Anyone else out there choosing 100% Alternative?
Comments
-
I have been considering doing bioidentical hormones, as well. It was suggested to me by a plastic surgeon who does breast reconstructions. She recommended the books by Dr. John Lee. I read, "What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Breast Cancer," one of his books. I've read a lot of conflicting information about hormones, which is compounded by the use of the word progesterone to describe both progestin and progesterone. From what I've read they have opposite effects on breast cancer, with progestin being negative and progesterone positive. But I am still on the fence and doing research.0 -
Fallleaves - Yes, I also wondered and am confused about the progesterone issue. If, in fact, it is a good thing to have progesterone receptors in your tumor then why is it not a reasonable idea to use bioidentical progesterone? Does that not help make the receptors, hence a better prognosis? I have questioned my onc about this and he only states that just not enough is known about progesterone and the effect it has on the tumor. My breast surgeon told me she has operated on women that had progesterone positive and estrogen negative tumors. Fours years later and all the questions I have asked about progesterone and I am still as confused as day one.0 -
Fallleaves and Gentianviolet:
Your plastic surgeon is not the one to ask about hormones. He or she is a surgeon (somebody who works with scalpels ans implants etc.) Your medical oncologist is the one to talk to about hormones. But here is a brief explanation. Our bodies produce hormones - two of them being estrogen/progesterone.
Your cancer cells have been examined & been found to have receptors for these hormones. What does that mean? Think of a receptor as a keyhole. It has a certain shape & certain 'keys' fit that shape. Estrogen & Progesterone are the right shaped 'keys' to unlock your cancer cells. When estrogen or progesterone 'unlock' the cell, they cause that cell to reproduce itself & grow (making many more cancerous cells). When estrogen or progesterone are not present, these cells become inactive (they don'y reproduce) or die.
In your bodies, however, E & P are present. So in and of itself having these receptors on your cells is NOT a good thing. The reason that it IS a good thing is because very effective treatments exist to either prevent your body from creating these hormones or to gum up the receptors. The ones that gum up the cancer cells receptors are called SERMS - selective est/pro receptor modulators. The other ones are Aromatase Inhibitors, they block an enzyme that is needed in producing estrogen and progesterone. Progestin is bioidentical synthetic progesterone.
In other words, the last thing that you would want to do if you have er+ pr+ receptors is give them something that is bio-identical to estrogen or progesterone. It is possible, that by having these things in your body they might 'fill in the receptor sites', but then the side effects would be the same as meds & if these are truly identical to estrogen or progesterone, then they would just feed your cancer cells - that's a very bad idea.0 -
Not to be contrarian but I've been doing bioidenticals for years with ER+, PR+ breast cancer. I have the same oncologist as Suzanne Somers and we would both be dead if the conventional theory were true. Still, I respect my hormone blocking sisters. But maybe there is something to the body's own estrogen but not supplementary estrogen?0 -
WOW, Lucy88! 19 years and going STRONG! According to most ladies here, you should be long gone by now going alternative with Grade 3 tumor! Good for you!
I think it's unfair to make fun of Ms. Somers as she has done probably more research than anyone here. She's done her homework. Who cares what TV show she was on! For God's sakes! President Reagan was an actor!!!!!!!!! Hellllo?!
Anyhoo....doitgagain... I would recommend joining the Yahoo groups cancercured/iodine group and breastcancerthinktank...You will gain much more support and knowledge there! xo
0 -
ziggypop - If it is not good to have the E and P receptors on the cells then why is it a better prognosis to have progesterone positive rather than a progesterone negative disgnosis?0 -
If Ms. Somers has "done her homework" then she deserves an F-. I am not sure how you can say what she has done is research, never mind "more research than anyone here". She is horribly vague about her own diagnosis and treatment, but uses her celebrity status to encourage woman to take potentially dangerous action (or inaction) and pops an insane amount of hormones daily. She should stick to peddling thighmasters as her "medical advice" is at best outrageous and at worst deadly. At least then those buying her schemes will suffer at most a pulled muscle.
