? A tumour is only a symptom; it shows that something has gone wrong in your body and that your immune system is no longer available to fight it. Many researchers claim that we all have tumours in our body and that several times in our life we get cancer. However, we do not all die from cancer. The reason is that our body’s defence mechanism spring into action when a tumour is formed and gets rid of it or at least neutralises it. If cancer cells are beginning to form, these are killed off by our immune system and all is back to normal.

However if for some reason our immune system is severely deficient and we are unable to fight off the formation of the cancerous cells, then disease spreads.

What needs to be done to fight the tumour is not so much to remove it (surgery), burn it (radiation) or poison it (chemotherapy) as all these will weaken our immune system (damaging both our liver and kidneys to a point where it is difficult for our body to fight off any health problem). But to find out why the tumour formed in the first place and remove the cause.

Fighting it according to Dr Binzel is no good, our body now has in its memory the recipe to form tumours and uses the negative ingredients we feed it with to form new tumours and it will rarely stop doing so unless we remove the cause. The lack of positive ingredients (Vitamins, minerals and essential enzymes) to fight off the tumour is just as important.

Let me compare this reasoning with the simple example of a tooth infection. There is no point in taking painkillers to fix the tooth. I grant you that they will probably relieve the pain but I profess that they will not cure the tooth. What needs to be done is to get rid of the infection with antibiotics or have the tooth removed.

What do cancer cells feed on?

Several factors such as diet, negative emotions/ stress and environmental toxins are usually responsible for the development of cancer. Dietary speaking, cancer cells need food to survive. Dr Otto Warburg received the Nobel Prize for scientifically proving that cancer feed from the fermentation of sugar:

“in cancer cells [the feeding] is replaced by an energy-yielding reaction of the lowest living forms; namely, a fermentation of glucose” (quoted in prevention – May 1968).

According to Macrobiotic medicine theory, cancer cells also feed on animal protein (all types of meat, especially chicken but also very much on dairy, eggs etc..)

Detecting cancer

Currently, surgeons often perform a biopsy when cancer is suspected. A biopsy is a way of extracting a quantity of matter from a tumour and test it to see if it is cancerous. The problem with this method is that if the tumour is cancerous and the tumour is punctured, there is a definite risk that the cancerous liquid will spread to surrounding cells and spread the cancer around the body (Roger Delin – medical analyst – Philippines.

Breast cancer is often diagnosed using a mammogram. The main manufacturer of mammographic equipment is a company called “Smarlight Mammographics”. They state: “We expected error rates to be around 30%, but the wide range of results (10%-90%) was an eye-opener.” Amazing admission from the largest manufacturer of what is considered as the ultimate test to detect breast cancer. Unbelievable !

It is interesting to learn that autopsies have shown that many undetected cancers were present in the body of people who died from other causes. This makes a mockery of medical statistics and confirms that in fact a substantial number of cancers are never detected and do not obligatorily cause death.

A Swedish study has revealed that 15% of major cancers were not revealed before death and around half were of a type normally considered fatal (ref: wddty).

Modern approach and progress on cancer

The modern approach to treat cancer is surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, hormones and immunotherapy. The percentage of oncologists (cancer doctors) who would not participate in chemotherapy trials is an alarming 75% (due to its toxicity). (John Robbins

Patrick Hamouy runs a school of Alternative Therapies in the UK. He teaches Reiki Healing, Indian Head Massage, Emotional Freedom Therapy (EFT), Anatomy & Physiology, Oriental Diagnosis & Psychic Development. He sees customers for consultations.in Macrobiotic, Emotional Freedom Therapy (EFT) and Removal of toxic products from the home environment Full information on his web site at: http://www.therapies.com

Create PDF    Send article as PDF   

Cancer: A Historical Perspective By Lawrence Broxmeyer MD

Cancer: A Historical Perspective By Lawrence Broxmeyer MD

 

Hodgkin’s cancer under attack

When Virginia Livingston was a student at Bellevue Medical College her pathology teacher mentioned, rather disparagingly, that there was a woman pathologist at Cornell who thought Hodgkin’s disease (a form of glandular cancer) was caused by avian tuberculosis [1]. This lady had published, but no one had confirmed her findings. Afterwards, Livingston compared slides of both. In Hodgkin’s, the large multinucleated giant cells were called Reed–Sternberg cells. They were similar to the giant cells of tuberculosis, which formed to engulf the tubercle bacilli. Livingston stored away in her memory that this lady pathologist was probably right but she would have a difficult time in gaining acceptance.

 By 1931, Pathologist Elsie L’Esperance was seeing ‘acid fast’ tuberculosis-like bacteria riddling her Hodgkin’s cancer tissue samples. And that germ, once injected into guinea pigs, caused them to come down with Hodgkin’s too, fulfilling Koch’s postulates. L’Esperance brought her stained slides to former teacher and prominent Cornell cancer pathologist James Ewing. Ewing initially confirmed that her tissue slides were indeed Hodgkin’s. But when he found out that her slides came through guinea pig inoculation of the avian (fowl) tuberculosis she had found in humans with Hodgkin’s, Ewing, visibly upset, said that the slides then could not be cancer.

It betrayed his checkered history of high-placed medical politician. In 1907, you could have approached Dr. James Ewing about a cancer germ, and he would have embraced you over it. At that time, both for he and the rest of the nations medical authorities, it was not a question of whether cancer was caused by a germ, but which one. Was not it Ewing, at one time, who had proclaimed that tuberculosis followed Hodgkin’s cancer “like a shadow”?

But shortly after, James Ewing, “the Father of Oncology”, sent a sword thru the heart of an infectious cause of cancer with “Neoplastic Diseases” [2], becoming an ambitious zealot for radiation therapy with the directorship of what would one day be called Sloan–Kettering squarely on his mind. His entry lay in prominent philanthropist James Douglas. A vote for Ewing, Douglas knew, was a vote for continued radiation and James Douglas began sizeable uranium extraction operations from Colorado mines thru his company, Phelps Dodge, Inc.[34].

Soon Sloan became known as a radium hospital and went from an institution with a census of less than 15% cancer patients, separated by partition, lest their disease spread to others, to a veritable cancer center. But the very history of radiation revealed its flaws, and by the early 1900s nearly 100 cases of leukemia were documented in radium recipients and not long thereafter it was determined that approximately 100 radiologists had contracted that cancer in the same way [3].

Still, Ewing, by now an Honorary Member of the American Radium Society, persisted.

Elise L’Esperance was anything but alone in linking Hodgkin’s to a germ called Avium or fowl tuberculosis. Historically Sternberg himself, discoverer of Hodgkin’s trade-mark Reed–Sternberg cell, believed Hodgkin’s was caused by tuberculosis. Both Fraenkel and Much [35] held, as L’Esperance, that it was caused by a peculiar form of tuberculosis, such as Avium or Fowl tuberculosis, and of all the cancers, debate over the infectious cause of Hodgkin’s waxed the hottest.

Into this arena L’Esperance stepped in 1931, with few listening. She would publish Studies in Hodgkin’s Diseases [4] in an issue of Annals of Surgery. It proved to be the one legacy that no one, not even Ewing, who would soon die from a self-diagnosed cancer, could take away.

Dr. Virginia Livingston

 ”Our (cancer) cultures were scrutinized over and over again. Strains were sent to many laboratoriesfor identification. None could really classify them. They were something unknown. They had many forms but they always grew up again to be the same thing no matter how they were cultured. They resembled the mycobacteria more than anything else. The tubercle bacillus is a mycobacterium or fungoid bacillus.”–Virginia Livingston, 1972

Virginia Wuerthele-Caspe Livingston was born in Meadville, Pennsylvania and went on to obtain impeccable credentials. Graduating from Vassar, she received her M.D. from N.Y.U. The first female medical resident ever in New York City, with time Livingston became a Newark school physician where one day a staff nurse asked medical assistance.

Already diagnosed with Reynaud’s syndrome, the tips of this nurses fingers were ulcerated and bled intermittently. Livingston diagnosed Scleroderma. But upon further examination there was a hole in the nasal septa, something that Livingston had previous seen in the mycobacterial diseases TB and Leprosy.

So Livingston approached dermatologist Eva Brodkin and a pathologist for confirmation, all the while convinced that mycobacterial infection was causing the Scleroderma. She then preformed cultures from a sterile nasal swab – mycobacteria appeared, everywhere [1]. Injected into experimental chicks and guinea pigs, all but a couple died. Upon autopsy, the guinea pigs had indeed developed the hardened skin patches of Scleroderma. . . some of which were cancerous.

Momentum builds

Livingston, now possessed, solicited fresh sterile specimens of cancer from any operating room that would give them to her. All cancer tissues yielded the same acid-fast mycobacteria. New Jersey Pathologist Roy Allen confirmed her findings. Livingston and Allen then found that they could actually differentiate malignant from benign tissue by their mycobacterial content [5]. But still the explanation for why the cancer germ showed so many different forms was elusive.

Try as she might, part of Virginia Livingston’s problems in an American validation of her multi-shaped cancer germ lay firmly entrenched in the history of medicine, especially in the constantly changing field of microbiology. Louis Pasteur could handle being quickly rushed off a Paris Academy of Sciences podium to escape harsh reaction to his suggestion that children’s milk be boiled first, but he could not tolerate his rival Pierre Bechamp’s statement that a single bacteria could assume many, many forms. On his deathbed, Pasteur was said to have changed his mind when he said: “The terrain is everything”, meaning the culture or milieu that bacteria grew on or in could change their shape or characteristics. But it was too late and even today, most conventional microbiologists deny the existence of such form changing (or pleomorphic) germs.

