natural girls
Comments
-
Oh, and happy birthday patty. Meant to say that last time I posted.
0 -
Designer Mom...My docs say "the body loves titanium" which is why it is used. As metals go, my research says it is the best...but some caution that it is "still a metal" so I don't know if I should want an implant or not. If I leave the space from these two side by side extractions...do I risk the teeth above the space dropping down since there are no teeth there for support????? As for porcelain....I had insisted on that for the crown which I now do not need since the tooth has been extracted...and if I get an implant I will definitely get porcelain...actually I think it might technically be ceramic.
0 -
Thank you ladies for the birthday wishes!!!
I'm off tomorrow to Ohio State for my second opinion about my microcalcifications.
Love to all, Patty
0 -
Here's my blog post on oil-pulling, which I wrote some time ago. Apparently, it's helpful for gum and teeth problems, insomnia, headaches and other ailments: http://healingpastures.com/2009/11/18/oil-pulling-for-insomnia/
0 -
Someone posted this link elsewhere on BCO today, and I thought I would re-post it here:
http://www.torontosun.com/life/healthandfitness/2010/08/19/15078251.html
Hope you had encouraging news at your second opinion app't. today, Patty. Deanna
0 -
Did anyone watch the stand up to cancer fundraiser last Friday? I'm hopeful that researchers who think outside the box have opportunities to win some these dollars for research. Was there any meaningful talk about prevention? Any reports of progress from the previous fundraiser?
I watched most of the previous su2c and felt my jaw drop when they recommended no red meat as part of a healthy diet. McGovern tried that back in the 70s and pressure from the industries forced his committee to back pedal. Then of course, there's the infamous lawsuit against Oprah when the Texas cattlemen sued her for saying on the air that she'd never eat another hamburger again. I never heard of any fallout over it, so I reckon that's a big piece of progress right there. ...a message that food choices DO matter.
I'm hopeful that the su2c decisions are being made by people who have a clue. It would be a shame if the su2c is just another pink october reincarnated.
0 -
dlb823,
Here is the abstract from PubMed on blueberries and triple negative breast cancer.
Cancer Res. 2010 May 1;70(9):3594-605. Epub 2010 Apr 13.
Blueberry phytochemicals inhibit growth and metastatic potential of MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells through modulation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathway.
Adams LS, Phung S, Yee N, Seeram NP, Li L, Chen S.
Division of Tumor Cell Biology, Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope, Duarte, California 91010, USA.
Abstract
Dietary phytochemicals are known to exhibit a variety of anticarcinogenic properties. This study investigated the chemopreventive activity of blueberry extract in triple-negative breast cancer cell lines in vitro and in vivo. Blueberry decreased cell proliferation in HCC38, HCC1937, and MDA-MB-231 cells with no effect on the nontumorigenic MCF-10A cell line. Decreased metastatic potential of MDA-MB-231 cells by blueberry was shown through inhibition of cell motility using wound-healing assays and migration through a polyethylene terephthalate membrane. Blueberry treatment decreased the activity of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and the secretion of urokinase-type plasminogen activator while increasing tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 secretion in MDA-MB-231 conditioned medium as shown by Western blotting. Cell signaling pathways that control the expression/activation of these processes were investigated via Western blotting and reporter gene assay. Treatment with blueberry decreased phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT and NFkappaB activation in MDA-MB-231 cells, where protein kinase C and extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) were not affected. In vivo, the efficacy of blueberry to inhibit triple-negative breast tumor growth was evaluated using the MDA-MB-231 xenograft model. Tumor weight and proliferation (Ki-67 expression) were decreased in blueberry-treated mice, where apoptosis (caspase-3 expression) was increased compared with controls. Immunohistochemical analysis of tumors from blueberry-fed mice showed decreased activation of AKT and p65 NFkappaB signaling proteins with no effect on the phosphorylation of ERK. These data illustrate the inhibitory effect of blueberry phytochemicals on the growth and metastatic potential of MDA-MB-231 cells through modulation of the PI3K/AKT/NFkappaB pathway.
