Avoiding Cancers

According to vast amounts of information available on the Internet, Cancer cells are acidic while healthy cells are alkaline. When the body’s pH becomes acidic, oxygen levels decline proportionately and begin to choke out the cells ability to make energy and eliminate wastes. Acidic pH creates a hostile internal environment which makes the body struggle to get its nutrient needs met. The more acidic you become the worse you will most likely feel. This is a main factor in feeling tired and worn out. Even though you are breathing oxygen, your cells can’t get it and you just can’t get the energy you want out of your body.

It is widely believed that chronic diseases (like cancer) need an acidic environment to thrive. Every cancer researcher surely knows that cancer cannot survive in an alkaline environment? In fact, there is evidence to suggest that if a cancer tumor is put into a beaker with an alkaline media, the cancer will die within 3 hours. This is why eating with an alkaline pH in mind is so important. Most people are scared of getting cancer and now you know there is something positive you can do about it...keep your tissues alkaline!

What this information suggests is that, if you eat and drink the foods that will make your blood and body lean more towards the alkaline end of the pH scale (and don't overdo it, as imbalance in anything is not good!), theory has it that you can reverse the growth of cancerous cells to healthy cells and/or kill off the cancer cells altogether. I like that theory and think it’s worth the effort. If it IS true, do you really believe that Medical Science would want it to be Public?! Onward…

Acidity - Alkalinity

The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14, with 0 being extremely acidic, 14 being extremely alkaline and 7 being neutral. Body fluids range between 4.5 and 7.5 pH (blood must maintain 7.35 to 7.45 pH). A one point drop on the pH scale is 10 times more acidic; for example from 7 to 6 is 10 times more acidic, from 7 to 5 is 100 times, from 7 to 2 is 1,000,000 times more acidic. Most plants and fish thrive in waters of pH values from 6.6 to 7.4. This is a good rule of thumb to use for humans as parasites, viruses, bad bacteria, and degenerative diseases are more prevalent in an acidic system. In order for the body to remain healthy, it keeps a delicate and precise balance of blood pH at 7.365, which is slightly alkaline. The body does whatever it has to in order to maintain this balance. The problem is that most people have incredibly acid-forming lifestyles. Acid is produced in your body whenever you have stress, upset emotions and when the food you eat is acid-forming.

The human body is composed of 78% water. The cells in the body are 98% water. Even our bones are 20% water. We can live for thirty days without food but only 3 days without water. If all the water is removed from a 150 pound person, the residue left would weigh less than 35 pounds. We know that the body fluids of healthy people are slightly alkaline while the same fluids of those who are sick are acidic, either very acidic or slightly. Generally speaking, the more acid your body is, the more serious the illness you have. The degree of acidity significantly affects the body's ability to prevent and/or reverse illness and disease (including such degenerative diseases as cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and others). Individuals that have severe health challenges almost invariably also have high acidity. Unfortunately, acidity has become a national epidemic that is one of the most ignored or unknown underlying causes of many of the degenerative diseases of the western world.

High systemic acid levels contribute or cause directly, numerous health problems;
· Acid systems can’t use calcium effectively.
· They can’t maintain proper blood oxygen levels and cancer can only develop in an oxygen poor, acidic environment.
· Acidic blood can’t circulate properly creating extra strain on the heart.
· It adversely affects the digestive system and the lymphatic system.

How is this condition created?

· What we eat and drink and
· What we are not taking in [nutrients, vitamins, minerals, water, etc.]

Whatever comes into contact with our skin, lungs and digestive system is absorbed into the body very quickly. To achieve and maintain a healthy alkaline body, we must eat foods and drinks that produce an alkaline body.

The Standard American Diet (SAD) consists of fast food, high protein, fat, sugar and carbohydrates, which contribute to an overly acidic body. In addition, Americans eat next to no vegetables and the vegetables that are eaten are often cooked thereby creating another acidifying food whereas raw, unprocessed vegetables are alkalizing to the body. In general, it is important to eat a diet that contains both acidic and alkalizing foods. People vary, but for most, the ideal diet is 75 percent alkalizing and 25 percent acidifying.

Dr. Bruce Ames, noted biochemist at the University of California at Berkeley at a 1998 conference of the Society of Toxicology, told the audience of researchers that nutrient deficiency may explain why the 25% of the population that eats the least fruit and vegetables has double the cancer rate in comparison to the 25% of the population that eats the most fruits and vegetables.

It is probable that the population that eats higher amounts of vegetables and fruits is also more alkaline than the rest of us. It only makes sense. It isn’t just the nutrient content of the food; it is the acid vs. alkaline ratios that are positively affected as well.

The National Health and Nutrition Survey reported that;
· Less than 10% of Americans consumed five daily servings of fruit and vegetables
· 40% ate no fruit or fruit juice
· 50% ate no vegetables
· 70% have no dietary vitamin C
· 80% didn't eat anything that had carotenoids
· The number one vegetable in the United States is French Fries and that comprises 25% of all vegetables eaten.
· Number two is Iceberg Lettuce and a close third is Ketchup.

If we can’t even eat the minimal amount of alkalizing foods it is no wonder we have such nationwide issues with degenerative diseases caused by acidity.

Dehydration is rampant often because the average American thinks that drinking soda or coffee is the same as drinking water. As well as acting as a diuretic, soda has an acidic range around 2.5 pH. It takes an incredible amount of “good” water to counteract the effects of soda. You may have to drink nearly 32 glasses of 7.0 pH water to eliminate the bad effects of 1 glass of soda. In addition to soda, coffee, caffeine, and smoking all contribute to raising the acid levels in one's body, thereby contributing to serious health problems. It is important to understand that raising the body's pH does not cure disease. It does however, allow the body to heal itself by normalizing cellular function and ridding itself of toxins. Also fruits and vegetables will be adding the minerals that are so important to maintaining good health.

Alkalizing With Foods

We can reduce the acidifying effects of our diet by choosing a diet which is balanced on the side of alkaline-forming foods. All natural, raw, vegetable and fruit juices are alkaline-producing. Fruit juices become more acid-producing when processed and especially when sweetened. A food's acid or alkaline-forming tendency in the body has nothing to do with the actual pH of the food itself. For example, lemons are very acidic; however the end products they produce after digestion and assimilation are very alkaline so in fact lemons are alkaline-forming in the body. Likewise, meat will test alkaline before digestion but it leaves very acidic residue in the body so, like nearly all animal products, meat is very acid-forming.

A severe acid condition forces the body to borrow minerals - including calcium, sodium, potassium and magnesium from organs and bones to buffer (neutralize) the acid to safely remove it from the body. This is a primary cause of osteoporosis. Acidic conditions can also cause such problems as:

Broccoli
Effective against: most cancers
Works because: the slightly bitter flavor of broccoli (and its cousins Brussels sprouts, cabbage and cauliflower) is the reason for the impressive track record these vegetables have in deterring cancer. The bitter chemicals isothiocyanates and glucosinolates actually interfere with cancer progression and deactivate harmful oestrogens associated with hormonal cancers such as breast and ovarian cancers.

Garlic
Effective against: stomach, colon and most cancers
Works because: the smelly compounds in garlic are potent anti-cancer agents. All of the onion family, including leeks and shallots, contain these compounds but garlic is the most rich. Trials have shown that chemically induced cancers can be interrupted by the active compounds formed from allicin from garlic. To get the most out of garlic chop the clove and leave it to `mature' in the air for 15 minutes, and then use it in your cooking. Heating prior to this 'maturation time' by air neutralizes the important compounds.

Tofu
Effective against: breast, ovarian and prostate cancers
Works because: the isoflavones the Soya bean contains have a gently estrogen-mimicking effect in the human body. This helps to block the effects of more aggressive oestrogens, both natural and those from environmental chemicals from sources such as plastics and pesticides. This has the effect of limiting the risk of hormone-linked cancers in both women and men. Tofu may be more effective than other Soya products or Soya supplements as it has been fermented and so some potentially negative compounds are neutralized. The Japanese and Chinese who eat tofu regularly have low risks of these cancers.