Robert Koch, Father of Bacteriology and discoverer of tuberculosis, could have helped. When he first worked with the bacteria anthrax, he noticed that anthrax’s classical rod shape became thread-like inside the blood of laboratory mice. And then, after multiplying, they changed again, into the same assumed spore-like forms he later documented in tuberculosis as well.

Aware of what she faced, yet undismayed   Livingston methodically went about proving cancers true cause. First in her line of attack were the long suspected and well-publicized tumor agents of Rous, Bittner and Shope. By photomicrographs, Livingston and her group demonstrated acid-fast mycobacterial forms in each of these so-called “viral” cancers. This included the famed Rous chicken sarcoma.

Early on, Virginia Livingston had decided that she needed help in validating her cancer germ and nobody knew the shapes and staining capacities of mycobacterial-related germs better than Dr. Eleanor Alexander-Jackson of Cornell. As far back as 1928, Eleanor Alexander-Jackson, bacteriologist, had discovered unusual and to that point unrecognized forms of the TB bacillus, including its filterable forms. By 1951, Alexander-Jackson was considered the expert TB microbiologist at Cornell.

In the same year, another American, H.C. Sweany proposed that both the granular and other forms of tuberculosis that passed thru a filter caused Hodgkin’s cancer [6]. This was subsequently supported by studies by Mellon, Beinhauser and Fisher [7,8]. Mellon prophetically warned that tuberculosis could assume both its characteristic red acid-fast forms as well as blue nonacid-fast forms indistinguishable from common germs such as Staphylococci, fungi and the Corynebacteria and that this would surely perplex modern microbiologists.

When organized medicine choose to ignore these studies, Jackson warned that a so-called cure for TB could be as short-lived as it took classical TB rods, for the moment gone underground as a nonacid-fast form, to resurface one day and spring back towards destruction. Although American medicine had no serious time for Alexander-Jackson or her discoveries, it would not disturb her for as long as she focused on tuberculosis and its cousin, leprosy. But when her focus shifted towards Livingston’s cancer germ, it would move to destroy her. She simply posed too great a threat.

Recognition

By December of 1950 Livingston, who would go on to write over 17 peer reviewed articles by the end of her career, wrote, together with Jackson and four other prominent researchers, what still stands as a milestone on the infectious nature of cancer [9].

At the AMA’s 1953 New York exhibit, participants interest was particularly riveted towards an exhibit of Livingston’s cancer germ, live. The press, muzzled by Sloan Kettering’s head, Cornelius Rhodes, was not allowed to interview or report on this exhibit. Above, the cancer germs seemed indestructible, surviving a five-day experience of intolerable heat from closed-circuit microscopy [1].

As Livingston and Jackson’s work on the cancer germ became more and more convincing, her opponents surfaced and became more and more vocal.

Also with recognition, came visitors. One a pathologist from Scranton, Dr. George Clark, told Livingston he had cultured Dr. Thomas Glover’s famed cancer germ from human cancer and developed metastasizing tumors in animals from it.

Clark assured Livingston that Glover was on to the same bacterial pathogen that she was. For more than two hundred years, the same organism had been discovered and rediscovered, named and renamed, each discoverer adding to what was known about the cancer germ, but thus far to no avail.

US studies take hold

Clark knew Glover as part of an investigative team of the US Public Heath Service headed by George W. McCoy in 1929. Glover had just become too well known to be ignored. His cancer serum was working.

Much was at stake. The Country was already committed to the idea that cancer could not possibly be an infectious disease, and Glover was saying that he had already isolated the cancer germ.

Actually, he had not, but few would believe that it was really his young, tobacco-chewing assistant, Thomas Deaken who had isolated it. Deaken worked his way up New York’s health and hospital system from the most menial positions to laboratory assistant. With neither formal medical or scientific training, this laboratory assistant nevertheless learned laboratory protocol [10]. Incredibly Deaken engineered a geranium based culture medium, managing to grow out acid-fast, tubercular bacteria. Then he inoculated mice and dogs, producing cancer with metastatic spreadin every case [10]. Sometime between 1917 and 1918 Thomas Daeken, laboratory assistant, produced a specific anti-cancer sera by injecting horses with the human cancer germ. Moreover, the sera worked whether in prevention or cure of his cancerous laboratory animals. But Glover had come to the point where he needed someone to lend credibility to his work, and that someone, came in the form of Dr. Thomas J. Glover of Toronto.

It will always be to Glover’s credit that he saw the importance and application of Deaken’s work from day one. A contract was quickly drawn up and executed. Glover rushed back to open a Canadian cancer clinic in Toronto. The serum worked in many but not all cases; but as Glover’s reputation grew, so to did the interest in him of Canada’s organized medicine. A subpoena giving him 21 days to submit a full presentation of his treatment was issued. But Glover was not cooperating. Glover was in trouble and would soon be chased out of Canada [10].

By 1926, and now in the US, Glover published Progress in Cancer Research, presenting over 50 cases, most of which went into remission with Glover’s Serum [11]. It sparked additional notoriety, both here and abroad. In 1929, Livingston’s friend Dr. George Clark joined Dr. George McCoy, then head of the Hygienic Lab of the US Public Health Service. Their intended destination: Glover’s laboratory, now at New York’s Murdock Foundation. Glover was under investigation and McCoy wanted him to repeat his work, this time under Health Service surveillance and in Washington. Glover complied, and he and his team went to the nations capital to prove their case at what was to one day become the National Institute of Health.

McCoy, the investigator, impressed by Glover’s work, rather than come down on Glover, instead issued a 1937 letter to Surgeon General Parran, which spoke in glowing terms of the great importance and significance of Glover’s cancer findings.

Soon thereafter, McCoy was abruptly and mysteriously replaced by Dr. R.H. Thompson. Parran, a product of organized medicine, had a definite agenda. The question before him was whether to publish Glover’s now finished Washington report or not and Parran, despite continued committee approval, was not about to, sending Glover into a cold rage which ended with him walking away from Washington to publish independently.Meanwhile, Glover’s serum, which had helped and saved so many was subjected to cursory animal studies and a review without clinical trials before being condemned by Government agencies.

Glover would eventually return to Canada, but he would never again answer questions as to just what had happened in America.

Focus on breast cancer

Virginia Livingston now went specifically after breast cancer. Thirty sterile cancerous breasts were transported from operating room to lab. Cancers were isolated from each breast and when axillary tissue from under the arm was supplied, the cancerous portion was cut from this too. Livingston and Jackson found the cancer germ everywhere, and in the case of underarm glands, even when the pathology report was negative, the cancer microorganism surfaced [1].

Champion of toxic chemotherapy, Cornelius Rhoads replaced Ewing at Sloan. Rhoads, head of chemical warfare during the Korean war, was deeply committed to chemotherapy and the huge grants it brought from the pharmaceutical industry.

It is poorly recognized that the chemotherapy or “chemo” used against cancer began as a weapon of mass destruction par excellence [12]. When the Axis folded, nitrogen mustard, declassified, first came under real medical scrutiny for cancer. Initially evaluated for lymphosarcoma in mice, human studies soon followed as more and more variants of nitrogen mustard were concocted and tried [12].

Other related classes of chemotherapeutic agents followed and so did their repercussions. Most had the potential to cause a second entirely different cancer [13]. Even tamoxifen for breast cancer was associated with a two to three-fold increased risk of cancers of the lining of the uterus (endometrial), some of which were high grade with a poor forecast [14].

Nevertheless, Cornelius Rhoads remained committed to the treatment, and at the same time prepared a series of major roadblocks to stop Livingston.

In 1950, he barred her from presenting her paper on the cancer germ at the New York Academy of Sciences by discrediting Irene Diller, the symposiums sponsor, chief-editor of the respected journal Growth, and a prominent cancer researcher. Diller, like many, had accepted a gift from a pharmaceutical house at one point. Livingston came across Diller in a Life Magazine article which talked about a Philadelphia cancer researcher who was observing strange fungus-like filaments protruding from cancer cells. Livingston and Alexander-Jackson convinced her that her fungal forms (the prefix – myco in mycobacteria denotes a germ with fungal properties) were part and parcel of the cancer microbe, and that crucial to its identification was acid-fast staining.

Dr. Eleanor Alexander-Jackson’s elation over the groups infectious breast cancer findings came to an abrupt halt when she was informed by her private physician Frank Adair that she too had it. A radical mastectomy was done at Sloan on Adair’s advice.

While anxiously waiting for the outcome, Dr. Virginia Livingston heard her name paged on Sloan’s overhead. Rhoads wanted to speak to her regarding Jackson’s ongoing surgery. It was urgent. Alexander-Jackson was still in the operating room and the radical mastectomy had been done. In Rhoads office, the two adversaries faced off. incredibly, Rhoads was after permission to go after a cancerous lymph node deep in the middle of Eleanor’s chest. Livingston bristled.

]]>

“We have been looking for a tumor such as she has.” said Rhoads.Apparently a radical was not enough. He was seeking permission to try a new surgical technique which went after the deep chest node. Livingston had had enough. Just the thought of the cruel, disfiguring procedure made her sick.

“Not on your life.” She shot back, as she left [1].