This is a woman who said the Sandy Hook shooter probably committed his shooting spree as a result of toxins in his diet and exposure to the household cleaners. Give me a break.0 -
gentianviolet - because there are drugs that are very effective in treating er/pr+ cancers. The makeup of non er/pr+ cancers is different, they don't need est or pro to divide & grow (so blocking them from getting est or pro doesn't do any good - they grow just as fast).
lucy88 - the study you referenced - the part about estrogen only therapy was done on women who had had hysterectomies. And it had to be cut short because the side effects outweighed the benefits, Also they are talking about using estrogen as a treatment for menopausal symptoms in women who have already been treated for breast cancer - not about using it AS a treatment for breast cancer. Also - the fact that you are 'still' here is meaningless (well obviously not for you & I am certainly glad your still here, but in terms of this discussion it's meaningless) it's like saying that smoking doesn't cause lung cancer because my uncle Bob smoked his whole life & died at 96 from falling off a horse and if smoking caused cancer he should have died a long time ago.0 -
Ziggy.....If Lucy88 had done conventional chemo you can bet your bottom dollar that most ladies here would be claiming success of conventional treatment! HA!
0 -
I don't see why Lucy would have been told she needed chemo given her Stage 1 breast cancer - with no nodes noted as being positive.
My GP's opinion on Bio-identical hormones was it was a big publicity stunt to make money.
0 -
Lol, presented as an example - "President Reagan was an actor" - NUFF SAID!!!
0 -
Yorkie, thing is, Reagan actually knew his limitations. The Somers chick seems not to know the meaning of the word.0 -
LADIES I had been using a bioidentical hormone cream during menopause, being treated by a gynecologist who had, following Dr. Lee's work, set up a practice where he did not use regular HRT. This question of whether or not to use the cream after a diagnosis of ER+PR+ cancer came up in some forum (probably this one) long ago - like in 2009 - and I was in a very heated debate - I even PHONED my gyn - who is a very busy person - and he called me back to say ON NO ACCOUNT TAKE BIOIDENTCAL HORMONES NOW - just like ziggy pop said, it is like candy to er, pr pas receptors. ok - He's not Suzanne Somers. He's a gynecologist who has about 40 years of medical experience, about 12 of those specifically with bioidentical hormone therapy. Whoever I was arguing with on this post dismissed me as being too stupid to follow her argument.I
let her have the last word. yes, I'm stupid! Wonder if she's around and how she is and would like to jump in on this one? It's early morning and I'm crabby............0 -
Momine, I think in terms of delusional incompetence, Somers definitely beats out Raygun, but I would argue, not by a whole lot.0 -
Flannelette, your post cracked me up. I guess if Miss Somers wants to make sumtin' of it, she has found her match
0 -
Ziggypop---I do understand the keyhole concept with ER/PR + BC cells. However, I am one of the people who believe there is a difference in the kinds of estrogen and progesterone, and they have different effects on breast cancer cells. For example the phytoestrogens in flaxseed and soy can fit the keyhole and block the stronger estrogens from fueling cancer (controversial, I know, some women avoid all types of estrogens, but there are studies that show the benefits of both in women with breast cancer.) Also, it is the synthetic form of progesterone, progestin, that has been implicated in the increased cancer rates in women taking HRT.
I recognize that tamoxifen can be very effective for many women, but it doesn't work at ALL in some women and some women develop resistance to it. It has serious side effects, as well. I prefer to do all the other things that have been shown to increase my chances of beating cancer, exercise 6 days a week, no alcohol, 25 g of ground flaxseed a day, supplements (tumeric, baby aspirin, vitamin D, grapeseed extract, DIM, maitake mushrooms, calcium d-glucarate) and a mostly vegan, low glycemic diet to reduce insulin and IGF-1 levels.