Oily fish (Tuna, Salmon, Mackerel)
Effective against: colon, prostate and breast cancers
Works because: the omega-3 fatty acids have a profound effect on cell metabolism and communication. These fatty acids also act as anti-inflammatory agents, which may be a reason for their influence on colon cancer. When the diet is higher in polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as the omega-3s, it also limits the intake and the effects of saturated fats, which are linked to increased risk of some cancers.

Green tea
Effective against: most cancers
Works because: the active compound in green tea, EGCG (epigalocatechin-3-gallate) is believed to be one of the strongest antimutagenic compounds found in plants - this means it has the effect of stopping damage at a genetic level. It can also stop tumors forming their own blood supply network. Trials suggest that fairly high intakes are needed, around 10 cups a day, so replacing all hot drinks with green tea could have a beneficial effect, but only one cup a day might not. Green tea is much lower in caffeine than black tea or coffee and so is easier on sleep patterns as well.

Wholegrain cereals
Effective against: colon and breast cancers.
Works because: The fiber in whole grains, from cereals and whole meal bread, are important for gut and hormonal health. The fiber gives the colon something `to work with' and also promotes good bowel bacteria. Fiber is also important in eliminating excess oestrogens. Fiber-rich cereals include bran flakes, porridge oats and muesli, though it is best to choose low-salt and low-sugar versions.

Tomato puree
Effective against: prostate and breast cancers
Works because: the active compound in tomatoes is lycopene, one of the most potent free-radical scavengers, and seems to affect the activity of free-radicals created by tumors. Interestingly, the significant effects found against prostate and breast cancers are observed in cooked and processed tomato products, rather than raw tomatoes. This is because lycopene is made more absorbable by processing and so tomato juice, puree and canned tomatoes are most effective. It is even better to include a little olive oil when cooking with or consuming these because the oil increases absorption further.

Live yoghurt
Effective against: colon and breast cancers
Works because: the beneficial bacteria found in live yoghurt promotes gut health and improves the performance of the immune system. Regular yoghurt intake has been shown to increase levels of immune anti-cancer compounds such as interferon and natural killer cells. Because elimination of oestrogens happens in the colon, the health of the colon directly affects the development of breast cancer.

Oranges and carrots
Effective against: lung cancer particularly, and most cancers in general Works because: they are rich, respectively, in vitamin C and beta-carotene. All fruits and vegetables are rich in antioxidants and many are rich in these two compounds. These water-soluble antioxidants are important at protecting lung tissue, which is a very water-rich environment. High blood levels of these antioxidants are linked to much-reduced levels of lung, and other, cancers. However taking beta-carotene in supplement form may be ill-advised for smokers as trials have shown higher mortality levels, probably as smokers' lungs already have advanced damage. A diet high in fruits and vegetables is highly protective against lung cancer and even in countries where smoking is more prevalent, such as Greece and Spain, fruits and vegetables seem to be protective.

Linseeds (also called flax seeds)
Effective against: breast and colon cancers
Works because: the lignans they contain are gelatinous fibers which are highly protective against hormonal cancers. They convert in the bowel, in the presence of beneficial bacteria (see yoghurt above) to even more potent compounds which block the effects of estrogen. Additionally, like all fibers, they have a positive effect on bowel health - indeed one of the most effective remedies against constipation is to take one or two teaspoons of linseeds pre-soaked for 30 minutes in water or fruit juice. They are also particularly rich in omega-3 fatty acids.

Flaxseeds contain two cancer-preventive compounds: omega 3 fatty acids and lignans, which may reduce the risk of breast cancer and colon cancer. Ground flaxseeds, because they contain both the fiber and the oil, have more potent anticancer properties than flax oil alone. Cancer researchers suggest 25 grams of ground flaxseeds a day. You can grind your own in a coffee grinder or purchase pre-ground flaxseed meal, which mixes well in smoothies or sprinkled like bran flakes over yogurt and cereal.

Cruciferous Vegetables (Broccoli, Cabbage, Cauliflower and Brussels sprouts etc). Cancers are probably caused by saturated fatty diets which curtail the bodies fighting immunity. The best weapon against cancer is - HOLD YOUR BREATH - Cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, radish, turnip and brussel sprouts - long classified as ANTI CANCER FOODS.

According to TrueHealth
The most powerful anti-cancer food of all is of course, a daily helping of seafood - for the complete range of the 72+ natural trace elements, without which we cannot help but sicken...or even, worse! The complete natural range of the 72 trace elements is the best anti-cancer food there is. This is the reason why the breast cancer rate is 21 times lower, the lung cancer rate is 36 times lower, the prostate cancer rate is 137 times lower, and the colon cancer rate 187 times lower among the Sinhalese and most likely, the people of India as well. Unlike Sri Lanka, India does not have a public health care system, hence the lack of figures for India.

Since SELENIUM and BROCCOLI seem to be synonymous with Anti-Cancer ratings, I wanted to give

you a bit of information as to where you can find these in their wonderful natural sources:

Food	Micrograms (μg)	Percent DV*
Brazil nuts, dried, unblanched, 1 ounce	544	780
Tuna, light, canned in oil, drained, 3 ounces	63	95
Beef, cooked, 3½ ounces	35	50
Spaghetti w/ meat sauce, frozen entrée, 1 serving	34	50
Cod, cooked, 3 ounces	32	45
Turkey, light meat, roasted, 3½ ounces	32	45
Beef chuck roast, lean only, roasted, 3 ounces	23	35
Chicken Breast, meat only, roasted, 3½ ounces	20	30
Noodles, enriched, boiled, 1/2 cup	17	25
Macaroni, elbow, enriched, boiled, 1/2 cup	15	20
Egg, whole, 1 medium	14	20
Cottage cheese, low fat 2%, 1/2 cup	12	15
Oatmeal, instant, fortified, cooked, 1 cup	12	15
Rice, white, enriched, long grain, cooked, 1/2 cup	12	15
Rice, brown, long-grained, cooked, 1/2 cup	10	15
Bread, enriched, whole wheat, commercially prepared, 1 slice	10	15
Walnuts, black, dried, 1 ounce	5	8
Bread, enriched, white, commercially prepared, 1 slice	4	6
Cheddar cheese, 1 ounce	4	6

*DV = Daily Value. DVs are reference numbers developed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to help consumers determine if a food contains a lot or a little of a specific nutrient. The DV for selenium is 70 micrograms (ug). Most food labels do not list a food's selenium content. The percent DV (%DV) listed on the table indicates the percentage of the DV provided in one serving. A food providing 5% of the DV or less is a low source while a food that provides 10-19% of the DV is a good source. A food that provides 20% or more of the DV is high in that nutrient. It is important to remember that foods that provide lower percentages of the DV also contribute to a healthful diet. For foods not listed in this table, please refer to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Nutrient Database Web site: http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/cgi-bin/nut_search.pl.

