natural girls
Comments
-
Patty, I'm so sorry to hear of all the stress in your life right now. Divorce is a very big change, even when it ultimately is a change toward a better life. I was separated from my ex twice before getting divorced, and I was so forgetful from all the stress. Later when I went through chemo, I wondered if it was the chemicals or the stress that was causing chemobrain.
How is the timing for all this falling into place? I don't recall you mentioning divorce before. Is this a sudden decision? Gosh, let us know what kind of support you need.
As for the milk question, I agree wholeheartedly with crunchy about seeking dairy and beef products that come from grass fed cows. Corn and soy are subsidized. They are produced in abundant excess, which makes them cheap food. Someone decided it was good idea to make the cows eat all this cheap food. These grains are an unnatural food choice for cows and it ultimately ruins the health of the animals. How much health benefit do you think YOU can receive from such conditions?
Goats to my knowledge are not involved in factory farm settings like cows. Even if goat milk is available in a store, however, it would still be subject to the pastuerization process. Much of what is good about milk is destroyed by heat, which is what the pastuerization process is all about.
0 -
Check out your local 4H or grange fair. This is the time of year that many of them run. You may just get to meet and become friendly with local dairy goat farmers. They can't sell the unpasturized milk, but they can share it with friends and family. You may even learn that you want to keep a goat or two.
Dairy goats don't take up much room. Some friends of mine kept goats in not that large a yard in northwestern NJ when they lived there.
0 -
Dear DesignerMom,
Luv your pix and enjoyed your post about singing with your son. So very true! Regarding milk products (i.e. yogurt, ice cream, cheese, etc...etc...) Nope! I haven't consumed any of them in over 9 years. Ditto for any ingredients that includes whey or casein.
After reading Jane Plant's books ("Your lIfe in Your Hands: Understanding, Preventing and Overcoming Breast Cancer and subsequently her book the No Dairy Diet) and since my tumor was hormone receptive and outside of the milk ducts it just felt like a no brainer to no longer consume products derived from another mammals' milk.
The encouraging thing is my oncolgoist is now referring patients (even Stage IV) to a no dairy diet overseen by a nutritionist.
Wish there was a way we could keep track of those of us that are living the no dairy diet! And, yes, I use organic (no GMO) soy milk. My web page www.supermom101.com has a few non dairy recipes posted...hope to post more soon!
Anyway, I try and keep it simple when it comes to food: since when do I need a science degree or a PhD in chemistry to know that an apple is better for me than a pop tart?
I try not to be the food police and preach to others (unless of course they ask). My husband and children still consume cow's milk through cheese, milk and ice cream. When I purchase it for them I always buy the no growth hormone but it's still coming from a cow (as noted in a previous post) that is kept artificially pregnant and has high levels of hormones in the milk.
Another favorite quote: If I can take a pill to change my molecular structure...how about the food?
Best health always,
0 -
Patty - are you on tamoxifen? I know that I was counseled against taking the cimetidine and tam prior to surgery. (It decreases the actions of the tam). It sure shows incredible study results though!! I did the mcp prior to my surgeries..just mixed in a glass of water, no problems. I also read to shower just prior with a wash that kills bacteria to prevent infection - I cant remember the name but have it in my closet and can check if you need. I also found studies that showed that taking an anti-biotic one hour prior to anasthesia prevented infection ---my surgeon and onc were all fine with everything I did. I am sure everything will go very well!!
0 -
Patty, when is your surgery? Do you have a date yet?
0 -
Hi all! I just want to thank all you lovely ladies for your help. My main worry now is if my surgeon is going to insist on lymph node biopsy. I don't want it done. My first surgery with the lumpectomy I had 30 nodes removed. I have to tell you that that arm is very sensitive and feels awfull all the time. I do wear a sleeve most of the time. I just don't want two compromised arms. I see my surgeon Sept 1.
Love to all, Patty
0 -
Oh Meg is it wonderful to see you again. I have thought about you so often. How are you feeling and doing? You look great bald!!!! Thanks so much for your suggestions!