As I mentioned, I'm still researching bioidenticals. But I also am not using my MO as my decision maker. He had never heard of DIM (which surprised me, since they are doing research trials with it) and when I asked him some questions about hormones, he said, "I don't know, I'm not an endocrinologist".
Well, gotta go run....
0 -
Fallleaves - as I'm about to go off arimidex, onc's orders as there's no scientific study yet to show that 10 yrs is better than 5, I am looking into things that WILL reduce estrogen and insulin and your list sounds very good - I already had taken I3C - before the arimidex - and will go back to that, and I do have a good supply of flaxseeds to grind as well as the books by David Servan-Schreiber and Drs.Beliveau and Gingras (Foods that Fight Cancer) - recommended by my dr, with a lot of info on research into flax etc. I'm off in January so that gives me time to investigate your list about the other things (I would probably look at Japanese green tea and - broccosprouts?) as it seems too weird to do nothing, and I've done more or less complementary all along - and it's entirely possible that by creating the right environment in the body we can do things to influence whether things like angiogenesis will have more trouble developing etc. I'm also relieved to be far past the age where I would be fighting off hot flashes.
My older sis had them horribly but would not even consider HRT as our mom had br ca at age 40. My sis got Br ca anyway (DCIS) - now uneventfully 10 yrs out. Then me, bingo right on cue same age as my sis, I get br ca, a whopper. I HAD been using bioidentical natural progesterone cream compounded for me by prescrciption, and I swear had not one hot flash and sailed through uneventfully (except for wanting to mow people down) till about age 55. Sometimes, after my dx, I felt guilty, like, had I actually accelerated the bc by so happily smearing that cream into my boobs for 3-4 years? I don't know if anyone has the answer as there is most likely no money to research it. it was the same gyn I called over the heated bioidentical hormone debate I was on on this thread, and he knew all about my cancer, and was the one who said no to any more use of it. But did know about I3Carbinol , which I then began to use.0 -
Props to DiveCat, ziggypop and flannelette.
I've been reading here for a long time. I can't prove it, but lucy88 was identified by some credibly skeptical posters (who ultimately left bco in disgust) as a multi-level marketer who comes on this forum to drum up business. I hope they were mistaken.
Here's a link to a piece about Somers. She's FOS.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/10/22/suzanne-somers-fishy-whole-body-cancer-s/0 -
Falleaves raises a very good point--why is everyone quoting gyns, MO's, BS's and so forth? Hormones are home base for endocrinologists, not these other specialists. If those of you exploring bioidenticals and/or the anti-estrogen scientifically validated drugs would please, please run your programs by an endocrinist and then post here, I think we'd all feel these approaches had validity. My assumption is that if these other compounds are biologically identical to the estrogens our bodies produce, then any little bc cells hanging around will respond to them exactly as they would the natural version. It's my guess that a couple of endo guys would be able to settle this issue pretty definitively.
0 -
Oh yes, I forgot about Somers' "full body cancer" claim. I must have archived that information in a lost corner of my brain as I gave myself a headache from the eyerolls I had when I first heard her talking about that.0 -
Hello you all! Quite some time since I post but I have been following the discussion... interested and controversial discussión. In conclusión: I believe there is no 1 answer. There is still a lot of research to be done for BC... and regarding hormone treatments... definitely a lot more of research is needed.
As I commented a long time ago I try to be as much as open minded regarding conventional and alternative treatment. I do believe in in yoga, homeopathy, excercise, types of food, vitamins, spiritual visits, etc etc but I do also think that there are studies and statistics about surgery/chemo/radio/hormone treatment. Thus, I decided, since I am 36 married and with a 3 yr old son, to follow the conventional treatment but with the continuous and consistent "company" of my "alternative" treatment. As most of you say, you have to follow what you are comfortable with and in particular what you have faith and what you believe in.
However, all this info is sometimes confusing: should I eat or not that stuff? So many opinions, so many good and bad things...overwhelming but definitely it helps.