ALKALIZING FOODS
VEGETABLES Garlic Asparagus Fermented Veggies Watercress Beets Broccoli Brussel sprouts Cabbage Carrot Cauliflower Celery Chard Chlorella Collard Greens Cucumber Eggplant Kale Kohlrabi Lettuce Mushrooms Mustard Greens Dulce Dandelions Edible Flowers Onions Parsnips (high glycemic) Peas Peppers Pumpkin Rutabaga Sea Veggies Spirulina Sprouts Squashes Alfalfa Barley Grass Wheat Grass Wild Greens Nightshade Veggies	FRUITS Apple Apricot Avocado Banana (high glycemic) Cantaloupe Cherries Currants Dates/Figs Grapes Grapefruit Lime Honeydew Melon Nectarine Orange Lemon Peach Pear Pineapple All Berries Tangerine Tomato Tropical Fruits Watermelon PROTEIN Eggs Whey Protein Powder Cottage Cheese Chicken Breast Yogurt Almonds Chestnuts Tofu (fermented) Flax Seeds Pumpkin Seeds Tempeh (fermented) Squash Seeds Sunflower Seeds Millet Sprouted Seeds Nuts	OTHER Apple Cider Vinegar Bee Pollen Lecithin Granules Probiotic Cultures Green Juices Veggies Juices Fresh Fruit Juice Organic Milk (unpasteurized) Mineral Water Alkaline Antioxidant Water Green Tea Herbal Tea Dandelion Tea Ginseng Tea Banchi Tea Kombucha SWEETENERS Stevia SPICES/SEASONINGS Cinnamon Curry Ginger Mustard Chili Pepper Sea Salt Miso Tamari All Herbs ORIENTAL VEGETABLES Maitake Daikon Dandelion Root Shitake Kombu Reishi Nori Umeboshi Wakame Sea Veggies

ACIDIFYING FOODS
FATS & OILS Avocado Oil Canola Oil Corn Oil Hemp Seed Oil Flax Oil Lard Olive Oil Safflower Oil Sesame Oil Sunflower Oil FRUITS Cranberries GRAINS Rice Cakes Wheat Cakes Amaranth Barley Buckwheat Corn Oats (rolled) Quinoi Rice (all) Rye Spelt Kamut Wheat Hemp Seed Flour DAIRY Cheese, Cow Cheese, Goat Cheese, Processed Cheese, Sheep Milk Butter	NUTS & BUTTERS Cashews Brazil Nuts Peanuts Peanut Butter Pecans Tahini Walnuts ANIMAL PROTEIN Beef Carp Clams Fish Lamb Lobster Mussels Oyster Pork Rabbit Salmon Shrimp Scallops Tuna Turkey Venison PASTA (WHITE) Noodles Macaroni Spaghetti OTHER Distilled Vinegar Wheat Germ Potatoes	DRUGS & CHEMICALS Chemicals Drugs, Medicinal Drugs, Psychedelic Pesticides Herbicides ALCOHOL Beer Spirits Hard Liquor Wine BEANS & LEGUMES Black Beans Chick Peas Green Peas Kidney Beans Lentils Lima Beans Pinto Beans Red Beans Soy Beans Soy Milk White Beans Rice Milk Almond Milk

We live in an era where the majority of Americans think that diseases strike us because of either misfortune, genetics, or unknown factors beyond our control. When serious disease “strikes,” we run to doctors and expect them to fix us with a pill. Most people have no idea that most diseases—including cancers, heart disease, strokes, and diabetes—are the result of nutritional folly. Because they do not know that adults lived much longer centuries ago, they accept the myth that we are living healthier and longer today.

If we were taught from childhood that the diseases we suffer in the modern world are the tragic consequence of our toxic food environment, we wouldn’t be in today’s disgraceful situation—where people graduate from high school, college, and even graduate school without learning how to protect, preserve, and restore their precious health. With proper health education, we would learn that our bodies are powerfully resistant to disease when nutritional needs are met. Instead, we have become the victims of the high-tech, mass-produced food culture that is fueling a cancer epidemic unrivaled in human history.

Chemotherapy Mentality
Our technologically-advanced society is suffering from the highest rates of cancer ever seen in human history, rates that are also much higher than in less developed parts of the world. Since 1999, cancer has surpassed heart disease and has become the leading cause of age adjusted mortality for Americans younger than 85. Despite more than a hundred billion dollars in cancer research— invested largely in the development of drug chemotherapy and screening and detection techniques—we have lost the war on cancer. While there has been a slight reduction of cancer-related deaths in the last 25 years, this is largely the result of the decrease in lung cancer deaths that has resulted from a reduction in cigarette smoking during this timeframe. Mortality rates for most cancers have stayed remarkably steady.

Chemotherapy has contributed to the progress made against cancer deaths from fast-growing cancers, such as leukemia, lymphoma, testicular cancer, and childhood cancers such as osteogenic sarcoma. But for the major cancers affecting most adult Americans, chemotherapy adds less than one year of disease-free life to those treated.

Science or Profits?
At present, pharmaceutical companies— not independent medical or scientific researchers—control the vast majority of research and clinical trials. We have lost the judgment and rationale of independent experts and now depend on drug companies to honestly report the risks and benefits of drugs they manufacture and sell. This is like asking the fast-food industry to be in charge of our nutritional advice. The medical studies that drug companies pay for and publicize are heavily biased in favor of the drugs they sell. The economically powerful pharmaceutical industry and the large chemical-food conglomerates wield undue influence on government and the media. Accurate nutritional information is rarely reported because the media cannot produce stories that go against the interests of their advertisers. Instead, the media is quick to report on drug company press releases—self-serving propaganda announcing new anticancer “breakthroughs” that reinforce the myth that we are winning the war against cancer.

Mythical Breakthroughs
Most often, the so-called “benefits” described by drug companies announce improved “response rates,” for example, when tumor burden is lessened. But an improved response rate means little if the patient does not survive longer. And even the cancer industry’s meager definition of survival—living 5 years beyond diagnosis—can be misleading. If “advances” in chemotherapy result in a higher percentage of people surviving for 5 years than did previously, that can be reported as “progress.” But if most of them still die between years 5 and 10, it hardly can be called a big success, especially if the same number or more people would have survived 10 years or longer without the chemotherapy.

Unless overall survival and quality of life are improved, it matters not if chemotherapy resulted in tumor shrinkage, or if a slight increase is seen in 5-year survival statistics. By using virtually meaningless terms like “response rates” and “disease-free survival,” researchers can report results that make chemotherapy look more effective than it really is.

Unless patients do some investigating of their own, they have no way of knowing that the glowingly optimistic results reported in the press—and too often parroted by their doctors—are designed to lead them to chemotherapy even though it is a poor choice for both quality and duration of life. The false perception that chemotherapy offers significant life-span benefits for cancer sufferers is dramatically juxtaposed by the fact that so many more people die of cancer today than they did years ago. In fact, a Swedish study showed that the risk of developing cancer and dying of it was three times higher in people born in the 1950s compared with those born in the 1880s. Since 1958, cancer has increased 55 percent in men and only slightly less in women.1

Does Chemotherapy Work?
Let’s see how effective chemotherapy actually is with a few common cancers.

A meta-analysis of chemotherapy for postmenopausal, estrogen receptor-positive women (the largest group of women with breast cancer) pooled the six largest studies to get the most accurate data on survival and complications. Here is what researchers concluded about the group treated with standard chemotherapy: “No significant survival benefit was observed.”2

In non-small cell lung cancer (the most common type), the 5- year survival is only about 10 percent. In stage 4, when the cancer has spread to distant sites, the 5-year survival is only 1.6 percent. After looking at multiple studies, it appears that treatment generally results in a very slight improved survival rate at 1 year, but this advantage disappeared at 30 months of follow- up.3

Even in small cell lung cancer where chemotherapy has proven effectiveness in life extension, the benefit adds only a few months of life, not years. And during this time the patient can experience serious—even life threatening— side effects from the treatment.

What Should You Do?
If you have cancer and are considering chemotherapy, it is wise to do a search on all of the studies done on the recommended therapy (using med-line, for instance), so an informed decision can be made. If this were done, most patients likely would refuse chemotherapy. Doctors generally hide and distort the realities of chemotherapy, talking to patients about “shrinking the cancer” and “killing cancer cells,” not mentioning the fact that the therapy has not been shown to extend life.

Every patient has to make her own decision. But if I were a woman with postmenopausal breast cancer, I would opt for surgery, without radiation and without chemotherapy, and would then pursue an aggressive nutritional protocol. I also would include antiestrogens if the tumor histology showed it to be estrogen receptor- positive.

War Against Good Nutrition
While the “war against cancer” is being fought with the wet noodle of chemotherapy, we are observing a significant increase in some cancers, such as malignant melanoma, multiple myeloma, and prostate cancer. Our population is heavier and as cancer-prone as ever. While we are pouring billions of dollars into drug companies and cancer centers, millions of people continue to die from what should be a preventable disease.