 

The single most convincing study of how bacteria causes cancer

By 1965, Edith Mankiewicz, Director of labs at Montreal’s Royal Edward Chest Hospital and assistant professor of bacteriology at McGill, by examining human cancer tissue, established mycobacteria-like germs inside cancer [15]. In the bibliography of one of her landmark papers is reference to a personal communication with Dr. Eleanor Alexander-Jackson. One of the cancers under Mankiewicz’s trained eye was lung cancer. Lung cancer,or bronchogenic cancer, was first reported in the nineteenth century at a time when it was practically unknown-while mycobacterial disease of the lung, primarily tuberculosis, was so rampant as to be called ‘white plague’ or in certain circles: ‘captain of the men of death.’ By the middle of the seventeenth century, one in five deaths was due to tuberculosis and at the end of the nineteenth century, there was fear that it would destroy the very civilization of Europe. So difficult was it to differentiate tuberculosis from the newly discovered bronchogenic cancer that it was only after cases first mistakenly diagnosed as lung cancer were operated on that the benefits of surgical resection of tuberculosis were recognized [16].

Mankiewicz not only showed the cancer germ in malignant tissue but significantly demonstrated how it probably evolved from tuberculosis and related microorganisms when some of the viral phages that lived in them jumped germs, bringing genetic materials which altered the target germs virulence and made them drug resistant. In fact beneath her microscope lay a pictorial of how the cancer germ emerged from TB-like bacilli to create pre-malignant change in mammalian tissue [15].

By 1970, Sakai Inoue, a PhD from Maebashi, Japan and Marcus Singer, a doctor at Case Western’s Developmental biology, completed the single most convincing study of how bacteria cause cancer altogether, with TB-like mycobacteria. Supported by grants from the American Cancer Society and the National Institute of Health, their study used cold-blooded animals, namely the newt or salamander and thefrog. But similar studies showed its applicability to mice [17] and humans [18,19]. Inoue:

 ”An organism similar to the mycobacterium described here has been isolated and cultured from tumors and blood of tumerous mammals, including man, and when injected into miceand guinea pigs, has been reported to yield a chronic granulomatous disease, neoplasm (cancer), or some intergrade.”                     –Inoue and Singer, 1970

Back in the spring of 1953, Sakai Inoue noticed an adult salamander with a hard mass on its stomach. He removed the mass, which turned out to be malignant. Then he injected tissue from the mass into healthy animals. Again, cancer developed.

In the work that followed, Inoue and Singer, from electron micrographs, knew that bacteria were involved, bacteria which stained acid-fast……..mycobacteria [20]. Inoue inoculated three other types of mycobacteria, into healthy animals. All came down with cancer, something that did not happen when other germs such as staphylococcus or streptococcus were used. Amazingly Inoue and Singer even noted regressions in some of the cancers, especially if very dilute solutions of the germs were used to initiate them. Furthermore, since cancers stemming from ‘carcinogens’ were structurally identical to mycobacterial induced cancers, the investigators results suggested that such ‘carcinogens’ might merely be factors that activate preexisting infection. The phages inside mycobacteria are viruses known to be activated by carcinogens such as UV light and chemicals [21].

Mankiewicz, five years previously, had shown that these phages, once activated, could cause pre-malignant changes in mammalian tissue [15].

Sakai Inoue and Marcus Singer’s study should have once and for all convinced Virginia Livingston’s opponents of the veracity of her results, and that she was not mistaking common contaminants such as staph. or strept. for the cancer germ. . .but it did not.

 

The politics of cancer

It was public knowledge in early 1951 that the Black-Stevenson Cancer Foundation intended to award two huge Black grants of 0,000 towards cancer research and that the first would go to Livingston’s group at Newark’s Presbyterian; with an equivalent amount to go to The Memorial Center for Cancer (now Sloan-Kettering), which Rhoads headed. The trustees having already decided this, the actual allocation was left in the hands of Newark lawyer Charles R. Hardin, but fate intervened.

 Livingston:

“Hardin, the lawyer in charge of allocation, soon would lie dying of cancer at Memorial and while still alive was prevailed upon by design of Rhoads to sign a paper giving Rhoads power over how Presbyterian’s grant was to be spent. And that wasn’t going to include further research towards an infectious cause forcancer.”                   -Livingston, 1972

Still Rhoads was not finished. Livingston, already world-recognized, took her cancer microbe and a guest named George Clark to Rome’s Sixth International Congress for Microbiology, a trip paid for by her husband’s firm as a consultant to British industry. In Rome, Livingston met Emy Klieneberger-Nobel at the Lister institute. Klieneberger-Nobel was a pioneer uncovering bacteria without cell walls which led them to assume many forms [32]. She called them ‘L-forms’ in deference to the Institute at which she worked. Her exploration also covered bacteria with cell-wall breeches. In either case, the resulting germs, called ‘cell-wall-deficient’ assumed many forms (pleomorphic). Livingston immediately saw Klieneberger’s work as clearing a large part of the confusion over her many-formed cancer germ.

Livingston’s trip to Rome’s Congress of Microbiology was punctuated by a stop to visit von Brehmer in Frankfort. Von Brehmer’s vaccination techniques, long respected throughout Europe, were now licensed by the German government.

During the war, Wilhelm von Brehmer’s scrimmage with the Nazi medical establishment went right to the top. Severely criticized for saying that cancer was an infectious disease, the struggle eventually found its way to Hitler himself, who, puzzled, yet interested, ordered an inquiry on the matter at the 1936 Nuremberg Party Conference. Subsequently, the committee formed came down hard on von Brehmer’s views. Nevertheless, unperturbed, he somehow persisted into the legendary status he now maintained.

Big names began to join the conference, including Nobel Laureates Fleming and Waksman. By the time Virginia Livingston returned to the States, the Rome conference had been highlighted by several news services. Beginning with the New York Times and The Washington Post, other papers quickly followed suite: the cancer germ had been found. Reaction quickly followed. At The New York Academy of Medicine, spokesman Iago Gladston, fresh from executive session, held his own sort of news conference:

“This is an old story and it has not stood up under investigation. Microorganisms found in malignant tumors have been found to be secondary invaders and not the primary cause of malignancy.”- Livingston, 1972.

Livingston returned to Newark. Her Chief, James Allison, contacted her with the bad news. Since they had lost Black-Stevenson funding, he wanted her to close up Presbyterian’s research and move back to Rutgers’s home campus in distant New Brunswick. And in still another cost-cutting gesture, she was informed that her close friend and associate Eleanor Alexander-Jackson would have to go. Shocked, Livingston made arrangements to leave Rutgers altogether. Barely unpacked from Europe, Livingston’s husband would now be hounded by the IRS regarding where they got the funds for the European trip. Someone had implied the money came from his wife’s grants. This did not bear out and the couple demanded to know who had instigated the inquiry.

“Someone high up in New York in cancer.” The IRS agent replied [1].

 

Parallels with plant cancer

By 1925 Mayo’s Charles Mayo became interested in Erwin Smith’s discovery of cancer in plants, called crown gall. Livingston and Jackson, sensing a possible link between Smith’s work and their own, went to the Bronx Botanical Garden to request cultures of Bacterium tumefaciens, the plant cancer germ he had discovered. No mere accident led Virginia Livingston towards Smith’s work. Smith stained his plant cancer germ with Fuchsin, long used to spot tuberculosis. And Smith’s bacteria, like Livingston’s, had many shapes. He had stumbled across B. tumefaciens in 1904, when he received some New Jersey daisies with overgrowths superficially resembling olive tuberculosis, a known disease of plants, but which proved to be plant cancer.

Smith had long suspected a bacterial cause for human cancer and criticized pathologists for drawing:

“Too sharp a demarcation between malignant tumors, on the one hand, where the cells of the animal or human host, acting under some unknown stimulus are responsible for the tumerous growth and granulomata (benign tumors) on the other hand, such as tuberculosis and actinomycosis, where a visible microbe isresponsible for the primary tumor, and the direct migration of this microbe for any secondary tumors that may appear.” -Rogers, 1952

Smith’s conclusion:

“At the bottom, I think the distinction between such a disease, for example as tuberculosis or leprosy and malignant tumors is not as sharp as some histologists have been inclined to believe”.   -Rogers, 1952

It could be said that at one time the entire medical and scientific community was set on fire by Erwin Frink Smith’s discovery of the bacteria that caused plant cancer. Twice honorably mentioned in The Journal of the American Medical Association, their Editorial “Is Cancer of Infectious Nature?” mentions how Smith’s work made “a very strong case in favor of his view of the infectious cause of cancer in general.” (JAMA, 1912)

By 1921, Margaret Lewis, of the Livingston Network, approached Frink Smith regarding her planned chicken inoculations with B. tumefaciens. Lewis would go on to elicit the cancer sarcoma from chick embryos using B. tumefaciens.

On January 31, 1925, an English abstract in the authoritative German Kinische Wochenschrift, written by Ferdinand Blumenthal, trapped Smith’s attention. Blumenthal, with assistants Meyer and Auler had shown that human cancer bore a microorganism closely resembling tumefaciens which in turn caused malignant tumors in plants as well as animals, complete with spread or metastasis.

Paula Meyer had worked with Friedlander on the human cancer germ since 1923. Her particular discovery was of a bacteria inside breast cancer which she called PM for Paula Meyers. She had also discovered closely related strains from 15 other human cancers. Smith examined stained slides of Meyer’s cancer germ from human breasts. It looked much like B. tumefaciens. Meyer’s germs were short rods, single or paired, and they stained with the same Fuchsin that he had used [22].

Moreover, when Blumenthal and Meyer inoculated their human cancer germ PM into plants, the tumors looked exactly like crown gall. That PM could produce plant cancer was now for Erwin Frink Smith beyond a shadow of a doubt. But it could not be B. tumefaciens itself, because no strains that he had tested grew at body temperature in warmblooded animals. His conclusion: that human cancer was probably due to some other microbe, possibly a mycobacteria, that had similar chemical activities to B. tumefaciens.