I appreciate the last explanations about why it is better the PR/ER+, the estrogen/prog and the keyhole. All the info helps a lot! And the decision is ours... some will belive in Somers some not... but I think the purpose of these posts is to exchange info and be tolerant. I am a teacher and I like to hear and give different opinions!
I also use I3Carbinol! My nutrionist/naturopath gave it to me.
I have a question: any suggestion for hot flashes?
gotta run!0 -
BrooksideVT, excellent point. A long-term survivor of Stage I, AlaskaAngel, has written here several times, wisely, about the need for involvement of endocrinologists in breast cancer treatments and aftercare. I wonder if the lack of involvement at this time is historical, residue from the "there, there, honey" days of truly disfiguring radical mastectomies and dismissed lymphedema (because hormonal blowback is all in our fluffy ladybrains, after all). We (the collective "we") need to start speaking up to our providers and push it.
DiveCat, I hear you. And if she's really taking all the stuff she says she is, wouldn't you think she's making a real mess of herself? Women in their 60s are not supposed to have the same hormone levels as those in their 20s and 30s.
And why all the "anti-aging" stuff? Isn't aging natural?0 -
I have a question about bio-identical hormones that i've asked before but have never had an answer to. Menopause is a natural process that all women go through. Got some symptoms are worse than others but most diminish over time. Why would those who prefer natural lifestyles put anything in their bodies to stave off a natural process? I understand taking natural supplements for symptom relief, but hormones, bio-identical or otherwise are just subverting the bodies natural cycle of aging.0 -
exbrnxgrl ... you've touched on an issue that I have been thinking about alot: the use of hormones to alleviate menopause and menopause symptoms. The connection between HRT and increased breast cancer risk was - for me - what got me thinking. Aging is a natural process. At a certain age, a woman's body is going to begin to decrease it's production of estrogen because that is what a woman's body is designed to do. Just like it's been designed to be fertile, it's also designed to stop being fertile. It's a natural part of being female.
By introducing HRT to alleviate menopausal symptoms, we interfered with the natural process of the female body. Just when its internal design is geared toward decreasing estrogen output, we artificially "jump-start" it again, bringing our hormone levels to - for this stage in our lives - unnatural levels. The menopausal body wasn't built to sustain pre-menopausal hormone levels; hence, the link between HRT and breast cancer.
What is even more interesting to me is the potential link between testosterone therapy and prostate cancer. Do men who take testosterone therapy to counter the effects of the natural male aging process courting an increased risk of prostate cancer? I'm still researching this one. But it begs the wider question... should we be fighing the aging process so hard? Aren't we creating more problems than we are solving?
0 -
Yes, exactly Selena! As I said, I understand using natural products for temporary symptom relief, but I am perplexed by the effort to circumvent the aging process, which is completely natural!0 -
Yes but age in our society is not desireable - we do not value the wisdom of elders. We get dumped in a retirement home where we can play Bingo! - people from other societies, like Tibet, are astounded and saddened by how we treat our old people.0 -
I may be vain, yeah I confess to that, but I am doing everything I can to look and feel younger. And so far I am succeeding! Most people think I am 10 to 15 years younger than my chronological age. But, I draw the line at doing anything that could damage my health. Bioidentical markers, NO THANKS.0 -
Flannelette,
I understand what you're saying, in general, about how we treat the aged. But, what I'm asking is about folks who choose a more "natural" path but still do bio-identicals to keep estrogen at levels nature didn't intend as they age.0 -
It doesn't make sense, does it? But, then again, I am one of those people that has a healthy respect for both the benefits- and dangers of natural substances. When misunderstood, misused and unregulated, "naturals" can - in their own way - be just as dangerous, if not more so than conventional medicine.
0 -
I believe HRT caused my breast cancer and as for what to do about hot flushes - I embrace them now because they show the Aromasin is working.
0