Almost nothing has been done to teach people about the power of nutritional excellence to protect against cancer. In fact, the media regularly reports that nutrition does not affect cancer. For example, a recent New York Times (G. Kolata, September 27,2005,“Science Times”) article reported that diet had only a “hypothetical” relationship with cancer. This ludicrous pronouncement was based on studies that showed that perimenopausal women who eat less fat still have high cancer rates. The Times evidently does not understand that modestly reducing fat and eating more chicken and pasta is not an anti-cancer program.

We are losing the war on cancer, and our government policies are actually worsening the problem. With all of the recent advances in science pointing to phytonutrient deficiency as the major cause of cancer, our efforts should focus on prevention; educating the public about proper diet and nutrition. Millions of lives can be saved. We also can eliminate the tragic consequences and family trauma of living with cancer—-diagnoses, surgeries, radiation, chemotherapies, suffering, and premature death, which come from the cancer and very often from the treatment.

Avoiding Cancer
Your body is a self-repairing and self-healing machine. Human cells have all the features necessary to protect themselves from chemical damage to their DNA that eventually results in carcinogenic changes. A cancer cell is essentially a normal cell whose DNA has been damaged to the point that it can no longer control its replication. The process that is creating our modern epidemic of cancer is twofold. One aspect involves the exposure of our cells to damaging stresses such as chemical carcinogens, radon, acrylamides, and high levels of saturated and trans fats and animal protein. At the same time, we have a woefully insufficient dietary intake of plant-derived nutrients, which renders our cells incapable of functioning to their fullest potential for repair and maintenance.

Our cells have built-in, powerful mechanisms to remove or destroy toxic substances, inhibit DNA damage, repair broken DNA cross-links, and remove cells that are injured or abnormal before they become cancerous. In recent years, the term phytochemicals has been used to refer to the thousands of newly-discovered nutrients supplied by plants that—-in addition to vitamins and minerals—-are necessary for maximal immune system protection and for the promotion of cellular detoxification and repair.

Most of our knowledge about what constitutes the optimal cancer prevention diet comes from both human population (epidemiological) studies and animal studies. Populations that have a high intake of natural, unrefined plant foods such as fruits, vegetables, seeds, nuts, and beans always have a low incidence of cancer, proportional to the intake of these phytochemcal-rich plant foods.

Even though other factors such as chemicals, pollution, and smoking play a role in cancer etiology, the scientific literature still illustrates that a better diet offers dramatic protection even against nondietary cancer promoters. For example, the Fiji Islands (where smoking rates are high) still has a dramatically lower incidence of lung cancer than Hawaii (where smoking rates are lower). This protection against lung cancer even in heavily smoking Fiji Islanders was shown to be the result of the high intake of green vegetables in Fiji.4

Examining data from numerous epidemiological studies, the World Cancer Research Fund concluded that the evidence that fruits and vegetables may reduce the risk of oral, esophageal, lung, stomach, colon, pancreatic, bladder, and breast cancer was convincing. No single substance in a plant-based diet accounts for this relationship; rather, it is the synergistic effect of multiple phytochemical compounds (which number in the thousands).

The National Cancer Institute recommends eating 5 servings of fruits and vegetables each day. However, scientific studies suggest that more is better and that much, much more is much, much better at reducing cancer risk. It is a national disgrace that very few Americans follow this very minimal recommendation to eat 5 servings of fruits and vegetables daily.

Cruciferous Vegetables
While fruits and vegetables are excellent sources of nutrients, the consumption of vegetables is more helpful in reducing cancer because they contain much higher amounts of cancer-protective compounds— especially green vegetables. Among these green vegetables, the cruciferous family has demonstrated the most dramatic protection against cancer. Cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower, kale, bok choy, collards, arugala, watercress, and cabbage) contain a symphony of phytonutrients with potent anti-cancer effects. Isothiocyanates (ITCs), which are perhaps the best studied, have been shown to provide protection against environmental carcinogen exposure by inducing detoxification pathways, thereby neutralizing potential carcinogens.

These vegetables also contain indole-3- carbinol (I3C). Indole-3-carbinol has been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer by decreasing estrogen activity. Important recent studies have shown that cruciferous vegetables and the compounds they contain can do the following:

prevent the replication of prostate cancer cells and induce death of cancerous cells;7

What makes these studies even more fascinating is the discovery of the gene/diet interaction, which has shown that high intake of greens and cruciferous vegetables provides the food factors necessary to interact with—and prevent— genetic defects from creating disease. This gene/diet interaction activates a battery of many genes, initiating DNA repair and other protection mechanisms.

These cellular repair and detoxification mechanisms are most powerfully induced by eating a mixture of both raw and cooked cruciferous plant foods. Some of the compounds are water soluble and heat stable, and absorption is increased when cooked, for example, in a soup. Other critical ITCs are heat sensitive and are better transmitted in the raw form.

Carotenoids & Polyphenols
Population studies show an association between high dietary intake of carotenoid-containing fruits and vegetables and reduced risk of prostate, breast, and head and neck cancers. A high dietary intake of fruits and vegetables provides a spectrum of carotenoids, including alphacarotene, gamma-carotene, betacryptoxanthin, zeaxanthin, lutein, and lycopene.

Vegetable juices (carrot, tomato, spinach, and other greens) represent a particularly potent form of carotenoids. Scientists have demonstrated that drinking carrot juice significantly reduces free radical damage to genes. Tomato juice and cooked tomatoes rich in lycopene and other potent antioxidants help reduce the oxidation of the “bad” LDL cholesterol and also have been shown to dramatically help protect against cancer. Carotenoid-rich extracts of carrots and tomatoes have been shown to substantially inhibit the early stages of liver cancer in animals.

Fruits also contain various key phytochemicals. For example, resveratrol, found in grapes, has been reported to exert a variety of anticancer effects. Studies have demonstrated that resveratrol causes growth inhibition of human colon and breast cancer cells. Ellagic acid, found in strawberries, grapes, blueberries, raspberries, and blackberries, is another polyphenol that has demonstrated anticarcinogenic potential in animal studies.

This article is from the Healthy Times newsletter, a complete archive of which is available to members of DrFuhrman.com.

References
1. Adami HO, Bergstrom R, Sparen P, Baron J. Increasing cancer risk in younger birth cohorts in Sweden, Lancet 1993 Mar 27;341(8848):773-777. 2. Hartman AR, Fleming GF, Dillon JJ. Metaanalysis of adjuvant cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/ 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy in postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-positive breast cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2001;2(2):138-143. 3. Blackhall FH, Bhosle J, Thatcher N. Chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients with performance status 2. Curr Opin Oncol 2005

"Heal Thyself: Radical Measures"

How the rare bloodroot plant healed my husband's cancer when nothing else would

It was a year ago in March that we got the news. My fit, 51-year-old husband was diagnosed with a rare form of cancer called sarcoma. A large tumor that had gone unnoticed for some time began to put pressure on Gary's spine, and resulting diagnostics confirmed its presence. On March 12, 2004 a tumor the size of a cantaloupe was surgically removed from his abdominal region and ultimately diagnosed as a stage IV soft tissue sarcoma. In spite of his healthy lifestyle and low risk behaviors-he's never smoked, rarely drinks and trains regularly to compete in triathalons-there it was, a very serious form of cancer with very little research or information available on its course and treatment.

Nothing is more frightening than being diagnosed with an aggressive, life-threatening illness. Nothing is easier than turning one's care over to a specialized physician with years of education and training, even for someone such as Gary, an acupuncturist of 17 years, who has helped patients with other serious health problems. The vulnerability that comes from this traumatic news fosters a kind of hope and dependence on the "professional," someone who has likely had a great deal of experience in dealing with our particular brand of illness. They seem to normalize the experience a bit. After all, they've dealt with a lot of similar cases and have even seen some success stories. It feels natural to extend a great deal of faith and belief in their capacity to help us.