Seibert rules out contaminants in the cancer germ

The only time that Dr. Florence Siebert, long part of established medicine, ran into resistance and suppression, was when she decided to have a closer look at Livingston’s cancer germ. One of America’s finest Ph.D. – Biochemist’s, while still at Yale she resolved the mystery of the many fevers coming from distilled water for injection and thought to be caused by fever-producing ‘pyrogens’, quickly proving that these were in fact bacterial contaminants. Having solved the mystery of pyrogens, Siebert was asked by Dr. Esmond Long to stay on at the University of Chicago to develop the Tuberculin skin test. Long suggested a European trip to learn techniques practiced on the continent [23]. At thePasteur Institute of Paris, Seibert exchanged ideas with Boquet, Calmete and Guerin: the three investigators who presented to the world its only recognized vaccine for tuberculosis, called BCG [23]. Seibert returned to the US and when Long left Chicago to head laboratory operations at the Henry Phipps Institute in Philadelphia, she accompanied him.

By 1903, Henry Phipps, wealthy partner of Andrew Carnegie, sought a charitable outlet for his wealth. He then joined Lawrence F. Flick, a doctor with a vision to open a center solely dedicated to the study, treatment and prevention of Tuberculosis.

Still working off grants from the National Tuberculosis Association, Seibert was asked at Phipps to continue her work for a skin test using Koch’s original Old Tuberculin (OT). Seibert refined and purified the protein in her TB skin test. She named it PPD-S, both because it was a purified protein derivative and was intended to serve as a standard (S) for the US Government, which it eventually became. Then, after 30 years in tuberculosis research, Seibert turned towards cancer. In 1948, Margaret Lewis of Philadelphia’s Wistar Institute asked Seibert to do a nucleic acid analysis on Wistar rat tumor extracts, which Seibert agreed.

Next, Irene Diller, who networked extensively with Livingston, asked Seibert to look at her slides of the cancer microbe. Seibert relates what she saw:

“I saw tiny, round, coccoid organisms, many of which were magenta in color. The slides had been stained with Ziehl-Neelsen reagent, which we regularly used to stain our tubercle bacilli red. When I learned that she had isolated them from a rat tumor and could do so regularly from tumors in general, as well as from blood of leukemic patients, I asked,”Could you find them in the rat sarcoma tumorI am studying?”    -Seibert, 1968

Diller agreed to try. Lewis allowed Seibert to forward the tissue sections. The results came back. The same cancer germ appeared. Seibert immediately saw the implications:

“This looked terribly important to me, and I was thenceforth willing to do whatever I could to help in this promising field. We did help by studying the immunological relationship to our tubercle bacilli, as well as to the “atypical” bacteria closely related to our tubercle bacilli.” – Seibert, 1968

Seibert was even more impressed with how Diller, following the footsteps of Livingston and Jackson, proved, thru Koch’s postulates, that her germ was the cancer germ:

“It is based on her (Diller’s) work that I am willing to say I believe she has foundthe cause of cancer, which I think no one can refute, and this work should be welcomed and confirmed by other cancer researchers, and not be ignored, even in view of the great stir at present about viruses.” -Seibert, 1968

Florence Seibert joined Livingston’s crusade in earnest in the 1960s, turning her cancer organism over to Frank Dunbar, chief of laboratories at the Southwest Tuberculosis Hospital in Tampa. Dunbar’s conclusion: her multi-formed germ did not belong to his groups of known “atypical” mycobacteria,even though they did have some of the properties of the mycobacteria [23].

Experimental medicine for the masses

Eventually Virginia Livingston gained university affiliations in San Diego working out of the University of San Diego with Dr. Gerhard Wolter of nearby San Diego State. In 1970, Wolter and Livingston discovered actinomycin-like compounds produced by the cancer germ, one of which, Actinomycin D or Dactinomycin, depite its toxicity, was being used in cancer. Livingston was aghast that her own discovery was being used this way. She cautioned that not only did actinomycins arrest the maturation of cells and inhibit the immune response but that they also inhibited enzymes and decreased hormone levels, stimulating the body to increase its hormone production [1]. 

She was puzzled as to why anyone would want to use a devastating substance like Actinomycin D for the subsequent treatment of cancer. Yet it was being done. Even more disturbing was the way in which organized medicine was responding to the hormonal disruption in the body caused by her cancer germ.

By 1966, Charles Huggins of the University of Chicago went to Stockholm and received a Nobel Prize for determining the effects of sex hormones on cancer that had spread. Following this, the practice of castrating cancer victims came into vogue. Consequently, someone came to the conclusion that if castration helped initially, any recurrence would better be treated by cutting out the adrenal glands, housed on top of each kidney.

And since this never produced earth-shaking results, a new procedure was devised to cut through the nose and remove the pituitary-the master gland of the body, lodged near the brain. Virginia Livingston had established that abnormal hormonal stimulation was coming from the toxic materials and hormonal derangers manufactured by her germ. In response America was chopping out the glands of its cancer patients.

White Knight

In The Cancer Microbe, Dr. Alan Cantwell Jr. acknowledged the invaluable help of four women who pioneered the early microbiology of cancer: Virginia Livingston, M.D.; Eleanor Alexander-Jackson, PhD; Florence Siebert PhD and Dr. Irene Diller [24]. Cantwell grew up reading that all germs responsible for the important diseases were supposed to have been already discovered. But much to his dismay, once a physician-researcher, he encountered the one left out: Livingston’s cancer germ. And although he knew that the many-shaped germ had long been considered a mere contaminant or secondary invader or even non-existent, Cantwell, like Seibert, knew better. Cantwell first contacted Virginia Livingston thru the suggestion of a colleague who had heard her on radio and immediately sensed their common ground, which was, by then, the acid-fast bacteria found in Scleroderma and cancer. Despite her meticulous research, Cantwell knew that Livingstone had already been branded by traditional medicine as a charlatan, leaving what he thought to be perhaps the major discovery of the 20th century largely discredited [24].

By 1971, Cantwell had published on Scleroderma in the highly respected Archives of Dermatology and had no further intention of pursuing Livingston’s germ. Livingston, Jackson, Diller and Seibert had each drawn considerable fire from the medical establishment and despite Livingston’s persistent overtures towards him, there was no way he wanted in. By 1974, Lida Mattman’s Cell Wall Deficient Forms [25], reconfirmed for Cantwell as well as others that many bacteria, but especially tuberculosis and the mycobacteria existed naturally in many forms – a cycle of growth which involved “cell-wall-deficient forms” ranging from viral look-a-likes to bacterial forms to granules and then on to larger globoid shapes. But most physicians and laboratory scientists were being taught little about cell-wall deficient bacteria.

Cantwell’s silence threshold was exceeded forever when he again saw the cancer germ in the skin of the chest wall of a young woman who had lost both her breasts to metastatic cancer. Removing this patients skin lumps, Cantwell and colleague Dan Kelso at first cultured Staph. epidermiditis, a common contaminant. But as their cultures aged, the seeming Staph cocci became large globoids, rods and yeast-like forms – with acid-fast TB-like granules everywhere [25].

Tracking down specimens of the woman’s original cancer, removed a year earlier, Cantwell not only isolated the variable acid-fast cancer germ in the tumor itself, but in surrounding specimens taken from the woman and thought by pathologists to be normal. This in effect established that the germ existed in the victims tissues before it became cancerous.

In a series of peer-reviewed, penetrating articles, Cantwell found the cancer microbe in three other cancers: Hodgkin’s, Kaposi’s cancer of the skin and a rarer skin cancer called mycosis fungoides.

It became obvious to Dr. Alan Cantwell after twenty years of microbe hunting that the old tenets of microbiology were not much use when it came to showing an infectious cause of cancer. In man as well as in nature, bacteria were constantly changing forms and evolving in their lifetime. The cancer microbe, unstable by nature, was no exception [25]. But 25 years after removing the metastatic breast nodules from the skin of a young mother and finding them variably acid-fast, there remained no cure for a germ which though tuberculosis-like, seemed indestructible. And a germ without a cure, as shown by the mixed reception to Koch’s discovery of tuberculosis, even decades later, fostered it’s own resentment and disbelief, a resentment and disbelief which Virginia Livingston never stopped facing.

BCG

“It seems to me that it is entirely rational to state that the reason the BCG vaccine is effective not only against tuberculosis, but leprosy as well as cancer is because of the fact that the cancer germ is closely related to the BCG since it is in the same family, the Actinomycetales.          -Livingston, 1972

When Florence Seibert met Boquet, Calmete and Guerin in Paris to discuss their BCG, the only recognized vaccine for tuberculosis in the world, made from cow or bovine tuberculosis, none of them had any idea that it would one day be used against cancer. But in fact, currently, this diluted vaccination of Mycobacterium bovis or cow tuberculosis is the most effective treatment for transitional cell carcinoma, a cancer of the urinary bladder. Moreover, BCG is the most successful therapy of its kind, called ‘immunotherapy’ [26]. Within ‘immunotherapy’, it soon became fashionable to suppose that BCG or cow tuberculosis somehow ‘bolstered’ the immune system, but noted immunologist Steven Rosenberg held that the immune system was highly specific. One immune stimulant such as BCG should not stimulate a response from another immune stimulant, cancer [27].