PMID: 20388778 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]PMCID: PMC2862148 [Available on 2011/5/1]
0 -
Deanna..thanks for the info on blueberries. Is it too early for me or is this too wordy.. I think this reading states that blueberries are an important addition for a triple negative patient?!!!
Ever since chemo, my absorbtion in reads are is so different and wonder if this could just be adult ADD??? Anyway, I do have blueberries in my smoothies with rice milk!THANK YOU!The info on thread is awesome and you ladies are so on top of it all!!!I Leaves me speechless!!!
0 -
Deanna..thanks for the info on blueberries. Is it too early for me or is this too wordy.. I think this reading states that blueberries are an important addition for a triple negative patient?!!!
Ever since chemo, my absorbtion in reads are is so different and wonder if this could just be adult ADD??? Anyway, I do have blueberries in my smoothies with rice milk!THANK YOU!The info on thread is awesome and you ladies are so on top of it all!!!I Leaves me speechless!!!
0 -
Deanna..thanks for the info on blueberries. Is it too early for me or is this too wordy.. I think this reading states that blueberries are an important addition for a triple negative patient?!!!
Ever since chemo, my absorbtion in reads are is so different and wonder if this could just be adult ADD??? Anyway, I do have blueberries in my smoothies with rice milk!THANK YOU!The info on thread is awesome and you ladies are so on top of it all!!!I Leaves me speechless!!!
0 -
Blueberries are truly a miracle food. A couple of years ago there was a psychological study that showed them to help correct Alzheimers. Other berries worked too, but blueberries had the best results. For that study, you needed to eat about a cup a day (not hard to do if you make a smoothy). But I wonder how much is needed for the cancer help to kick in.
Have a wonderful day!
Mandy
0 -
The studies on cancer and blueberries are very preliminary based on studies of cancer cells in the culture and in mice. There has been no studies on the long term effects on lab animals and no studies on humans.
0 -
Thanks for sharing this.
0 -
Maybe I'm just overly sensitive about promotions that have a mixed message, but here's the most recent one that just seems off-base to me...
http://www.cupcakesforacause.org/
I know it's a cute idea, and I guess an occasional cupcake isn't that horrible. But it still doesn't feel right to me. Deanna
0 -
Oh boy, Deanna... that's kinda like KFC's "Buckets for the Cure." TOTALLY off-base IMO.
0 -
Somehow I don't think they'd get the same response with Carrots for a Cause that they'll get with the cupcakes. It is a campaign about children's cancer, and at least the cupcakes are naturally portion controlled. A cupcake sale lets kids get in on "helping" other kids because they may be able to buy a cupcake at a bakesale out of their allowance or money they've saved.
It also looks like they have an option for designing and sending virtual cupcakes which would fit into any diet.
0 -
PatMom, I agree that Carrots for a Cause would bomb, and cupcakes are a cute fit to a promotion geared to helping kids. But if sugar feeds cancer, which I've read from several PhD sources, then the promotion is still bothersome and not well thought out, at least to me. Deanna
0 -
The saving grace is that the virtual cupcakes contain absolutely no sugar.
0 -
I agree Deanna, it's an oxymoron...
0 -
http://www.naturalnews.com/029749_nuclear_imaging_breast_cancer.html
We continue to be victims of the same industry that professes to care. Why do they continue to push dangerous diagnostics, when thermography is safer, painless, and highly reliable?!$$$
I tried the oil pulling. It did nothing for me, but I have so much metal in my mouth, I need bigger guns. Now that I had the root canal out, I am saving for amalgams. I found a reasonably priced dentist who will do it in phases. Then I will continue with an NAC detox. I tried this before, but I was detoxing so much I quit. So I decided to wait until I get the metal out. I also tried tooth soap and an herbal tooth polish. Both were just too yucky for my taste. Luckily Usana has one that is flouride free and has xylitol in it, which is supposed to be a great preventative.
0 -
I am happy to be through chemo, and watching this board! I have a wonderful naturopath, and will share what I learn from her. She is with Raby Institute.