Gary was fortunate to have a team of top-notch, conscientious doctors working on his behalf. We initially opted for a conventional program of treatment. In truth, standard methods of treatment for cancer rarely include options other than surgery, radiation and chemotherapy. These methods are not without their liabilities, but for many kinds of cancer, success rates are sizeable. In Gary's case, because there has been so little research done on sarcoma, we were often operating in the dark. Most disheartening of all was the fact that sarcoma has no known markers to determine its presence in the body, and we were therefore unable to measure success rates with the protocols until the end of treatment.

After 24 radiation sessions and five harrowing chemotherapy hospitalizations, doctors determined there was still an active tumor in Gary's body. He declined his doctor's recommendation of a sixth round of chemotherapy and made an appointment with a surgeon to discuss the possibility of a second surgery.

Gary and I were grateful for the candid approach of his surgeon. He was straightforward and pulled no punches in detailing what would be required to remove the tumor, which was located in the gastric esophageal junction. A portion of Gary's stomach and esophagus would need to be removed and reconstructive surgery would be required. Life might not be the same in terms of his ability to tolerate foods and he would likely experience chronic gastric difficulty. Even then, the doctor put the chances of a recurrence of the cancer at 75%.

We were speechless on the drive home. Both of us knew surgery was not even on the list of options. We have both known people who have suffered through one surgery after the next, trying to eradicate their cancer, with vital parts of their bodies cut out. Each surgery promises to be "the last one." Too often, it doesn't seem to happen this way. We knew that no matter what course the tumor might take, this kind of debilitating surgery was not on our list of alternatives.

When we arrived home, a curious shift began to take place. We were out of options-at least options from the conventional Western medical model. Somehow, there was relief in this. We no longer felt the pressure of "doing the safe thing" by embracing modern medicine. We were left to our own devices, free to consider new possibilities with abandon. This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as "the golden handshake." The traditional methods have now been exhausted; there is now permission to venture down new roads.

I got on the Internet that night and typed in the words cancer treatment alternatives. When I pushed the enter key, the tight space we were in began to open up. From that point on, life felt very different for both of us. An old statement came back to me then, pointing out that the fewer choices we feel we have, the greater our level of despair. I could never have predicted the many, many alternative options that were available for the treatment of cancer. I guess I had been socialized to believe that non-traditional health care for something as serious as cancer was most likely a form of quackery-desperate, last resort attempts to hang on to hope. The reality couldn't have been more different.

We spent the next few months doing a great deal of research on a variety of treatment methods. We accessed research studies (yes, there is a great deal of research available on non-traditional medical practices), ordered books, and consulted with practitioners. But mostly, we explored our relationship with fear, and realized that cultivating fear really is a choice, and we don't have to do it. Somehow, our fear seemed to diminish when we took the healing process into our own hands.

We decided on a number of treatment choices. Each one has been instrumental in Gary's course of healing. But the most remarkable, and most dramatic, was the use of the black salve that comes from the plant known as Sanguinaria canadensis, or bloodroot.

I have come to have a great deal of reverence and respect for this most powerful of healing agents. Bloodroot, combined with several other ingredients, forms a salve that is known as an escharotic (es-ka-rah'-tik). I was surprised to discover that escharotics have a long history of use in the treatment of cancer, dating back to Hippocrates (who was known to use such substances), and ancient Egypt. In the last three centuries, many case studies using escharotics for cancer treatment have been documented, both in Europe and in the United States, by physicians such as Dr. Weldon Fell, Dr. John Pattison and Dr. Eli Jones.

An escharotic is defined as a caustic substance that creates a chemical reaction with various tissues in the body. The salve is applied topically in the region where the disease is believed to be present. It then absorbs through the skin, seeks out diseased tissue located internally, and destroys it. The incapacitated tissue is then brought to the skin's surface and eventually sloughs off. If there is no disease present, the black salve will simply rest on the skin's surface until it is wiped away. Healthy tissue seems to be bypassed in the process, other than tissue disturbance on the skin's surface where the eschar (scab-like formation) breaks through. Remarkably, in spite of the potential for gaping holes in the skin, bleeding and infection are rare at the application site. However, there is usually considerable scar tissue.

It is almost impossible to move through the cancer experience (whether it's you or a loved one) and not feel that, somehow, an initiation has taken place. Never is this more true than when using the black salve. It is often said that the black salve is not for the faint of heart. My husband got a firsthand experience with just how radical this treatment can be.

The action was simple enough. He applied the salve directly over the tumor site, on a daily basis, until the eschar seemed to be well formed. At this point he stopped the salve and just applied vaseline to the wound area so it wouldn't dry out, continuing to dress it each day.

There was some soreness on the skin's surface that became painful at times, but the most intense pain took place internally, at the tumor site. He describes the sharp pain as a "strong tug and a pulling." He took strong pain medication for nearly three weeks during the 38-day process.

At the end of 38 days the eschar, which was three inches in diameter, a half inch thick and resembled a large mushroom sitting on his breastbone, detached. The wound closed up rather quickly, and the resulting scar shrunk down to two inches in diameter during the next six months. Gary's next biopsy showed that there were no active cancer cells in that region. His other diagnostics indicated that there was no other cancer present in his body. After months of disheartening news, it was gratifying to hear the best news ever: Gary was cancer free.

There is an intense spiritual component to working with bloodroot. Ingrid Naiman, who wrote a comprehensive book on "Cancer Salves," makes this statement: "People who are ready for an initiation of the spirit in which they surrender themselves to the purposes of their own souls, and to God, can be saved by this plant."

Looking at bloodroot in its black salve form, it appears dark and heavy and has a deep, musky odor. From a metaphysical perspective, its healing properties reflect only high, vibrating energy. One school of thought proposes that the low-vibrating, fear-based cancer cell cannot tolerate the light and vibration of the bloodroot, and therefore perishes. There is also, of course, much in the way of scientific explanation that supports its function, but in the matter of healing it is almost impossible to separate the physical and the spiritual.

Walking the line between conventional and alternative worlds of medicine has its its challenges. It takes a fair amount of ego strength to weather the subtle, and sometimes not so subtle, messages from your doctor that modern medicine is the one and only avenue toward eradicating cancer. Granted, some of Gary's physicians reported that cancer could surprise you sometimes with unpredictable outcomes, but that's about as far as it went. Happy as they seemed to be when his diagnostics showed he was cancer-free, they did not show much interest in what alternative therapies he was pursuing. I remember times when, in his excitement, Gary attempted to explain the merits of the black salve to our doctors. I would watch the polite interest on a doctor's face soon dissolve into boredom. A congratulatory pat on the back on their way out the door saved them from any additional explanations. Sometimes they'd even say, "Well, whatever works," and move on to other matters.

Willingness to be unpopular with any number of people is an inevitable part of taking treatment options into one's own hands. It is never easy to stand up to medical specialists (and in Gary's case, excellent, compassionate ones) and say, "I'm going to pursue a different path." But those who wish to be wise and proactive in following the course of treatment they feel is best run the risk of leaving some individuals frustrated with their decisions. A more substantial risk would be to wait until the body is ravaged by the effects of radiation, chemotherapy or disabling surgery before considering alternative therapies. Lee Ann McConnell is a clinical social worker with a private practice in Salt Lake City. Visit her and her husband's website at www.meridianhealth.info for more information on alternative treatment options for cancer.

“The Annie Appleseed Project” received the following information in January 2004:

Balm of Gilead (Also known as Compound X or Black Salve)

Note: No claims can be legally made about Compound X. This instructional document has been prepared as a narration of what users have reported to be the most effective way to use Compound X as a folk remedy, and what some have reported as results. It is not intended as a report of scientific studies, and it is not offered as endorsed by the AMA or the FDA. It is intended to be an honest report of what is known for those who are interested. What is reported here is the result of informal trial and error on the part of may non-professional folk’s intent on healing themselves or their animals. What follows has been gleaned from letters with users over 30 years, which means it is based on experience but is by no means complete.

Historical Background In 1890 Tom McCreary was diagnosed as having incurable, cancerous tumors on his neck by physicians. They refused to operate, not wanting to risk injury to his jugular vein. Tom paid careful attention to a repeated dream that came to him about how to make a medicine to cure himself. After obtaining the elements and herbs for the medicine from some gypsies traveling through Texas, he mixed up a black salve and applied it to his tumors.