The precise mechanism as seen by a 1993 University of Illinois study was that initially cancer cells seemed to eat (or phagocytize) and kill the Mycobacteria bovis in BCG. But then, suddenly, the cancer cells too died. Although investigators in the study admitted the relationship wasn’t clear, a strong ‘tumoricidal agent’, inside the Mycobacteria was pointed to [28]. Livingston felt that investigators were probably unwittingly looking at was a common phenomena in nature known as ‘lysogeny’. Lysogeny is what happens when one colony of a similar bacteria kills another by hurling viral phage weaponry towards it, without itself being harmed.

By the late 1970s Virginia Livingston could no longer ignore Chisato Maruyama of Japan and sent John Majnarich of Seattle’s BioMed Laboratories to Japan to have a closer look. In 1935, Maruyama, of the Nippon Medical School began to develop a vaccination against tuberculosis which turned out to be good against cancer. The Maruyama vaccine was similar to BCG, but instead of using cow tuberculosis as its base, the Japanese version used human tuberculosis.

Chisato Maruyama had long noted that patients with either the Mycobacteria tuberculosis or leprosy seldom had cancer [33]. By the 1970s Maruyama’s vaccine was proving quite successful in that he claimed that half of the 8000 cancer patients he had treated had benefited [29].

Livingston’s legacy

By the early 1970s Virginia Livingston, badly beaten by the medical establishment, was ready to launch a counterattack in the form of a fascinating study which showed that her cancer microbe secreted humanchoriogonadotropic hormone (HCG) – a growth hormone long associated with cancer. Initially, despite laboratory evidence to the contrary, her contention that a bacteria could produce a human hormone was not believed. But then reports from traditional bastions such as Allegheny General, Princeton and Rockefeller University confirmed her findings.

Livingston believed that this growth hormone, secreted by her cancer germ built up uncontrollably to stimulate tumor growth, turning normal cells into malignant ones when either the body’s immune system was weak or essential nutrients were deficient. Dr. Hernan Acevedo of Allegheny, in fact, showed that all cancer cells had the hormone [30].

Livingston’s discovery, a medical milestone, gave further impetus to a microbial theory of cancer with well over a century of research behind it. Yet despite this, the premise behind an infectious cause was stubbornly refused by orthodox medicine.

Virginia Livingston was past 80 when she died on June 30th, 1990. Just months before, a subpoena was issued to her prohibiting her vaccinations, made from the patient’s own cancer germ (autogenous), with which she had had great success. Following this, her vaccine was stigmatized as an “unproven method” in the March–April 1990 issue of CA – The Journal of the American Cancer Society[31] with references to her mistaking several different type of bacteria, rare and common for a unique microbe. This despite droves of research papers establishing mycobacteria as either coming before or coexisting with cancer. Ironically, Acevedo, who could not stop lauded her discovery that the cancer germ could manufacture human growth hormone was instrumental and key to the society’s damaging conclusion.

Yet when questioned by this author approximately a decade later, Acevedo admitted that he had ignored acid-fast forms which were indeed present in the cancer preparations Livingston sent to him. He felt these irrelevant, and mentioned that besides, the technology was not available at the time to pursue these acid-fast forms further.

On such fuzzy logic, it seemed that perhaps the most important scientific cancer lead in this or any other century was buried.

Conclusion

The striking analogy between cancer and tuberculosis was noticed long before the tubercle bacillus was discovered. In 1877, Sir John Simon clearly

pointed out this analogy and in fact argued very strongly in favor of a microbial origin of cancer. But by 1910, certain American medical powers did an 180 degree rotation, deciding that cancer was not caused by a microbe and that anyone who thought otherwise was a heretic, a charlatan or a quack.

But Virginia Livingston was none of these. Rather she was a symbol of painstaking research and dedication at the height of post World War II American medical technology. Opponents of Livingston said that she saw “contaminants” of a group of commonly encountered germs. But Florence Siebert, an expert on contaminants who standardized the present day tuberculin skin test for the US government, saw no contaminants present and Dean Burk, then Head of Cell Chemistry at the NCI went so far to say that Livingston’s cancer germ was as real and certain as anything known about cancer [29]. Yet in the subsequent suppression of Livingston and her many colleagues by the medical establishment a picture emerges, and it is not a very pleasant one.

Virginia Livingston gained international status when she discovered that her cancer germ produced human growth hormone, long associated with malignancy. However, at first even this was not believed. Had she gained the same stature regarding identifying the cancer germ itself, by today there probably would be no cancer. At this time there is admittedly no cure for Livingston’s cancer germ. Suppression led to its own disinterest in cure and each year a multitude must suffer and die as a result.

 

References

[1] Livingston, Virginia Wuerthele-Caspe, Cancer: a new breakthrough, Los Angeles: Nash Publishing; 1972.

[2] Ewing J. Neoplastic diseases. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: W.B.Saunders; 1919.

[3] Hunter D. The diseases of occupation. 6th ed. Boston: LittleBrown and Company; 1978.

[4] L’Esperance E. Studies in Hodgkin’s disease. Annal Surg1931;93:162–8.

[5] Livingston V, Allen RM. Presence of consistently recurringinvasive mycobacterial forms in tumor cells. Microscop Soc Bull 1948;2:5–18.

[6] Sweany HC. Mutation forms of the tubercle bacillus.JAMA1928;87:1206–11.

[7] Beinhauer LG, Mellon RR. Pathogenesis of noncaseatingepitheloid tuberculosis of hypoderm and lymph glands. Arch Dermatol Syph 1938;37:451–60.

[8] Mellon RR, Fisher LW. New studies on the filterability of pure cultures of the tubercle group of microorganisms. JInfect Dis 1932;51:117–28.

[9] Livingston V, Alexander-Jackson EA. Cultural properties andpathogenicity of certain microorganisms observed fromvarious proliferative and neoplastic diseases (published under Virginia Wuerthele-Caspe). Am J Med Sci 1950;220:636–48.

[10] Boesch M. The long search for the truth about cancer. NewYork: GP Putnam’s Sons; 1960.

[11] Glover T, Scott M. A study of the rous chicken sarcoma No.1. Can Lancet Practioner 1926;66(2):49–62.

[12] Goodman LS, Gilman A. The pharmacologic basis of therapeurtics. 5th ed. New York: MacMillan; 1975.

[13] Skirvin JA, Relias V, Koeller J. Long term sequelae of cancerchemotherapy. Highlights Oncol Practice 1996;14(2):26–34.

[14] Pukkala E, Kyyronen P. Tamoxifen and toremifene treatmentof breast cancer and risk of subsequent endometrial cancer: a population-based case-control study. Int J Cancer2002;100(3):337–41.

[15] Mankiewicz E. Bacteriophares that lyse Mycobacteria and Corynebacteria and show cytopathogenic effect on tissuecultures of renal cells of Cercopithecus aethiops. Can Med Assn J 1965;92:31–3.

[16] Dubos R. The white plague: tuberculosis. New Brunswick,NJ: Man & Society Rutgers University Press; 1987.

[17] Aaronson JD. Spontaneous tuberculosis in salt water fish. JInfect Dis 1926;39:315.

[18] Wuerthele-Caspe VE, Alexander-Jackson E, Smith LW. Someaspects of the microbiology of cancer, J Am Woman’s Med Assoc 8:7.

[19] Alexander-Jackson EA. A specific type of microorganismisolated from animal and human cancer. Bacteriol Org Growth 1954;18:37–51.

[20] Inoue S, Singer M. Experiments on a spontaneously originatedvisceral tumor in the Newt, Triturus pyrrhogaster.Annal NY Acad Sci 1970;174:729–64.

[21] Lwoff, A. Biologic order (Karl Taylor compton lectures),Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1962.

[22] Rogers III AD. Erwin Frink Smith: a story of North Americanplant pathology. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society; 1952.

[23] Seibert FB. Pebbles on the Hill of a Scientist, in: Florence B.Seibert, author/publisher, St. Petersberg, FL 1968.

[24] Cantwell Jr A. The cancer microbe. Aries Rising Press; 1990.

[25] Mattman LH. Cell wall deficient forms – stealth pathogens.2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1993.

[26] Schneider B. Specific binding of Bacillus Calmette–Guerinin urothelial tumor cells. In vitro World J Urol 1994;1216:337–44.

[27] Rosenberg SA, Barry JM. The transformed cell/unlockingthe mysteries of cancer. New York: GP Putnam’s Sons;1992.

[28] Devados PO, Klegerman ME. Phagocytosis of Mycobacteriumbovis BCG organisms by murine S180 sarcoma cells. Cytobios 1993;74(296):49–58.

[29] Martin W. Medical heroes and heretics. Old Greenwich, CT:The Devin Adair Company; 1977. 

[30] Acevedo H. Human choriogonadotropin–like material inbacteria of different species: electron microscopy andimmunocytochemical studies with monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies. J Gen Microbiol 1987;133:783–91.

[31] Congress of the United States Office of Technology Assesment.Unconventional Cancer Treatments US Govt PrintingOffice, Washington, D.C; 1990.

[32] Klieneberger-Nobel E. Origin, development and significanceof L-forms in bacterial cultures. J Gen Microbiol 1949;3:434–42.

[33] Moss RW. Cancer therapy. the independent consumer’sguide to non-toxic treatment and prevention. New York: Equinox Press; 1997.

[34] Rusch HP. The beginnings of cancer research centers in theUnited States. J National Cancer Inst 1985;74(2):391–403.

[35] Fraenkel E, Much H. Uber die Hodgkinsche Krankheit(Lymphomatosis granulomatosa), insbesondere deren Atiologie. Z Hyg 1910;67:159–200.