I had a long talk with her about thermography. Thermograpy is a mixed bag, just like the rest of the diagnostics. It requires cancer of a certain type and girth to register. What I'd love is to see mammography go the way of the wind in women my age (well, now 40, but was under 40 when diagnosed!) It is useless, and dangerous--I got the all clear for three years, only to find my own lump which totally didn't show up on the mammo.
The MRI is toxic, but far more precise in dense-breasted women.
0 -
Vivre..when you started the iodine, how much Vit C did you take with it? My iodine book is with my DR and need it back as i feel achy in legs and body overal and feel in the dark with out it! I see the DR on the 22nd.. I am taking two a day now. Obviously I am detoxing? I am also on Armour Thryroid as my thyroid is under active and determined this with a thermometer under arm first thing in AM. blood work of course never showed that thyroid was not effectively working.
0 -
Okay, here is a question. Like MHP70, I had regular yearly mammograms and nothing showed. I found the lump myself. MY BS said that many BC are not visualized on mammograms (I think she said 30%). She also said my cancer could have been growing for 5-10 years. I had thought maybe thermography was more accurate, but now I guess it is not. As the ultrasound DID show the tumor, and US are not so toxic (I think sound waves?) why don't they use US for yearly screening with breast dense women?
0 -
Designer Mom, I wish that something as non invasive as an ultra sound would solve the screeing process. It would be so wonderful. If I am typical, it would seem that there is no one technology to solve the screening problem. I had a mammo that showed one out of 4 possible sites. I then had an MRI that found another 3 to look at. The Ultrasound only found 2 of the 3 and they appeared to be so positive that the radiologist was going to to a biopsy on the spot. Well, the two found by the ultra sound were benign. The one found by the mammo and the micro spot found only by the MRI were not benign.
That's why I wish they'd stop concentrating on screeing and new chemos and start to work on prevention. Anyone who has had a heart attack will be given a diet and exercise plan that will greatly reduce the chances for a second heart attack. But not so for bc people. And if we even mention that we are interested in what lifestyle changes might help, the docs label us as "nuts." (or at least my onc has; my rads onc has not).
Have a nice day everyone.
Mandy
0 -
Designer Mom, I wish that something as non invasive as an ultra sound would solve the screening process. It would be so wonderful. If I am typical, it would seem that there is no one technology to solve the screening problem. I had a mammo that showed one out of 4 possible sites. I then had an MRI that found another 3 to look at. The Ultrasound only found 2 of the 3 and they appeared to be so positive that the radiologist was going to to a biopsy on the spot. Well, the two found by the ultra sound were benign. The one found by the mammo and the micro spot found only by the MRI were not benign.
That's why I wish they'd stop concentrating on screeing and new chemos and start to work on prevention. Anyone who has had a heart attack will be given a diet and exercise plan that will greatly reduce the chances for a second heart attack. But not so for bc people. And if we even mention that we are interested in what lifestyle changes might help, the docs label us as "nuts." (or at least my onc has; my rads onc has not).
Have a nice day everyone.
Mandy
0 -
DesignerMom, I think one answer might be that finding something with an u/s is like looking for a needle in a haystack -- at least that's been my observation whenever I've had an u/s to followup on something imaged on a mammo. Often it takes quite a bit of back & forth scanning to locate something they already know is there. I'm guessing u/s just isn't a very accurate modality to thoroughly screen an entire breast. Deanna
0 -
So true about the ultrasound...When the tech couldn't find it I sat up and showed it to her. The bumps were easy to see with ones own eyes.
vivre-I sent you a PM. Did you get it?
0 -
An FYI, there are a few charities listed at the end of the article which don't use animal testing.Cancer: Why We're Losing the 'War'
Since President Richard Nixon signed the Conquest of Cancer Act in 1971, the "war on cancer" in the U.S. has become a series of losing battles. Through taxes, donations, and private funding, Americans have spent almost $200 billion on cancer research since 1971. However, more than 500,000 Americans die of cancer every year, a 73 percent increase in the death rate since the "war" began.