In less than a month, Tom was healed and went on to live another 70 years. Over his lifetime, he was a preacher, rancher, doctor, farmer, and sheriff under Judge Parker, living with a strength that became legendary. Tom kept the formula for the black salve to himself, sharing it only with a friend. After Tom’s death, his son Howard, and grandson Mickey, sought out the old friend who taught them how to make the salve.

Howard McCreary, attempting to make the black salve available to everyone, started a company in the 1960's and had some tests done on "Compound X" in the early 70's, at the University of Colorado to learn more about it. The Veterinarian College at Ft. Collins also tested Compound X and discovered that it killed all known viruses on contact. They found with one application, sarcomatoid on horses (similar to skin cancer) had an 80% cure, and with two in the early 70's, at the University of Colorado to learn more about it. The Veterinarian College at Ft. Collins also tested Compound X and discovered that it killed all known viruses on contact. They found with one application, sarcomatoid on horses (similar to skin cancer) had an 80% cure, and with two applications 100% cure was achieved.

For many years, Compound X has been used to cure eye cancer and early viral diseases in cattle, sarcomatoid on horses, and abnormal tissue growths in all kinds of pets. In addition, ranchers, homesteaders, and folks of the rodeo circuits used it for external cancers, tumors and growths on themselves. Some successfully treated gangrene and even leprosy.

Today, people are using Compound X for moles, skin malignancies, warts, liver detox, diabetes, internal malignancies, herpes, chronic fatigue syndrome, viral diseases, tumors, yeast and fungal infections, allergies, parasites, lupus, gum disease, Aids related symptoms, and much more.

Tom’s son, Howard McCreary was the first to use Compound X internally. In the 1960's he was diagnosed as having stomach cancer. After checking himself into the hospital and without telling his doctors, he took an oral dose of Compound X the night before his scheduled surgery. The next morning they postponed his surgery because he was running a fever that continued for several days. On the 5th day Howard said he passed a large quantity of black, vile smelling feces apparently the growth itself. When the doctors took x-rays, they discovered that the cancerous growth was gone. Howard went on to live another 25 years, without recurring stomach cancer. He later used Compound X to cure himself of bone cancer in the 1980‘s.

During the course of his life, Howard provided Compound X to thousands of people. However, in his seventies, Howard was caught in a blizzard and later died of pneumonia.

Compound X or Balm of Gilead has been used successfully by tribal people and is now being used by the modern people of today. It is used for moles, skin malignancies, wart, liver detox, diabetes, internal malignancies, herpes, chronic fatigue syndrome, viral diseases, yeast and fungal infections, tumors, allergies, parasites, lupus, gum disease, aids and much more. There are no side effects because it is herbal.

SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS:
Compound X is somewhat acidic having a pH like vinegar. It is best to use wood or plastic utensils when handling Compound X (Balm of Gilead).

Using a non-metal utensil, lift out enough Compound X to make a ball HALF the size of a dried pea or the size of a lentil. Make sure you know how big dried pea or lentil is, even if you need to get one! Pack the half pea dose into a gelatin capsule, and swallow it after you have eaten a meal! Take this dose twice a day for 20 days and always on a full stomach. It will make you nauseated if you take on an empty stomach and it will make your stomach burn... Take with food!! THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT- DO NOT TAKE ON AN EMPTY STOMACH.

After the first 20 days, during which Compound X has built a great deal of zinc into your system, it is prudent to take a complete 5 day break from the black salve. During these 5 days you may wish to double your doses of vitamins and minerals, as this will help balance the system. Compound X can be taken as directed above in 20 day cycles with a 5 day break for a total of four (4) cycles.

NOTE: Avoid caffeine and alcohol, take extra Vitamin C, and drink pure water. In addition eat plenty of fresh fruit and vegetable, organic if possible. This helps in the healing and rebuilding of your health!!!

Internal cancers of all known body zones have dissolved under the onslaught on Compound X (Balm of Gilead). Compound X hunts down and kills abnormal tissue wherever it is.

Colon cancer and uterine cancer have been healed with not only the internal dosing described above, but by also using enemas or douches of one quart water to which was added one (1) pea size volume of Compound X (Balm of Gilead).

Breast cancer has been healed with internal and external applications.

Emphysema, Aids, and Viruses also seem to come under subjection to Balm of Gilead.

NOTE: If you are in the process of Chemotherapy or Radiation Treatment do not use Compound X at the same time...The Chemical action that occurs could clash with other substances.

NOTE: Brain Cancer should be monitored by a professional, because the swelling that will occur, it may have to be relieved by a surgical hole being place in the skull to relieve the pressure.

EXTERNAL USE:
Everyone is different, so proceed CAUTIOUSLY. This salve will cause a burning sensation if there is cancer present. Begin with a small amount of slave on ONE cancer, and follow the directions below. DO NOT OVER DO IT! Some hardy souls are able to remove several cancers at once. Others cannot. You will want to learn your own tolerance for this burning sensation, as well as how quick you body is able to remove the toxins which will be released, so begin slowly.

Once you have established what is comfortable for you, place a liberal amount of salve on the affected area. Cover with a bandage and leave alone for 24 hours or as long as you can tolerate it. If cancer is present, you feel a burning sensation, and a white scab will begin to form. If it is not, there should be no significant effect. If the pain is too severe, then only leave on for as long as you can tolerate, at least 5 hours. Wash it off and cover with Vaseline or Vitamin E ointment and cover with a bandage. DO NOT LEAVE COVERED LONGER THAN 5 DAYS. ALSO DO NOT PUT MORE BLACK SALVE ON AFTER THE 24 HOURS IS UP.

Remove the bandage at the end of the time and rinse thoroughly with hydrogen peroxide on a cotton ball or Q-tip. After cleaning, cover well with a softening salve (Myrrh, Golden Seal Salve. Vitamin E ointment, olive oil, Castor Oil, Nature’s Way Black ointment, etc).

Twice a day (morning and evening) clean the edges to keep them loose and free of pus. Do Not let a hard scab form. Five to seven days should show a core loosening and it should come out in 7 to 10 days. Do not try to pull it out or force it in any way. The feelers and tentacles must come out too.

Swelling will most likely occur and the cancer will be painful and/or itch. This is the normal reaction. The growth will change color after the first day, and may even become "dead white”. There will sometimes be pus as the body ejects the mass; just keep it clean. Keep changing the bandage and cleaning the area until it is healed.

More than two applications do not seem to be necessary for external growths. More applications cause increased pain and longer healing time. DO NOT TRY TO PULL IT OUT OR FORCE IT IN ANY WAY, THE ROOTS MUST COME OUT OR DISSOLVE...LET IT DO IT’S OWN THING. IT WILL COME OUT! BE PATIENT!!

If you feel that you should apply another layer of Compound X, that is ok, just follow the above directions.

What to expect during the first 20 days.

Lymphomas, such as appear on the neck or arm, may change from the texture of a hard lump, to rather soft, pliable, even squishy consistency. During the first 20 days, you may continuously run a low fever. Sweat, urine and feces may take on an offensive odor and be darker that usual. At the 20-day mark, it is wise to have competent physician take biopsy, or test your cancer for malignancy. For many, but not all people, the test reveals that the cancerous tissue is dead but present.

Compound X (Balm of Gilead) is not a gentle healer. But neither is surgery. In many reported cases, it is a relentless substance which hunts down and penetrates all abnormal tissue. It cannot be stressed enough that Compound X or Balm of Gilead is very potent. Do not assume that if a little is works more will be better. Use the smallest dose possible and increase only if necessary. Pain, swelling, and sometimes fever is associated during its use. Animals seem to mind it less that people.

In almost all reported cases, Compound X completely eliminates abnormal tissue and stimulates regrowth of either healthy or scar tissue.