 

© Copyright 2010

Lawrence Broxmeyer, MD, is an internist and medical researcher. He was on staff at New York affiliate hospitals of SUNY Downstate, Cornell and New York universities for approximately 14 years, his work including extensive treatment immediately prior to and in the midst of America’s AIDS epidemic. In conjunction with colleagues in San Francisco and at the University of Nebraska, he first pursued, as lead author and originator, a novel technique to kill AIDS mycobacteria with outstanding results (see The Journal ofInfectious Diseases 2002 Oct 15; 186[8]:1155-60). Recently he contributed a chapter regarding these findings in Sleator and Hill’s textbook Patho-biotechnology, published by Landes Bioscience. Dr Broxmeyer’s research covers the most challenging medical problems of our times, including AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, bird flu, cancer, Creutzfeldt–Jakob and “mad cow” diseases, diabetes, heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, swine flu, tuberculosis and more. He is currently a licensed internist in Pennsylvania and the founder and director of The N. Y. Institute of Medical Research in Bayside, New York, USA.

Fax Online    Send article as PDF   

Natural Health Therapies and Cancer – Part Three

Natural Health Therapies and Cancer – Part Three

Article by Jerry Ryan, Ph.D.









This article is the third installment of a series on Natural Health Therapies and Cancer. The material presented is meant to inform you of complementary cancer therapies that are available in the medical community. These therapies are to be used in cooperation with other cancer treatment methods. They are not meant to be done in place of your physician’s care. In the previous articles, we have covered the basics of cancer, the causes, the various types and stages, and how nutrition can trigger and promote cancer growth. This article will focus on Anti-Cancer Herbal Supplements as a form of cancer therapy.

Herbal therapy is also known as Phytotherapy or Phytomedicine. As you may recall from previous articles, the word ‘phyto’ means ‘plant.’ This form of cancer therapy focuses on herbal or botanical supplements have been used for centuries in dealing with a wide range of diseases. Many of these plants have been studied by pharmaceutical companies to isolate active ingredients for use in drugs. A few key examples are foxglove (used for digitalis), rauwolfia (used in reserpine), and opium poppy (used in morphine).

The anti-cancer herbal supplements that we will discuss in this article are listed below in alphabetical order. Due to the number of herbals involved, we will only be able to cover each one briefly. However, this does give us a starting point to follow-up at the library for more in-depth information. Remember that ‘herbal’ does not equal ‘safe.’ Although herbal therapies usually work more slowly than pharmaceuticals, adverse reactions can occur if the wrong dosage, a poor quality herb, or the incorrect herb is used. In addition, there are potential interactions with prescription drugs. Always check with a medical professional before using any complementary therapies.

The effects of these various herbs on cancer have been researched and documented by a large number of studies worldwide. The results indicate that the herbs work by:

* Stimulating DNA repair

* Producing antioxidant effects

* Promoting protective enzymes

* Inhibiting cancer-activating enzymes

* Inducing oygenating effects

The anti-cancer herbal and botanical supplements currently being used by a variety of medical practitioners are:

AlgaeChlorella, Sea vegetables, and Green Drinks provide high levels of antioxidants that help to clean up the damage done by free radicals. The albumin, vitamins, and minerals contained in chlorella are considered a major detoxification resource.

Aloe VeraLong used for burns, cuts, and minor skin irritations, tests indicate that this plant has tumor-fighting capability. A major component of aloe vera called Acemannan has displayed remarkable ability as an immune system stimulator.

AmygdalinKnown also as Laetrile, this substance is found in the pits of apricots and other fruits. It has been used for centuries and produces a cyanide compound that targets cancer cells.

AstralagusThis herb is widely used in China, often in conjunction with ginseng. Research shows that it increase Natural Killer (NK) cell activity, reduces the stress hormone cortisol, and boost interferon levels.

Cat’s ClawUsed in Peruvian tribal medicine, this herb displays antioxidant, and anti-tumor properties. Studies have indicated that it enhances the immune system as well as digestive system.

EchinaceaThis well-known herb has shown properties that enhance the immune system. Test results indicate an increase in NK cell activity ranging from 90-221%. Echinacea provides support to battle secondary problems like infection.

Essiac This is an herbal tea originally used by Native Americans. It contains burdock, sheep sorrel, Indian rhubarb, slippery elm, and other herbs. It has been shown to boost immune system function, diminish inflammatory processes, and reduce the toxic side effects of many drugs.

FlavonoidsA group of phytochemicals found in fruits and vegetables. These substances have very high antioxidant levels. This group contains quercetin, rutin, citrin, hesperidin, proanthocyanins, and anthocyanins.

GarlicEnough scientific evidence exists for this longtime folk remedy that scientists held the First World Congress on the Health Significance of Garlic and Garlic Constituents in the late 1980s. Research points out garlic’s ability to suppress cancer initiation and growth by boosting NK cell and T-cell activity. Garlic also blocks cancer cell adhesion to blood vessels which helps prevent metastases.

Gingko BilobaThis herb has been used for thousands of years in Chinese medicine. One of its components, gingkolide B, interferes with a chemical in the body that promotes tumor growth. Gingko also has a high antioxidant level.

Ginseng Used for centuries in Asia, this small woodland plant has been documented to have immune system enhancing properties. It stimulates macrophage and NK cell activity as well as boosting the production of antibodies.

Grape seed extractPycogenols, the active ingredients in grape seed extract and pine tree bark, might be the most powerful antioxidants found to date. Studies show that they are 50 times more powerful than Vitamin E and 20 times more powerful than Vitamin C in reducing free radical damage.

Green teaA popular drink in Japan and China, green tea has been shown to reduce the risks of throat and liver cancers. This is attributed to the high antioxidant properties found in green tea, far exceeding those of Vitamin E. The average daily consumption of green tea in Asia is 2-10 cups.

Haelan 851This is a liquid soybean concentrate made with a specialized fermentation process. The preparation contains zinc, selenium, Vitamins A, B1, B2, B12, C, D, E, and K. It also contains high levels of genistein, an isoflavone shown to increase cancer cell death, inhibit blood vessel growth to tumors, regulate hormonal imbalance, and provide other anti-cancer functions.

HANSIA homeopathic combination of about 10 herbal components, HANSI has been shown to increase NK cell activity in the immune system. The primary ingredients in the formula are from rain forest and desert plants such as cactus, aloe, arnica, licopodium, and lachesis. Made in Argentina, this formula is available in the U.S. on a three month supply basis.

Hoxsey’s herbsThis is an herbal preparation that contains red clover, burdock root, buckthorn, barberry bark, stillingia root, chaparral, licorice, cascara amarga, and prickly ash bark. Used since the 1840s, these herbs produce documented antioxidant, anti-tumor, and anti-estrogen activity. They also have been shown to boost immune function and inhibit blood vessel growth to tumors.

Iscador (Mistletoe)Used by European physicians since 1920, Iscador has been found to increase the length and quality of life, stabilize the cancer, cause tumor reduction, and improve the overall condition of the patient. Immune system function, particularly NK cells, increases within 24 hours after Iscador treatments.

Larch arabinogalactanThis is a complex carbohydrate compound derived from the Western Larch tree. Studies have shown that it enhances the activity of NK cells, macrophages, and immune-enhancing chemicals called cytokines.

Maitake mushroomMaitake, shitake, and reishi mushrooms have all been shown to promote NK cell and antibody activity. Maitake mushrooms consistently show the greatest results in inhibiting cancer development and metastasis.

Pau D’ArcoAn herbal extract derived from the inside of the bark of certain trees in the South American rainforest that has displayed anticancer properties. The key component, lapachol, has a unique molecular composition that produces biological activity against cancer.

Pectin, modified citrusThis is a food fiber found in fruits which has been modified to bring out the immune system enhancement properties. Research show that modified citrus pectin boosts the function of both T-cells and NK cells in the immune system.

SilymarinKnown also as milk thistle, this herb is full of antioxidants and flavonoids. It has been seen to provide protection from liver damage. Studies indicate that Silymarin accelerates the regeneration of damaged liver tissue. This is important in cancer patients because all toxins including chemotherapy drugs are filtered through the liver and excessive toxins can result in liver dysfunction.

TurmericA major ingredient in curry powder, this herb comes from India and is a member of the ginger family. Studies show that it provides powerful antioxidant effects, inhibits tumor growth and formation in certain cancers, and reduces production of some cancer-promoting enzymes.

In the next article, we will explore the use of Physical Support Therapies for cancer therapy. These methods include Detoxification, Biological Dentistry, Water Therapy, Heat Therapy, Bodywork/Therapeutic Massage/Exercise, and Qi Gong. I hope that this material has been helpful and informative. The material in these articles is a portion of an e-book available on my website.



About the Author

Jerry Ryan, Ph.D. is a Natural Health Coach who teaches individuals and group classes on the scientifically documented benefits of natural health techniques. He is also an internationally published author and has been a guest speaker at such places as NIKE World Headquarters. For more information, his website is http://www.JerryRyanPhD.com










PDF Editor    Send article as PDF   

The Truth About Heart Disease And Cancer

The Truth About Heart Disease And Cancer

Article by Joann Cheong









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

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

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

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

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

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

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



About the Author

Read More On The Truth About Heart Disease And Cancer










Edit PDF    Send article as PDF   

How to Cure Cancer Naturally and Effectively

How to Cure Cancer Naturally and Effectively

These days the treatment of cancer has taken all encompassing ways. The doctors can opt for removing the tumors surgically, injecting the chemicals to destroy the cancer cells or utilize the radiation therapy. Various experiments are carried out clinically to aim the cancer cells in a better manner. Though, there are people who promote a different path of treating the cancer, the natural way.  