Love, Patty
0 -
Patty,
I just PMed you.
0 -
Ivory, taking the nodes was the best predictor in the old days. Not now. The new research presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium says it's not necessary and potentially disabling. There are much better predictors from the tumor biology and other tests.
Unfortunately that surgeon's medical degree doesn't mean he's practicing up to date, evidence-based medicine.
June 7, 2010 NY Times
Findings May Alter Care for Early Breast Cancer
By ANDREW POLLACK
CHICAGO - For many women with early-stage breast cancer, treatment may become
considerably less arduous, researchers say.
<<<A new study found that certain women getting a lumpectomy may not need an
operation to remove underarm lymph nodes, a procedure that can leave them with
painfully swollen arms. Compared with not removing the nodes, the surgery did not
prolong survival or prevent recurrence of the cancer.>>>>
And a second study found that a single dose of radiation, delivered directly to the site of the
tumor right after a woman has a lumpectomy, was as effective as the six or so weeks of daily
radiation treatments that most women now endure.
"We're now getting really good long-term survival for breast cancer," said Michael Baum of
University College London, the lead investigator of the radiation study, which was presented
here at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. "The theme is now
how can we improve the quality of life for women."
There is some controversy about whether women should be treated at all for certain early
breast abnormalities that some experts say may never hurt them. But if a woman is to be
treated, doctors would agree the treatment should be as painless and convenient as possible
while retaining effectiveness.
Removal of the underarm lymph nodes next to a cancerous breast was long the standard
treatment. In the 1990s doctors began to remove and examine only the sentinel node, the one
to which cancer would be likely to spread first. Usually the other nodes are removed only if
cancer is found in the sentinel node, which happens in about one quarter of cases.
The more extensive removal, called axillary node dissection, can cause restricted mobility of
the arm and painfully swollen arms or fingers.
The study presented here involved 991 women who had had lumpectomies, radiation
therapy and a positive sentinel lymph node. Half had the other lymph nodes removed
and the others did not.
After five years there was no difference in survival or disease recurrence between
the two groups. Some 82.2 percent of the women who had the dissection were alive
and disease free compared with 83.8 percent of those who did not. Cancer recurred
in the breast or nearby in 4.3 percent of those who had the operation and 3.4
percent in those who did not.
"The evidence is overwhelming that the operation might not be necessary," the lead
investigator, Dr. Armando Giuliano of the John Wayne Cancer Institute in Santa
Monica, Calif., said.
About a quarter of women had cancer in the nodes other than the sentinel one, based on the
results from those who had the nodes removed. But somehow, this residual cancer did not hurt
the patient. That is perhaps because of the radiation the women received. For that reason, Dr.
Giuliano said, the results of the study apply only to women who undergo a lumpectomy
followed by radiation, not women who undergo complete breast removal, who do not typically
get radiotherapy.
One shortcoming was that the trial enrolled only about half the number of patients intended,
limiting its ability to draw conclusions. Dr. Giuliano said doctors and patients were reluctant to
participate because they feared forgoing node dissection would endanger lives.
Dr. Jennifer K. Litton, a breast cancer specialist at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in
Houston, said the results could change practice but added, "I don't think this is going to
change overnight."
She said the study involved only women with tumors that had a relatively favorable prognosis
and longer follow-up was needed because cancer can recur after five years.
The radiation study tested a procedure that uses a probe to deliver a high dose of radiation
directly into the breast where the tumor has been removed by lumpectomy and while the
woman is still under anesthesia. Some women undergo a mastectomy instead of more limited
breast-conserving surgery because they do not want the weeks of radiation therapy or live too
far from a radiation center.
Dr. Dennis R. Holmes of the University of Southern California, who was one of the investigators
in the trial, said one of his patients ran a marathon two weeks after getting the one-time shot of
radiation. "That would have been very unlikely in someone receiving standard breast
radiotherapy," he said.
The study involved 2,232 women. After about four years, there were six recurrences within the
affected breast in the women who received the single-dose, or intraoperative, radiation and
five cases among those who received conventional radiotherapy.