Prevention Is Possible
Dr. John R. Seffrin, president of the International Union Against Cancer, said, "Cancer is potentially the most preventable and most curable of the major life-threatening diseases facing humankind." Both the International Union Against Cancer and the World Health Organization estimate that at least 2 million lives could be saved by 2020-and 6.5 million lives by 2040-if "immediate action" were taken to prevent and treat cancer.Clinical studies have proved that smoking and consuming food that's high in fat or animal protein are leading causes of cancer. The number one recommendation in the American Cancer Society's "Guidelines on Nutrition and Physical Activity for Cancer Prevention" is to eat a diet "with an emphasis on plant sources." Researchers have found that vegetarians are between 25 and 50 percent less likely to suffer from cancer, even after taking smoking and other factors into account.
Of Mice and Men
Millions of mice (referred to as "preclinical models") have suffered and lost their lives to futile cancer research. According to Massachusetts Institute of Technology biology professor Robert Weinberg, "[I]t's been well known for more than a decade, maybe two decades, that many of these preclinical human cancer models have very little predictive power in terms of how actual human beings-actual human tumors inside patients-will respond. . . . [H]undreds of millions of dollars are being wasted every year by drug companies using these models." The New York Times reported that following preclinical tests on animals, only "one in 20 prospective cancer cures used in human tests reaches the market, the worst record of any medical category." Dr. Richard Klausner, former director of the National Cancer Institute (which has an annual budget of more than $6 billion for cancer research), was quoted as saying, "The history of cancer research has been the history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades and it simply didn't work in human beings." ,Ninety-four percent of cancer drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests fail in human clinical trials because they prove to be toxic or ineffective.
Critical Differences
Those who profit from animal experimentation claim that animals are physiologically similar to humans-similar enough to persuade us to believe that what happens in a rat, mouse, dog, cat, or nonhuman primate will occur in humans.Although most animal cancers arise in the bone, connective tissue, or muscle (sarcomas), most human cancers arise in living membranes (carcinomas). Furthermore, animals who are confined to small laboratory cages, repeatedly manipulated, and otherwise subjected to pain and stress make very poor "models" of human cancer patients. These animals may be given highly concentrated doses of substances that a human being would never be exposed to or heavily irradiated to form cancerous tumors, or they may have human tumors grafted to their bodies (see our factsheet on Xenografts for more information).
Animal experimenters want a disposable "research subject" who can be manipulated as desired and killed when convenient, but their artificially created "animal models" can never really reflect the human condition.
Technologies and Treatments
Much of the research conducted in the name of curing cancer misses the mark: What kills human cancer victims 90 percent of the time is metastasis-when aggressive cells spread to other areas of the body. According to Fortune magazine's investigation of the National Cancer Institute's grants since 1972, only an alarming 0.5 percent of study proposals were dedicated to research on metastasis.Alternatives to animal testing include replacing animal tests with non-animal methods, such as 3-dimensional in vitro models in which scientists grow actual human tumors surrounded by actual human tissue, allowing for controlled laboratory testing in an exact replica of in vivo human cancer. Comparative studies of human populations allow doctors and scientists to discover the root causes of human diseases and disorders so that preventive action can be taken. Epidemiological studies led to the discoveries of the relationship between smoking and cancer and to the identification of heart disease risk factors. Microdosing is another promising alternative: Human subjects are given a drug dose that is one-hundredth of what would be expected to have an actual effect on the body, but sensitive measuring equipment is able to monitor the metabolism of the drug and allow scientists to predict the dangers or benefits of a full dose.
Of the three basic treatment methods available to people who are diagnosed with cancer today-surgical removal, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy-not one is guaranteed to be effective. If a cancer does go into remission following one of these treatments, there is no assurance that it will not reappear. Because radiation and chemotherapy treatments irradiate or poison normal tissues as well as cancerous ones, both can cause additional cancers and unbearable side effects. Animal testing has not helped these patients; if anything, it has held back progress in treatments.