Cancer cells are unusual cells that multiply and devastate the fundamental organs of the body. They breed inside the tumors and live off on the oxygen and other nutrients. When the tumors cut into the blood stream they can insert the cancer cells and spread around very easily. If they enter the lymph nodes they straight away win over the immune system. There are numerous ways on how to cure cancer naturally. They are:

A method that goes with the traditional cancer cure is modifying the diet and including more of raw foods. Raw food diet is trouble-free for your body than the chemotherapy. The raw diet must strictly be followed until the cancer cells starts decreasing, as the cooked foods can aggravate their growth.  

]]>

Detoxification comprises of quickening of the body’s elimination of the toxins from the entire body. That can be carried out with the help of exceptional diets which comprise of supplements. For instance, the skin removes the toxins of the body through sweat, therefore the sauna sessions could be taken everyday to eliminate your toxins from the body through sweat.

Cancer can also be cured through the addition of a blend of flaxseed oil and baking soda in the daily diet. The linol acids that are found in the cooking oil are basically accountable for cancer encouraging oxydase enzymes. Therefore, flaxseed oil would arouse the protein growth in cells and make oils water soluble; efficiently eliminate them from body and preventing the repeated growth of cancer cells.

Colon cancer is one of the three kinds of cancer that is also known as a killer. The colon is where the body filters out the waste products from the body. It is also a very risky and a potential place for acquiring cancer. Therefore, cleansing the colon can be of a great help to eliminate the waste fast from the digestive system.  

Budwig diet was discovered by late Dr. Johanna Budwig and is endorsed by lots of cancer patients for really curing the disease, as stated to the testimonials online. This diet is all about including oil and protein comprising flax seeds and eliminating the trans fat and the supplements.                 

Gerson therapy is also said to be a strong natural cure for cancer that has reportedly healed even the most serious cases of myeloma or bone cancer. This therapy comprises of big quantities of fresh juices of vegetables and three coffee enemas everyday.

Green barley pills are also said to work successfully in killing cancer cells. Water fasting is another acclaimed method of killing the bladder cancer, where the patient fasts for 28 days. Aromatherapy and yoga can relieve both the physical and mental stress from the patient.

Are you looking for more information on how to cure cancer naturally and effectively? Visit http://www.NaturalCuresForAllDiseases.info . today for more information!

www.pdf24.org    Send article as PDF   

Fat intake and Prostate cancer!

Fat intake and Prostate cancer!

Article by Yfish









Prostate Cancer is a leading cancer threat to men in United States. And now, there are studies showing that a high fat intake can have a direct correlation to the risk of prostate cancer.

According to wikipedia, Prostate Cancer is “a disease in which cancer develops in the prostate, a gland in the male reproductive system. It occurs when cells of the prostate mutate and begin to multiply out of control. These cells may spread (metastasize) from the prostate to other parts of the body, especially the bones and lymph nodes. Prostate cancer may cause pain, difficulty in urinating, erectile dysfunction and other symptoms.

Rates of prostate cancer vary widely across the world. Although the rates vary widely between countries, it is least common in South and East Asia, more common in Europe, and most common in the United States.

Prostate cancer develops most frequently in men over fifty. This cancer can occur only in men, as the prostate is exclusively of the male reproductive tract. It is one of the most common types of cancer in men. However, many men who develop prostate cancer never have symptoms, undergo no therapy, and eventually die of other causes.”

The article from Newschief.com suggests that fat makes up about 35% of calories in American diet, while it’s only about 15% in Japanese diet. This is probably a known fact to most American, as some of our daily lunch or dinner usually contain of fried food or fatty meat. It is exceptionally difficult for a lot of working people who simply go get fast food as daily lunch items.

There are of course things we can start to do. A high vegetables intake during the week can help lower the risk of prostate cancer, among which broccoli and cabbage are the best good to help protecting against the men threat. Also, tomatoes contain high level of antioxidant called lycopene – bright red carotenoid pigment and phytochemical that some preliminary research has suggested an inverse correlation between lycopene (consumption of tomato) and risk of cancer (which the kind of research is yet to get approved from FDA). One thing that anyone can prove is, however, a good amount of vegetables servings would be good to help reduce bad enzymes in our fragile body.

So, next time when you have to dine out, try to incorporate some tomatoes, broccoli or cabbage in your meal. Or, the best of all, try to reduce the amount of fat intake in your diet!

References:http://www.newschief.com/article/20081109/NEWS/811090351/1011/LIVING02?Title=Prostate_cancer_affected_by_amount_of_fat_in_diethttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostate_cancerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycopene



About the Author

Interest in finance, health and music. http://ysfinanceroom.blogspot.com/ http://health-food-room.blogspot.com/ http://ysmusicroom.blogspot.com/










PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

My research and strategy to help myself prevent pancreatic cancer

My research and strategy to help myself prevent pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer… that’s what killed my grandfather at age 75, my father at age 70, and my childhood friend at age 56. It is considered by many as untreatable. So, I’ve been doing a great deal of research on the Internet about different ways I can help myself avoid becoming a victim of this deadly cancer. Listed below is my preventive strategy.

First, let me emphasize that I am NOT a doctor or medical professional. I am not recommending anything to anybody. I can not be certain of any of the claims from the materials I have studied doing my research. I am only sharing with those of you who have an interest in my research, what I found on the Internet… and what I am doing as my “health assurance” to help me avoid future cancer – and all in all help myself to better health as I enter my golden years.

INFORMATION I FOUND ON THE INTERNET

Let me start by providing you links to web pages and articles I found that particularly talked about using Far Infrared Radiation (heat) as a treatment for a variety of cancers – including pancreatic. It seems that when the internal temperature of the body is raised, cancer cells have a difficult time growing. Some of the other concepts I found most interesting center around better blood flow, better blood oxygenation, the release of nitric oxide from internal cells, and the detoxification and flushing of harmful elements from the body.

#1 – Sauna Therapy – Dr. Lawrence Wilson – http://www.drlwilson.com/books/saunabook.htm

This page contains the preface and chapter 1 from his book. These two passages caught my attention:

“Healing. Spending one to four hours a day in sauna therapy is a powerful yet safe healing modality. The sauna is excellent to add energy to the body, decongest internal organs, assist circulation, heal infections and help many other body systems. Medical therapies too often focus on relieving symptoms while ignoring deeper causes which the sauna addresses.”

“In particular, conventional medicine often overlooks the effects of toxic chemicals and heavy metals on one’s health. Genetics is emphasized, but there is little mention that nutritional deficiencies and toxic agents cause genetic defects. The following sections describe toxins the sauna can help remove in more detail.”

Dr. Wilson also has two articles that I found very informative:

Preventing Cancer – http://www.drlwilson.com/Articles/CANCER PREVENT .htm
Alternative Cancer Therapy – http://www.drlwilson.com/Articles/cancer.htm

#2 – Infrared Heat and Cancer – Dr. Kathie M. Black PhD – http://healthchiproducts.com/infrared_heat_and_cancer.php

This article talks in more detail about using Far Infrared Radiation therapy to treat cancer. This caught my eye:

“One thing all modalities agree upon is that cancer cells cannot survive heat. Infrared heat becomes a “hyerthermic” treatment that artificially raises the body temperature allowing the body to literally burn out cancer cells. Malignant cancer cells are more sensitive to heat than healthy cells. Hyperthermic treatment consists of heating the body either in the local area of the cancer cells or tumor, regional sections, or by treating the entire body.”

“Finally, this group recommends hyperthermia as a way of preventing cancer through having a healthy lifestyle and using an infrared sauna to remove toxins on an ongoing basis.

#3 – Infrared Radiant Energy – Dr. Aaron M. Flickstein – http://www.doctordetox.co.uk/dr-flickstein.php

The information found on this page covers many uses of Far Infrared Radiation – including for cancer.

]]>

#4 – Complementary Cancer Care – Michelle Hancock – http://www.alive.com/1372a4a2.php?subject_bread_cramb=116

Author Michelle Hancock discusses more about heat therapy for treating cancer.

#5 – Far Infrared Technology Research (FIR) from all around the world -
Article from Health Info and News – http://www.biofircenter.com/info/far-infrared-technology-research-fir-from-all-around-the-world

This article talks about how FIR helps produce nitric oxide in the body.

“When you apply FIR technology, these researchers report seeing healing results from the production of nitric oxide by the hemoglobin due to the reaction of the photons of the FIR on the enzymes, which produces the nitric oxide gas. The immune cells get into the area and the circulation is increased. Pain is reduced, and the area then is reported to have the immune cells necessary to get complete healing.”

“The wide-ranging results of nitric oxide may pay off in new treatments for:

* Atherosclerosis (a thickening of artery walls);
* Septic shock (a dangerous drop in blood pressure);
* Cancer.”

#6 – Whole Body Hyperthermia: Fever Therapy vs. Cancer – Ruth Sackman
from the Rethinking Cancer website – http://www.rethinkingcancer.org/resources/articles/whole-body-hyperthermia.php

Talks about fever therapy

“I would like you to become knowledgeable about Whole-Body Hyperthermia (Fever Therapy) and wonder, as I do, why it isn’t available in every oncology department in every hospital. Fever Therapy, in contrast to chemotherapy, can destroy cancer cells without destroying healthy cells, therefore, it does no harm to the patient. Isn’t this what cancer research is looking for?”