Statistically, the experimental procedure was "non-inferior" to the standard practice. The
frequency of major toxicity was similar in the two groups, the authors reported in The Lancet,
which published the study online on Saturday. The trial was designed by academic
investigators and mainly paid for by University College London Hospitals and the British and
German governments. Carl Zeiss, the company that makes the machine used, picked up some
expenses. Dr. Baum, the lead investigator, is a consultant to the company.
Dr. Bruce G. Haffty, chairman of radiation oncology at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical
School in New Jersey, said "the follow-up isn't as long as you'd like it to be." He said cancer
can recur after four years and a large dose of radiation can cause tissue damage that might
not show up for three to 10 years.0 -
Mollyann, isn't that newest research saying exactly what Meg's saying -- sentinel node only, no ALND. I don't think it's saying no nodes at all, is it? It's just saying the sentinel node is sufficient IF you followup with rads. Deanna
PS ~ Here's something about that research in more detail: http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ASCO/20556
0 -
Deanna, the trouble with SNB is that you sign that you're giving them permission to take as many nodes as they want. Unless, as somebody here did, they wrote on the consent form NO MORE THAN THREE NODES.
Hi Ivorymom--good to see you again. We have to demand that our doctors follow evidence-based medicine such as the San Antonio research report-- which was based on very, very old research but in a better designed study. We want the most evidence-based surgeries, not standard-of-care surgeries that have been proved obsolete and may cripple us.
Only the patients can demand the doctors upgrade standard of care procedures to evidence-based procedures. You are the executive of your own information.
0 -
supermom-Thanks for the good feedback. I will check out Jane Plant's book. I don't eat that much dairy, but can't imagine my coffee without cream! Who knows, maybe I can get there someday. I just got "The Cancer Fighting Kichen" cookbook, some fun recipes right up my alley. One of my all time favorite cookbooks is "The Ecological Kitchen" by Lorna Sass. I got it about 10 years ago. I think it is totally Vegan and dairy free (though that wasn't in vogue then!). It is loaded with fabulous bean and legume recipes.Most use either a pressure cooker or stove top. My family's favorite is Nosmo King "No smoking, get it?" lentil stew, full of orange, clove and Eastern spices, magnificent!
I just finished chemo #4 today, only two more to go. I think I need something to eat....but what? Maybe I'll just take a nap.
0 -
My husband and children still consume cow's milk through cheese, milk and ice cream. When I purchase it for them I always buy the no growth hormone but it's still coming from a cow (as noted in a previous post) that is kept artificially pregnant and has high levels of hormones in the milk.
Supermom, did you read my post on the last page? They should be consuming grass-fed dairy... NOT dairy products from a grocery store. The best place to get grass-fed dairy is from a local farm where you interview the farmer, "meet" the cows, make sure they are not made artificially pregnant year-round, eat grass instead of organic corn and soy (which is HORRIBLE for the cows and horrible for the humans who consume their dairy). I haven't read the Jane Plant book, but does she address GRASS-FED dairy at all? There are actually good cancer-fighting nutrients in it. But, I agree that even grass-fed dairy should be consumed in moderation, no more than 5-10% of the total diet. Thankfully, it's so nutrient-dense (if unpasteurized and grass-fed) that a little goes a long way, nutritionally speaking.
You mentioned you consume soy milk... I hope you're not consuming more than 1-2 tablespoons a day (such as in coffee). While small amounts of fermented soy products are good and probably provide some cancer-fighting benefit, non-fermented soy shouldn't be consumed in large quantities. If you're not going to consume real grass-fed dairy, you shouldn't consume fake dairy (soy milk, soy cheese, etc.). I'm convinced that an excess of soy products (even non-GMO/organic) -- i.e. more than a tablespoon or so a day -- contributes to cancer.