What You Can Do
Take responsibility for your health by avoiding carcinogens. Stay away from animal-based foods (meat, eggs, and dairy products), tobacco, excessive radiation, artificial food additives and colorings, and pesticides in order to lower your risk of getting cancer.Encourage medical charities and research agencies to develop and use clinical, epidemiological, and other non-animal research methods. If you donate to medical charities, write, "Not to be used for animal studies," on your check because some organizations--including the March of Dimes, the American Cancer Society, the Canadian Cancer Society, and countless others-use donations to fund experiments on animals. Compassionate, modern charities, such as the National Children's Cancer Society, Cancer Care, and the Avon Breast Cancer Crusade, know that non-animal methods are the best way to fight cancer. Visit HumaneSeal.org to find out which charities do and which do not fund research on animals.
References
1) Clifton Leaf, "The War on Cancer: Why We're Losing the War on Cancer-and How to Win It," Fortune 9 Mar. 2004.
2) International Union Against Cancer, "Concerted Global Action Is the Only Answer to Rising Cancer Deaths," 3 Jun. 2003.
3) World Health Organization and International Union Against Cancer, Global Action Against Cancer 2005.
4) American Cancer Society, "Cancer Prevention and Early Detection: Facts and Figures, 2004," 2004.
5) J. Chang-Claude et al., "Mortality Pattern of German Vegetarians After 11 Years of Follow-Up," Epidemiology 3 (1992): 389-91.
6) Leaf.
7) Gardiner Harris, "New Drug Points Up Problems in Developing Cancer Cures," The New York Times 21 Dec. 2005.
8) Andrew C. von Eschenbach, "The Nation's Investment in Cancer Research: A Plan and Budget Proposal for FY 2006," National Cancer Institute, Oct. 2004: 54.
9) Jerome Burne, "Danger Mouse," The Times [U.K.] 30 Jul. 2002.
10) Susan Okie, "Access Before Approval-A Right to Take Experimental Drugs?" The New England Journal of Medicine 355 (2006): 437-40.
11) Leaf.
12) Christopher Anderegg et al., "A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation," Medical Research Modernization Committee, 2002.
13) Kerri Smith, "The Human Guinea Pigs," The Times [U.K.] 17 Dec. 2005.0 -
DesignerMom, I've done a lot of research on the diagnostics. The ultra sound is great for sussing out what they see on a "big picture", whether MRI or mammogram. It's not a good hunting and pecking method, the boob is just too jumbled. In my case, they overlooked this tumor EVERY time, as it didn't show on the mammo. But, as soon as I pointed it out, whammo. The ultrasound tech knew exactly what she was looking at. In fact, I knew I had cancer from the look on her face. I started crying then and there.
They just haven't perfected the diagnostics, not by a long shot.
0 -
Prevention is certainly a most sensible thing to emphasize. Sadly, the medical experts pay little attention to it. It is up to US to do the smart things to help us stay healthy. About 5 years ago, DH went for a physical and the doctor gave him prescriptions for high BP and high Cholesterol. He was only 58 at the time and I think it was a real wake up call. FINALLY he was ready to think about my "hooga booga" way of eating. He lost 40 pounds eating fabulous, mediterranean style, meals and has kept it off. AND! No prescriptions needed, everything is normal. I think we are all pioneers in this new preventive/nutrition/supplement aproach to getting and staying healthy not only from BC, but other disease. I don't have time for the insurance, government or other agencies to lead the way. Not to mention, I think they would screw it up. I know I am trying to educate my friends and nieces that food can harm or heal. I am SO grateful for this forum as I am learning so much. I am encouraged that there is a lot of good info out there. Just yesterday I picked up a flyer at my RO on a lecture at Gilda's Club NYC. The topic is "Breast Cancer & The Environment: What is the Link?" They are talking about ways to reduce exposure to toxins in the home, school, workplace: cosmetics, cleaning products, pest control etc... Maybe someday we will not be thought of as wackos, but pioneers.
0