“The fact that heat destroys cancer cells is an accepted fact.”

#7 – Far Infrared medical facts – http://healthchiproducts.com/far_facts.pdf

#8 – Far Infrared Technology research (FIR) with observations about the USA consumer market. – http://healthchiproducts.com/far_overview.pdf

#9 – American’s Win Nobel in Medicine – http://healthchiproducts.com/nobel.pdf

Mentions how nitric oxide is used to defend against cancer.

#10 – Klinik St. Georg – Some people have had excellent results here.

Information about the clinic – http://healthchiproducts.com/hot.pdf

More information about the clinic – http://healthchiproducts.com/klinik-st-georg.pdf

The Klinik St. Georg website – http://www.klinik-st-georg.de/e/index.html

The resources above gave me a good idea of some of the alternatives to the typical treatment of cancers… and what conditions cancer needs to grow and survive. Like I said at the beginning of this page – I am not an expert… I am not a doctor… I am not trying to persuade anybody to do anything. I am simply someone who has a family history of pancreatic cancer, and I’m deciding for myself what course of action I choose to take to hopefully keep myself from getting cancer.

So, I have outlined below what I am doing to help protect myself – and why I believe this course of action will help me in my fight.

*Remember – none of the HTE health machines I use are intended or marketed for the treatment of any disease. But, it is true that when the body becomes more healthful, the body can help protect itself from disease and sickness.

MY ANTI-CANCER STRATEGY

First, I became a distributor of HTE Health Machines. I purchased an Original Sun Ancon Chi Machine to help get rid of my lower back pain. I liked the machine so much I purchased the SOQI Bed Spa – the total health management system. What a great decision that has turned out to be. I am so glad I did that.
SOQI Bed Spa – the total health management system – http://healthchiproducts.com/soqi_bed.php

The SOQI Bed Spa is a complete Health Management System that includes three HotHouse Health Builder domes, and one Sun Ancon Chi Machine – built on an extra comfortable massage table. The SOQI Bed Spa is a Total Health Management System, and it also includes a built in CD player with two speakers allowing me to slide into a peaceful meditative state. Everything is controlled by a single program panel located by the head of my SOQI Bed.

I use my SOQI Bed twice each day – once in the morning shortly after I wake up, and again before I go to sleep for the night. I have the 3 HotHouse domes set for 45 minute sessions, and I use the Chi Machine for 22 minutes during the HotHouse sessions. The HotHouse domes flood my body with Far Infrared Radiation (FIR) – for more information on the HotHouse – http://healthchiproducts.com/hot_house.php. The rays penetrate my skin and go several inches deep. This helps to elevate my body temperature and increase my blood circulation – both of which should help cancer from taking hold. Using the Chi Machine helps to oxygenate my blood and flush out toxins from my body. For more information on the Chi Machine – http://healthchiproducts.com/sun_ancon_chi_machine.php. These 45 minute sessions are both energizing and relaxing. Not only do they make me feel Great – I choose to use these health machines because I sincerely believe they will help prevent future sickness – even cancer.

And, I make sure to take at least 10 very deep breaths at the beginning and end of each Chi session. I breathe in through my nose as deeply as I can – forcing the air into my abdomen rather than just small breaths into my chest area. I hold my breath for the count of 10, then I slowly exhale through my mouth until all the air is out of my lungs. I then repeat this process until I have finished 10 repetitions. This deep breathing really helps in oxygenating my blood – which is a good thing overall… and a deterrent to cancer forming.

Also, every Saturday I devote 2 1/2 – 3 hours to relaxing under the three HotHouses located on my SOQI Bed. From my research, it seems that this extended time under the HotHouses will increase the hyperthermic effect on my body, which may help even more.

I understand this is a large commitment of time (I invest 13+ hours weekly), but my health is very important to me, and I much prefer to set aside time each day to help my body defend itself. I really do look at it as my best “Health Assurance” and long term strategy.

YOU CHOOSE YOUR OWN STRATEGY

No one can force you to help yourself to better health. It is a decision you make based on your commitment to help yourself. I believe the HTE Health Machines will assist you in developing a healthy body. I will be more than delighted to work with you in your quest for better health.

Mark Peltier-Robson is a Supervisor Distributor of HTE Health Machines and Nutritional Supplements. His website is located at:

http://www.HealthChiProducts.com

PDF24 Creator    Send article as PDF   

Metastatic Bone Cancer Prostate

Metastatic Bone Cancer Prostate

The doctors can opt for removing the tumors surgically, injecting the chemicals to destroy the cancer cells or utilize the radiation therapy. Metastatic Bone Cancer ProstateVarious experiments are carried out clinically to aim the cancer cells in a better manner. Though, there are people who promote a different path of treating the cancer, the natural way.

Cancer cells are unusual cells that multiply and devastate the fundamental organs of the body. They breed inside the tumors and live off on the oxygen and other nutrients. When the tumors cut into the blood stream they can insert the cancer cells and spread around very easily. If they enter the lymph nodes they straight away win over the immune system. There are numerous ways on how to cure cancer naturally. They are:

A method that goes with the traditional cancer cure is modifying the diet and including more of raw foods. Raw food diet is trouble-free for your body than the chemotherapy. The raw diet must strictly be followed until the cancer cells starts decreasing, as the cooked foods can aggravate their growth.

]]>

Detoxification comprises of quickening of the body’s elimination of the toxins from the entire body. That can be carried out with the help of exceptional diets which comprise of supplements. For instance, the skin removes the toxins of the body through sweat, therefore the sauna sessions could be taken everyday to eliminate your toxins from the body through sweat.

Cancer can also be cured through the addition of a blend of flaxseed oil and baking soda in the daily diet. The linol acids that are found in the cooking oil are basically accountable for cancer encouraging oxydase enzymes. Therefore, flaxseed oil would arouse the protein growth in cells and make oils water soluble; efficiently eliminate them from body and preventing the repeated growth of cancer cells.

Lung Cancer Secrets Revealed Click here

Colon cancer is one of the three kinds of cancer that is also known as a killer. The colon is where the body filters out the waste products from the body. It is also a very risky and a potential place for acquiring cancer. Therefore, cleansing the colon can be of a great help to eliminate the waste fast from the digestive system.

Budwig diet was discovered by late Dr. Johanna Budwig and is endorsed by lots of cancer patients for really curing the disease, as stated to the testimonials online. This diet is all about including oil and protein comprising flax seeds and eliminating the trans fat and the supplements.

Gerson therapy is also said to be a strong natural cure for cancer that has reportedly healed even the most serious cases of myeloma or bone cancer. This therapy comprises of big quantities of fresh juices of vegetables and three coffee enemas everyday.

Green barley pills are also said to work successfully in killing cancer cells. Water fasting is another acclaimed method of killing the bladder cancer, where the patient fasts for 28 days. Aromatherapy and yoga can relieve both the physical and mental stress from the patient.

lung cancer treatment breakthroughs Click here

PDF Converter    Send article as PDF   

Colon Cancer Surgery Complications

Colon Cancer Surgery Complications

The doctors can opt for removing the tumors surgically, injecting the chemicals to destroy the cancer cells or utilize the radiation therapy. Colon Cancer Surgery ComplicationsVarious experiments are carried out clinically to aim the cancer cells in a better manner. Though, there are people who promote a different path of treating the cancer, the natural way.

Cancer cells are unusual cells that multiply and devastate the fundamental organs of the body. They breed inside the tumors and live off on the oxygen and other nutrients. When the tumors cut into the blood stream they can insert the cancer cells and spread around very easily. If they enter the lymph nodes they straight away win over the immune system. There are numerous ways on how to cure cancer naturally. They are:

A method that goes with the traditional cancer cure is modifying the diet and including more of raw foods. Raw food diet is trouble-free for your body than the chemotherapy. The raw diet must strictly be followed until the cancer cells starts decreasing, as the cooked foods can aggravate their growth.

]]>

Detoxification comprises of quickening of the body’s elimination of the toxins from the entire body. That can be carried out with the help of exceptional diets which comprise of supplements. For instance, the skin removes the toxins of the body through sweat, therefore the sauna sessions could be taken everyday to eliminate your toxins from the body through sweat.

Cancer can also be cured through the addition of a blend of flaxseed oil and baking soda in the daily diet. The linol acids that are found in the cooking oil are basically accountable for cancer encouraging oxydase enzymes. Therefore, flaxseed oil would arouse the protein growth in cells and make oils water soluble; efficiently eliminate them from body and preventing the repeated growth of cancer cells.

Lung Cancer Secrets Revealed Click here

Colon cancer is one of the three kinds of cancer that is also known as a killer. The colon is where the body filters out the waste products from the body. It is also a very risky and a potential place for acquiring cancer. Therefore, cleansing the colon can be of a great help to eliminate the waste fast from the digestive system.

Budwig diet was discovered by late Dr. Johanna Budwig and is endorsed by lots of cancer patients for really curing the disease, as stated to the testimonials online. This diet is all about including oil and protein comprising flax seeds and eliminating the trans fat and the supplements.

Gerson therapy is also said to be a strong natural cure for cancer that has reportedly healed even the most serious cases of myeloma or bone cancer. This therapy comprises of big quantities of fresh juices of vegetables and three coffee enemas everyday.

Green barley pills are also said to work successfully in killing cancer cells. Water fasting is another acclaimed method of killing the bladder cancer, where the patient fasts for 28 days. Aromatherapy and yoga can relieve both the physical and mental stress from the patient.

lung cancer treatment breakthroughs Click here

PDF Creator    Send article as PDF