0 -
Patty-Sorry to hear about your situation. My advice on either a SNB or ALND, don't do it!!! They are both for diagnostic purposes only, not of any therapeutic benefit. If you have a recurrence, you have a recurrence!! Ask yourself why do the SNB or ALND? There isn't any good reason for this. The only reason it would be justified is if you were unsure about whether or not to do chemotherapy. If your nodes tested positive, then it would be suggested to you. And for what it's worth, the doctors can tell you whatever they want, just make sure that you agree to everything on the consent form. And if you don't DO NOT SIGN it. Make them change it to what you do agree with. Even the 'possible ALND' will become an actuality. It happened to me, after I told my doctor I didn't want it done regardless if she found cancer in the SNB. It ruined my life. Don't let it ruin yours.
0 -
Patty-Sorry to hear about your situation. My advice on either a SNB or ALND, don't do it!!! They are both for diagnostic purposes only, not of any therapeutic benefit. If you have a recurrence, you have a recurrence!! Ask yourself why do the SNB or ALND? There isn't any good reason for this. The only reason it would be justified is if you were unsure about whether or not to do chemotherapy. If your nodes tested positive, then it would be suggested to you. And for what it's worth, the doctors can tell you whatever they want, just make sure that you agree to everything on the consent form. And if you don't DO NOT SIGN it. Make them change it to what you do agree with. Even the 'possible ALND' will become an actuality. It happened to me, after I told my doctor I didn't want it done regardless if she found cancer in the SNB. It ruined my life. Don't let it ruin yours.
0 -
Makingway wrote: The only reason it would be justified is if you were unsure about whether or not to do chemotherapy.
........
Makingway, you are awesome You get right to the point!
0 -
Thanks ladies. I'm not going to let them touch my nodes. I tried chemo the last time and it almost killed me so I won't be going that route again. Please keep suggestions coming! If there were any positive nodes where does that cancer go?
Peace and Blessings to all, Patty
0 -
Yes, for over 9 years now I've been drinking approximately 8 ounces of organic soy milk per day to combat the hot flashes. (Had one ovary twist and die with an 11 centimeter cyst and the other removed as adjunct therapy 'cuz it also had huge cyst. And the ovaries obviously have a hormone connection..) I have substituted soy products for all of my cooking and baking needs.
Anyway, (insert common sense) with all due respect, I just can't see how a plant's "estrogen" would cause cancer and another mammal's milk that "naturally" contains the IGF-1 growth hormone (the same as in humans) and is designed to take a calf to a cow in less than a year is good for me. Whether it's unpasteurized, grass grazing in the green fields of Ireland or from a cow in the U.S., I won't touch it. (I would suggest reading The China Study if you want to understand the naturally occuring growth hormones in cow's milk.) Remember in rural China 1 in 100,000 woman in China will die from breast cancer during her lifetime and in the U.S...1 out of 7 women will have breast cancer during her lifetime.
So, I basically live an almost vegan life style with limited amounts of meat. (No growth hormones, steroids, or antibiotics.) There are so many awesome books out there now about diet and diseases: Skinny Bitch, The Omnivore's Delimina to name a few.
I'm fortunate to have been seen, diagnosed and treated by some of the best of the best breast cancer specialists/oncologists (I live in the Boston area). The first team suggested I get a second if not a third opinion as to my course of treatment because I was young, pre menopausal and the "cells" had infiltrated outside the ducts. Since the lymph nodes were clear I choose not to have chemo and I only took tamoxifien for 3 months. (My mom's breast cancer came back and she took it for the full 5 years. My sister was diagnosed with Stage 0 last year - she doesn't eat red meat but loads of cheese, chicken, etc.- They both tested for the gene and don't have it. They both eat dairy.) I've always weighed around 135 lbs and I'm 5'8". My exercise (at the time) was yoga and chasing around a toddler, walking the older two to school, etc. It has to be something else that was causing my cells to go crazy.
Anyway, I'm very "familiar" with the medical community and pharma industries and I don't know how else to say this...breast cancer is big business! The only person who knows what your body needs and wants or doesn't need or want... is you! Your MD should cite you the statistics as to a particular course of treatment and what the standard of care is but remember "they are practicing medicine" and the decisions always rest with you.