More than half the people who have used Compound X have reported that they ended with a moderate or heavy scar when the used externally on their skin. If scarring cannot be tolerated on the face or elsewhere, consider Vitamin E ointment or Castor oil or one of the salves mentioned previously.

After the Core Comes Out

After the core comes out, you will have a hole in your flesh and you may even see muscle, but it usually doesn’t bleed. This normal.

Keep it clean, soft and bandaged until the core area is filled in & new skin is formed. Colloidal Silver can also be used before you put a new bandage on. This will keep any infection from developing.

LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THIS SALVE CAN BE USED IMPROPERLY. Please consult a health professional and BE CAREFUL.

PURCHASE Black Salve with DMSO
An herbal-based compound, this Black Salve is the strongest, most powerful available today! Being that this cream is our strongest formula, in most cases it only requires one or two applications for the desired effect. DMSO has been added to allow for deepest penetration of herbs.

Ingredients includes red clover, graviola, burdock root, chaparral, blood root, DMSO, and zinc mineral salts.

Cancer, the second leading killer in most Western industrialised nations, is a disease which has crept from an incidence rate of around 1 in 500 in 1900 to between 1 in 2 to 3 today. Over 600,000 people are expected to die from cancer in America in 2004, and yet, in spite of supposedly the brightest and the best walking the corridors of our leading cancer research institutions, armed with the latest technology and limitless budgets, the incidence rates for cancer continue to rise.

Breast cancer serves as a poignant yardstick. This type of malignancy is now the leading cause of death in women between the ages of 35 and 54. In 1971, a woman's lifetime risk of contracting breast cancer was 1 in 14. Today it is 1 in 8. Rachel's Environment and Health Weekly, No. 571 reports: "More American women have died of breast cancer in the past two decades than all the Americans killed in World War 1, World War 2, the Korean War and Vietnam War combined."

The amazing thing is, most physicians in the world today have absolutely no idea what cancer is, or even how it is contracted. Some believe cancer is virus-related. Others believe the cause is parasites. Others yet examine the environmental causal link.

Let's look at what society generally knows about cancer and see how it stacks up with the truth. Most believe that:

Cancer is a serious disease that kills those suffering from the life-threatening variants, such as lung, breast, bone, colorectal and liver.

Cancer can only be treated with chemotherapy, radiation treatments and radical surgeries to poison or break up tumours, or physically remove them altogether.

These cancer treatments sometimes work and sometimes don't. No one can be sure who will survive and who won't.

Cancer is caused by genetics, smoking, and other less well understood or known environmental causes. We still don't have the cure for cancer.

The cancer charities and famous pop and TV stars are doing a superb job raising money to help with the drug research to combat and defeat cancer.

Cancer appears to be a complex disturbance of cells in our bodies which mutate and then begin an uncontrollable proliferation. No one really knows what cancer is at the moment.

During the twelve years that I and my fellow researchers conducted our investigation into the cancer industry, what we found dispelled any illusions that cancer medicine was working in any way for the benefit of humanity. Here is what we found:

The proof behind what cancer actually is and how to combat it effectively has been known for almost a century.

Cancer cells are pre-embryonic stem cells that have been stimulated by estrogen in our bodies to form trophoblast healing cells. It is these trophoblast cells that may progress to form 'cancer' cells if the trophoblastic multiplication of these cells (the healing process) is not halted.

These rogue healing processes are started when our bodies become damaged in various ways. For instance, smoking damages the back of the throat and the lungs, resulting in site-specific healing processes that may or may not stop. Viruses, bacteria, mobile phones, physical blows, a toxic environment and chemical causations can all initiate healing processes in our bodies. In the event that a healing process is not terminated, healing trophoblast cells continue to proliferate to form a tumour.

All cancers can be traced to ENVIRONMENTAL OR LIFESTYLE RELATED CAUSATIONS that damage our bodies, initiating a healing process that may not stop. We can say 'ALL' because there are at least 18 different peoples on Earth today who do not suffer from cancer. Many of these cannot record even one victim of the disease in their entire culture. By this definition, cancer can be deemed preventable. The reasons why these peoples do not contract cancer are entirely known, yet this information, and the top researchers who discovered it, have been deliberately vilified by the mainstream science establishment.

Orthodox medicine has waged an effective and relentless war against this life-saving knowledge to prevent its widespread dissemination and thus forestall an attack on the highly profitable cancer industry. There are more people today making a living out of cancer than are dying from it. The cancer industry turns over in excess of $200 billion annually.

Cancer charities are fund-raising institutions for the pharmaceutical combines whose livelihoods depend on the continuance of cancer. Thus we see all efforts made to wage the war on cancer, not win it. In the event that cancer were vanquished, millions around the world would need to retrain. Cancer charities have no interest in knowing the truth about cancer - my organisation can vouch for that. Their job is to raise as much money as possible through the emotional showcasing of the heart-rending consequences of cancer, thereby stimulating the public to give more money.

There is no evidence that chemotherapy and radiation treatments extend life in the major epithelial cancers, which are the majority of the cancers striking us today, although these two treatments can and do sometimes effect a reduction in tumour size. In a small minority of cases, as with some testicular and childhood cancers, efficacy with these treatments may be shown. Radiation and chemotherapy on the other hand have long been known to compromise the body's immune system, leading to the progressive degradation of the patient's health.

Chemotherapy drugs are cytotoxic, meaning that they indiscriminately poison the cells in our body that multiply the most rapidly (cancer cells). However, certain immune system cells, such as our T and B lymphocytes, are also targeted, as these multiply rapidly too, contributing to our body's inability to fight opportunistic diseases that may come upon us as a result of the treatment.

Radiations treatments harm the body, often leading to the production of more healing trophoblast. Radiation has been recognised to foster aggressive cell lines and in certain cases actually accelerate tumour growth.

Cancer is a chronic, metabolic deficiency disease that is exacerbated by a) poor immunity, b) fungal infestations, and c) general mineral depletion in the food chain, including the missing B17-nitriloside dietary element. Cultures, whose diets are rich in essential nutrients and the nitrilosides, suffer no cancer in their peoples, provided they are living in toxin-free environments.

THE POLITICS OF BIG CANCER AND THE FAILURE OF CONVENTIONAL TREATMENTS
Let's review some startling comments made by insiders to illustrate the point that the shameful corporate story surrounding cancer has long been known and written about by honest physicians who see major mischief afoot. Also included in this section is the compelling truth that conventional cancer treatments are not extending life in the major cancers striking us.

One such leading critic of the cancer industry has been Dr Samuel S Epstein, chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition and a world-renowned toxicologist and Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at the University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago. Epstein's relentless attacks against corporate vested interests in the chemical and medical industries concerning the avoidable causes of cancer have led to the public gaining a far wider knowledge of these issues. Epstein has no hesitation in indicting 'Cancer Inc.', comprising the American Medical Association, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society (ACS), the cancer charities and the pharmaceutical industry, as well as other cancer administrative bodies elsewhere in the world, for losing the winnable war against cancer. Epstein contends:

"We are not winning the war against cancer, we are losing the war. The number of Americans getting cancer each year has escalated over recent decades, while our ability to treat and cure most common cancers has remained virtually unchanged.

The National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society have misled and confused the public and Congress by repeated false claims that we are winning the war against cancer - claims made to create public and Congressional support for massive increases in budgetary allocations."

Quentin D Young, MD, president of the American Public Health Association, agrees with Epstein and highlights the chief environmental causes of cancer, which must be addressed if we are to turn the tide on the disease:

"Billions of public dollars are being misspent in an ill-conceived 'war on cancer' - a war we are losing because we are not addressing the increasingly carcinogenic environment that man has created. We have introduced these creations into our water and air, our food chain, our habitation, our workplace, and into the products produced there. In failing to allocate these resources for prevention, we are fighting the wrong war."

John Cairns, professor of microbiology at Harvard University, recorded in his scathing 1985 critique in Scientific American: "Aside from certain rare cancers, it is not possible to detect any sudden changes in the death rates for any of the major cancers that could be credited to chemotherapy. Whether any of the common cancers can be cured by chemotherapy has yet to be established."