Since we figured the tumor had been growing for over 5 years to reach the size it was (the tip of my pinky finger) I don't like to be exposed to the mammogram every year. It drives my oncologist crazy yet he always tells me to keep on doing what I'm doing (or not doing) because it's working.
There have been thousands upon thousands of studies about dairy and cancer and very rarely you will hear about them. They will be quietly published in a peer reviewed journal and filed away. Most MDs have less than a 2 hour exposure to nutrition during their training.
I can tell you stories first hand of an industry nutritionist that witnessed a Stage IV breast cancer patient (thankfully) referred to a no dairy/no soy diet and after her chemo treatments: "it's gone...it's like she never had it."
What I'd really like to do is find out who else is living the no dairy diet and see what those results say.
As Ben Franklin would say, "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure." And the cure for breast cancer is prevention.
Thanks to those of you who have made it this far in my long winded post.
Best health always,
p.s. I'm heading outside to enjoy the summer sunshine and my family. (And yes, without sun block to get my vitamin D.)
0 -
Sorry...should have added to the post I don't eat soy cheese or any of those types of products. I cook with a non hydrogenated olive oil based margarine. The only "soy" I consume is the milk for hot flashes...
0 -
Supermom-ditto everything you said, times 10. I also am a believer in Jane Plant's theory. Hers was one of the first books I read. I use to love dairy. When I stopped, I lost so much weight, and I balanced my estrogen levels. I do indulge in a little hormone free cheese, but that is it. I however am not on the soy bandwagon. I just do not trust the stuff. Most soy is not organic and it is the most GMO crop. They even treat the seeds with pesticides! So I do not trust the stuff. I use almond, rice and coconut milk.
I also agree with Mollyann and Makingway. There are lots of studies indicating that it is not necessary to take lymph nodes, and in fact, it jeopardizes your future. The lymphatic system is crucial to fighting infections. Taking all those nodes is barbaric. I am still pissed I even let them take two. I had wide margins, so why did they take any? I had a long recovery from those friggin nodes. How I wish I had put my foot down. Not to mention all the radioactive gunk they poured into me to find the SN. I thought my purple breast was bruising, but it was all that crap still in my breast, months later. Oh, how I wish we could make people see they need to do their homework, before making these decisions. It just makes me so mad that they do not tell us we do have options.
Ivory Mom, good to see you again. You are in my thoughts and prayers.
Didn't we have a discussion a while back that surgery should be timed at a certain time of the month, when progesterone is highest as progesterone is protective and fosters a better outcome. Hmm, I wonder if a little BHRT progesterone in the days before surgery for menopausal women would be beneficial?
Patty dear, call me.
0 -
SuperMom, we are on the same page 100% about the power of diet/nutrition and lifestyle choices in the role of health and disease. I've read the same books you have (The China Study is the reason I was a raw vegan for several years -- I now believe the study and the book's conclusions are flawed)... Skinny Bitch was also influential and is a big reason that to this day, I will NEVER, NEVER consume factory-farmed animal products ever again. The Omnivore's Dilemma is another great one, as you said.
But, we will have to agree to disagree about the conclusions drawn. As I mentioned, I was a raw vegan for several years and am now convinced veganism helped wreck my health.
Obviously the abundance of organic vegetables/fruits are fantastic for our health, but after reading outstanding books like The Vegetarian Myth, Nourishing Traditions, Real Food, and Anti-cancer, I firmly believe that it's the non-organic, corn-fed, FACTORY-FARMED animal products that are so deadly.
Like I said earlier, that doesn't mean I guzzle milk by the quart or anything (in fact I don't even drink it at all). My dairy is pretty much limited to the Greek yogurt that I make from grass-fed raw milk... I have a few ounces of it every morning with my organic blueberries and a tablespoon of ground organic flax, and I now cook with grass-fed butter (oh, the liberation, after avoiding it like the plague from the time I was about 13).
BTW, the reason I'm opposed to soy is not because it's a phytoestrogen. It's because of the phytic acid and other harmful anti-nutrients in it. When soy is fermented (such as in miso), the anti-nutrients are neutralized. I love a good steaming cup of organic miso soup... it and other organic, non-GMO fermented soy products are beneficial. I don't consume too many of them because as vivre said, the vast majority of soy is not organic, and I'm not sure that I 100% trust the USDA organic certification to be accurate all the time.
Anyway, I only meant to spark a lively discussion and certainly don't want to attack your choices and would hope you won't attack mine, in spite of my having read the same books as you and come to a different conclusion. If you want an interesting read, I do suggest you pick up a copy of The Vegetarian Myth... really fascinating stuff.
BTW, what part of Boston are you in? I went to college in Cambridge, spent summers in Somerville and Arlington, and lived in Beacon Hill for a couple of years after college. I absolutely ADORE Boston and miss it so much (well, I don't miss it in Februrary and March! heh heh).
Vivre, yes, that's right about surgery being best after ovulation because of the protective levels of progesterone. I wasn't able to time my last surgery correctly so I applied some natural progesterone cream before the surgery and in the days following.
0 -
I was someone who had SNB, which initially was negative, then the intricate staining during Pathology showed a micromet. Of course they scheduled me for the AND to remove 9 more nodes and at the time, I didn't think to question it. Knowing what I do now, I would probably have declined, In my first meeting after the AND with my BS she told me the 9 nodes were negative. Of course I was relieved, but then I asked "did they do the Histo staining to make sure"? She said "no, they only do that test on the Sentinel node, it isn't cost effective to do it on all of them". I of course asked "so how do we know that there weren't micromets in the other nodes". She answered "We don't, they could be positive". I was dumbfounded. I now wonder why I put myself at added risk for lymphedema etc...
About the mammos. I know they have found a lot of BC and probably saved lives from early detection. In my case I got a mammo like clockwork every year. I found the lump while bathing. When I asked how long it might have been growing my BS said it could be 5-10 years! When I asked why the mammo did not detect it, she told me that some cancers are not visualized on mammos! I think she said 30%. JOY!
For all you Boston lovers. Count me in. I graduated from BU. I lived off of Kenmore Square facing the Victory Gardens. I used to go on my rooftop and watch the Redsox games!
0 -
No worries...thanks for your thoughtful response. I absolutely agree with you about the meat. (Jane Plant's book is where I first heard of the growth hormones added to beef, etc.) I bet you've also seen the movie Food Inc? It is nasty what is being done to our food supply and I had no idea. I thought I was eating "healthy" and now realize it was all based on "junk science" and what the food and beverage industries tell us (and our doctors) to eat. Americans have never been fatter or sicker and that goes for our children too.
It can be pretty scary when you start to peel back the layers. But I always try not to be confrontational about it and hope I didn't come across that way in my post.
Maybe I should have added...it would be interesting to see how many of us are choosing a no dairy (or as you said very small amounts of organic cheese) nonGMO, hormone free, organic, free range, mostly planted based lifestyle. As a molecular biologist once said, "you can take a pill to change your molecular structure but not your food?"
The good news is I know of one major hospital in Boston that is offering nutrition counseling (no soy or dairy) as part of their breast cancer treatment...and it's working!
Oops! My previous post was the draft and it should have read "thousands of research studies with dairy and the host of diseases ranging from diabetes, asthma, heart disease and cancer. (Not just cancer.)
Let food be your medicine and medicine be your food. -Hippocrates
Oh yeah...Yep! It's still cold in February which is always a good excuse to spend too much time in a restuarant with a good friend enjoying a great meal.
Best health always,
(p.s.got to get back outside and enjoy the sunshine because February will be here before you know it...)
0 -
Supe, crunch and designer - if you are taking a poll, I do 1 tsp organic 1/2&1/2 daily, no hormone beef/chicken 1/week, fresh local caught fish (sometimes I catch them)1- 2/week, organic fruits and veggies, no wheat or gluten, no corn, very little (if any) soy. I imagine there are LOTS of other women doing this as well.