Making the point that chemotherapy is not curative, and actually has very little effect on the major cancers, Dr Martin F Shapiro stated in the Los Angeles Times that "...while some oncologists inform their patients of the lack of evidence that treatments work... others may well be misled by scientific papers that express unwarranted optimism about chemotherapy. Still others respond to an economic incentive. Physicians can earn much more money running active chemotherapy practices than they can providing solace and relief... to dying patients and their families."

Alan C Nixon, PhD, erstwhile president of the American Chemical Society, declares that "...as a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good."

Oncologist Albert Braverman MD told the world in 1991 that "...no disseminated neoplasm (cancer) incurable in 1975 is curable today... Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumor, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failure."

Christian Brothers, a retail organisation forcefully shut down by the American Food & Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000 and its CEO jailed, states: "In 1986, McGill Cancer Center scientists sent a questionnaire to 118 doctors who treated non-small-cell lung cancer. More than 3/4 of them recruited patients and carried out trials of toxic drugs for lung cancer. They were asked to imagine that they themselves had cancer, and were asked which of six current trials they themselves would choose. 64 of the 79 respondents would not consent to be in a trial containing cisplatin, a common chemotherapy drug. Fifty-eight found all the trials unacceptable. Their reason? The ineffectiveness of chemotherapy and its unacceptable degree of toxicity."

Dr Ralph Moss was the Assistant Director of Public Affairs at probably America's most famous cancer research institution, Memorial Sloan Kettering in Manhattan. He states: "In the end, there is no proof that chemotherapy in the vast majority of cases actually extends life, and this is the GREAT LIE about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumor and extending the life of a patient."

Walter Last, writing in The Ecologist, reports: "After analysing cancer survival statistics for several decades, Dr Hardin Jones, Professor at the University of California, concluded in 1975 that "...patients are as well, or better off untreated." Jones' disturbing assessment has never been refuted. What's more, three studies by other researchers have upheld his theory."

Professor Charles Mathe, French cancer specialist, makes this astonishing declaration: "If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre. Cancer victims who live far from such centres have a chance."

From another angle, Dr John Gofman's mammoth research attacks 'preventative' measures, such as routine mammograms, for causing the very illness they are designed to prevent:

"Breast cancer is a largely PREVENTABLE disease, and we reach that good news because of our finding that a large share of recent and current breast cancer in the United States is CERTAINLY due to past medical irradiation of the breasts with x-rays - at all ages, including infancy and childhood. Much of today's radiation dosage is preventable, without any interference with necessary diagnostic radiology, and hence many future breast cancers need not occur."

Epstein concurs with the risks mammograms and x-rays in general pose for the unknowing patient:

"X-rays are carcinogenic. The more X-rays you submit to and the greater the dose, the greater is your risk of cancer. Whatever you may be told, refuse routine mammograms to detect early breast cancer, especially if you are pre-menopausal. The X-rays may actually increase your chances of getting cancer. Very few circumstances, if any, should persuade you to have X-rays taken if you are pregnant. The future risks of leukaemia to your unborn child, not to mention birth defects, are just not worth it."

Breast cancer patients are certainly at risk of developing lung cancer after radiation. In one study of 31 patients who had received radiotherapy for breast cancer, 19 went on to develop a lung cancer, on average, seventeen years later, mostly in the lung located on the same side as the breast that had been irradiated. Some oncologists believe that the lung is especially sensitive to radiation damage, either scar tissue or inflammation - which would tend to argue against high-dose radiotherapy for lung cancer. For Hodgkin's Disease, radiotherapy also poses a risk of breast cancer years later. In rectal cancer, animal studies have demonstrated the descending colon may be especially susceptible to cancer caused by radiation, particularly after surgery, where blood vessels are joined up. The current trend for health departments to promote routine and regular mammograms for early detection of breast cancers is also dangerous nonsense, given the evidence.

The patent failure of modern medicine to halt cancer is now becoming obvious, as the strategies Big Cancer uses to cover up a disaster of its own making are unmasked and exposed for the sham they have become. For instance, in August 1998, the huge MD Anderson Comprehensive Cancer Center in Houston was sued for making the unsubstantiated claim that it cures "well over 50% of people with cancer." Leaflets were deposited in mailboxes throughout the Houston area by MD Anderson in an effort to solicit funds to continue their 'war against cancer.' Misrepresentations and conflicts of interests abound within the cancer industry. For example, the wretched performance of the world's largest 'non-profit' institution, the American Cancer Society (ACS), is examined in the appendix section entitled Conflicts of Interest.

Environmental causations are repeatedly downplayed by Big Cancer, which invariably follows a 'blame the patient' course in explaining the rising causes of cancer. It also partially explains the rise in cancer incidence by alleging that earlier and more accurate detection has inflated the numbers of cancer incidence that were in fact already existing. Another strategy is to state that more people are contracting cancer because they are living longer and therefore stand a statistically higher risk of contracting the disease. Both these allegations are completely false. If age were a factor in cancer, then certainly the Hunzas and other long-lived cultures would be riddled with the disease. Clearly they are not. These strategies serve only to highlight clearly Cancer Inc's extreme reluctance to finger its cousins, Big Industry and Big Food, as the leading cancer felons worldwide today.

Cancer Inc. spares no effort in vilifying and pillorying alternative and non-toxic treatments which have shown a clinical track record of efficacy. Proponents of these treatments have been consistently harassed and defamed, and in certain cases jailed for the stand they have taken on this issue. The unpatentable treatment for cancer we will examine in a moment is not popular with an establishment that has shown itself eminently determined to keep its drug gravy train firmly on the rails.

Dr. Otto Warburg received the Nobel Prize in 1931 for the discovery that unlike all other cells in the human body, cancer cells do not breathe oxygen. Cancer cells are anaerobic, which means that they derive their energy without needing oxygen. It turns out that cancer cells cannot survive in the presence of high levels of oxygen.

At a pH slightly above 7.4 cancer cells become dormant and at pH 8.5 cancer cells will die while healthy cells will live.

Those who eat the most partially hydrogenated trans fats in margarines and bakery products are the ones most likely to suffer diseases such as breast cancer and heart attacks.

"Various highly trained and educated individuals are dismayed and irritated by the fact that serious medical conditions can be cured by cottage cheese and flax seed oil."

Women who eat the most food made from white flour have the highest incidence of breast cancer: white bread, bagels, rolls, spaghetti, macaroni, white rice, biscuits, cookies, pastries, cakes, pies and pretzels.

"The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet and in the cause and prevention of disease."
- Thomas Edison

"The introduction of homeopathy forced the old school doctor to stir around and learn something of a rational nature about his business. You may honestly feel grateful that homeopathy survived the attempts of allopaths (the orthodox physicians to destroy it)."
- Mark Twain (My personal Favorite!)

"Homeopathy .... cures a larger percentage of cases than any other method of treatment and is beyond doubt safer and more economical and most complete medical science."
- Mahatama Gandhi

"Oxygen plays a pivotal role in the proper functioning of the immune system; i.e. resistance to disease, bacteria and viruses.”

“... the development of a shortage of oxygen in the blood could very well be the starting point for the loss of the immune system and the beginning of feared health problems such as cancer, leukemia, AIDS, Candida, seizures, and nerve deterioration."

- B. Goulet, Author of “The Magic of Aerobic Oxygen, Focus on Nutrition”.

"Lack of oxygen clearly plays a major role in causing cells to become cancerous."

"Oxygen gets rid of toxicity. Bacteria, viruses and parasites are destroyed in the presence of oxygen, especially cancer."

"Unlike healthy human cells that love oxygen, the primitive viruses - like HIV - which are found in AIDS and other diseases are lower life form viruses. These viruses and related bacteria are anaerobic. That means these microbes cannot live in oxygen."

Acidity - Alkalinity

How is this condition created?

Alkalizing With Foods

"Heal Thyself: Radical Measures"

How the rare bloodroot plant healed my husband's cancer when nothing else would