0 -
As a molecular biologist once said, "you can take a pill to change your molecular structure but not your food?"
Right! LOL -- and it's so ludicrous that some doctors actually believe your diet has NOTHING to do with your health beyond calorie intake determining your weight!!
I overheard my own breast specialist, for whom I have IMMENSE respect (in every other way), when another patient asked him if there was something in particular she should change about her diet now that she knew she had IDC. His reply? "Not really, just make sure you don't eat more than 2,000 calories a day." Argghhhh!!! Now, I realize medical doctors get practically no nutrition training, but couldn't he have at least said, "That's outside my area of expertise, but if you'd like, I can refer you to a nutritionist"? Not that they would have been much better. I asked my friend who was treated for IDC a few years ago what she learned from her oncological nutritionist. I asked, "Did she tell you things like cut out factory-farmed dairy and things like that?" My friend said no, it was more like what to eat to minimize the nausea effects of chemo -- like popsicles. ARRRRGHHH again!!!
BTW - one last thing on the vegetarian vs. non-veg front. During the years that I was a raw vegan, although initially I felt wonderful, exhilharated even, after a while I developed chronic depression and low-level anxiety. I thought it was due to my infertility... my husband and I couldn't conceive ONE time during the years I was a vegan.
After my cancer diagnosis, I started re-evaluating the vegetarian thing and changed my approach based on the books I mentioned above. Within a couple of months of my adding pasture-raised eggs and dairy to my diet, my depression lifted (WEIRD, since you'd think I should be MORE depressed after my diagnosis!!), my skin cleared up, my ADD cleared up, I lost weight, and wonder of wonders, even though we were trying to avoid trying to conceive until after my final surgery, we conceived TWICE in four months (unfortunately they resulted in very early miscarriages).
I suspected all these positive changes were the result of adding non-factory-farm animal products back into my diet, and from the research I've done since then (especially in The Vegetarian Myth and Nourishing Traditions) confirms it. It was a very hard mental switch when for so many years I thought veganism was the holy grail, the most perfect and pure of all possible human diets, but my dramatically improved health now that I'm no longer vegan indicates that just isn't the case. But, again... we can all agree that factory-farm animal products are evil... horrible for the poor animals, horrible for the environment, and horrible for us, too!
0 -
Recently found out that my blood work showed thyroid level as normal and am not!!! All of my insomnia issues, off balanced hormones, anixety galore and fatigiue is from underactive thyroid. My DR has put me on Armour Thyroid and of course my Iodine (from Brownsteim's book) and WOW. i am feeling incredible in just a few days. Taking my temp under arm is what determined by under acheiving thyroid.Temp goin up now.
0 -
There's an interesting new thread this morning I thought I'd cross reference here, in case you haven't seen it:
http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/67/topic/756757
If that link doesn't work, it's in the Stage III forum and entitled, Something I Thought I Should Share. Very interesting.....
0 -
Hi dlb823-I drink akaline water as well. Lucky for me I have the Water Brewery 2 blocks from my house. I have to tell you it feels like 'magic' water when I drink it
0 -
Here's an easy explanation of absolute vs. realtive risk:An example when talking about risks of disease
Say the absolute risk of developing a disease is 4 in 100 in non-smokers. Say the relative risk of the disease is increased by 50% in smokers. The 50% relates to the '4' - so the absolute increase in the risk is 50% of 4, which is 2. So, the absolute risk of smokers developing this disease is 6 in 100.
An example when talking about treatmentsSay men have a 2 in 20 risk of developing a certain disease by the time they reach the age of 60. Then, say research shows that a new treatment reduces the relative risk of getting this disease by 50%. The 50% is the relative risk reduction, and is referring to the effect on the '2'. 50% of 2 is 1. So this means that the absolute risk is reduced from from 2 in 20, to 1 in 20.
0 -
makingway - That was an easy explanation? lol I guess ones needs to be a math whiz!!!!! No, really that was helpful after I studied it awhile! Thank-you
Peace and Blessings to all, Patty
0
