Cancer - Advances...
Follow
Find
17.8K views | +0 today
 
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
onto Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments
Scoop.it!

High Vitamin D Level Found to Double Chance of Breast Cancer Survival

High Vitamin D Level Found to Double Chance of Breast Cancer Survival | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it

Research published in The International Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment concludes that high serum 25(OH)D was associated with lower mortality from breast cancer.

 

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

A study of women with breast cancer reveals that breast cancer patients who had high levels of vitamin D were twice as likely to survive as women with low levels.

Laboratory studies have demonstrated anticancer effects of vitamin D metabolites on three critical phases in the development of breast tumors: differentiation, apoptosis, and angiogenesis. It is possible that the association of serum 25(OH)D with survival depends on maintaining differentiation, promoting apoptosis, and inhibiting angiogenesis.


While most studies have focused on the relationship between vitamin D and incidence of breast cancer, only a few studies have investigated the possible relationship between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D 25(OH)D status and cancer survival rates.

more...
No comment yet.

From around the web

Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

What Do We Do When Antibiotics Don’t Work Any More? Many Cancer Patients Would Likely Suffer the Consequences of Untreatable Infections!

What Do We Do When Antibiotics Don’t Work Any More?  Many Cancer Patients Would Likely Suffer the Consequences of Untreatable Infections! | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
What do we do when antibiotics don’t work any more
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Today we stand on the threshold of the post-antibiotic era. Our antibiotics have provided benefit to many in combatting bacterial infection, and provide critical support to contemporary life. But each time we develop an antibiotic, the bacteria simply develop resistance and we need another more powerful antibiotic to combat that resistance. The cycle has continued like this for the past 70 years.
- Penicillin arrived in 1945. Widespread resistance to penicillin was present by 1945.
- Vancomycin arrived in 1972. Widespread resistance to vancomycin arrived in 1988.
- Imepenim arrived in 1985. Widespread resistance to imepenin arrived in 1998.
- Daptomycin arrived in 2003. Widespread resistance to daptomycin arrived in 2004.

Today bacteria are able develop resistance to antibiotics so fast that pharmaceutical companies have concluded that development of antibiotics is not in their best interests. In the year 2000 an infection was found (KPC) in a single case in a North Carolina hospital that was resistant to all but two drugs. Today that same infection has been spread across the USA and is now in present all states except for only three.

In 2008 Swedish doctors diagnosed an Indian man with an infection that was resistant to all but one drug. The gene (known as NDM) that creates that resistance has now spread amongst the population to China, Africa, Asia, Europe, Canada and the US.

Such resistance is an inevitable biological process. Particularly when you consider that bacteria produce a new generation every 20 minutes, compared to 10 years for a pharmaceutical company to derive a new drug. Evolution always wins.

In the USA and Europe 50,000 people die each year of infections that no drugs can help. Worldwide that figure is 700,000, according to the conclusion of an investigative project organized by the British government (The Review of Antimicrobial Resistance). The review predicts that if we cannot bring this under control, then by 2050 the worldwide toll will be 10 million deaths per year.

If antibiotics are no longer available or effective there would likely be immediate catastrophic results at least for the following people:
- Those with weakened immune system function
- Cancer Patients
- AIDS patients
- Transplant recipients
- Pre-mature babies
- Those receiving surgical implants or replacement joints etc

A recent estimate concluded that without antibiotics, perhaps one out of every six patients with bacterial infections may die. Today many surgical operations are preceded by prophylactic doses of antibiotics. Without that protection, the risk of surgery would increase considerably, and surgery may no longer be an option in many situations.

We arrived at this point by our abuse and overuse of antibiotics. Penicillin was at first sold over the counter until the 1950s, and many antibiotics throughout the developing world are today available this way. In the USA it has been estimated that 50% of antibiotics given in hospitals are unnecessary, and that 45% of antibiotic prescriptions written in doctors’ clinics are for conditions that antibiotics cannot help.

Across the world most animals bred for their meat receive antibiotics every day of their lives. In the USA 80% of antibiotics sold every year are for farm animals, not humans. This contributes to the creation of resistant bacteria that move off the farm and into our society. Aquaculture and fruit growing relies on antibiotics against disease too.

This dire situation was predicted by Sir Alexander Fleming, the man who invented penicillin. Yet his prediction was ignored in the interests of ‘progress’. Every time we use an antibiotic we give the bacteria billions of chances to crack the code against the defenses we have constructed.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Doctors Fail to Listen to Pleas of Teenage Girl Convinced She Had Cancer. She Subsequently Dies of Cancer.

Doctors Fail to Listen to Pleas of Teenage Girl Convinced She Had Cancer. She Subsequently Dies of Cancer. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Bronte Doyne’s death from cancer after she was told to stop googling her symptoms raises questions about the doctor-patient relationship
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

It is disheartening to learn that there are doctors who do not listen to their patients. Many doctors cling to the doctor-patient power relationship and choose to be aloof and evasive in communications with their patients.

Here is an example of such a relationship that turned out to be a contributing factor to the death of a young teenage girl, Bronte Doyne. Bronte begged doctors to listen to her as she was convinced she had liver cancer, based on her own online research. In her case she died 16 months after being told she would survive.

Another worrying aspect of the medical system is that there is very little accountability on the part of the doctors. In contrast if a garage mechanic did not fix a customer’s car there is indeed obvious accountability. However sometimes patients may even lose their life as a result of lack of care and attention from a doctor and there is no accountability. Doctors are well protected by the system that they are part of.

Medical information today is freely and quickly available online to anybody who wishes to look for it. Yes there are always questionable sources and incomplete details, but there are also very highly regarded organizations with well researched a complete information available online. So the knowledge is there for anybody. While doctors may not like their patients to have access to information and knowledge, it is a fact of contemporary society. Therefore doctors must learn how to work with informed patients in today’s society.

One obvious conclusion is that we can all now possess the information and knowledge. But perhaps the doctor’s real differentiator is the interpretation of that knowledge in the context of the patient and their symptoms. Health services typically support greater patient involvement as critical to making healthcare sustainable, with greater self-management of long-term conditions and improved understanding of prevention and risk.

However it would seem that some doctors may not have thought through the most effective way for them to deal with informed patients.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Chemicals Linked to Causing Cancer.

Chemicals Linked to Causing Cancer. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
The insecticide lindane, once widely used in agriculture and to treat human lice and scabies, causes cancer and has been specifically linked to non-Hodgkin lymphoma, the World Health Organization said
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

The WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reports that "Large epidemiological studies of agricultural exposures in the United States and Canada showed a 60% increased risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in those exposed to lindane."

(IARC) also said that DDT, or dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, probably causes cancer, with scientific evidence linking it to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), testicular cancer and liver cancer. DDT was introduced for the control of insect-borne diseases during World War Two and was later applied widely to eradicate malaria and in agriculture.

Although most uses of it were banned from the 1970s, IARC cautioned that DDT and its breakdown products are "highly persistent and can be found in the environment and in animal and human tissues throughout the world".

On the subject of chemicals, there are approximately 85,000 in current use and listed with the Environmental Protection Agency. A logical conclusion of most people is that they have of course been thoroughly tested and confirmed to be safe. That is definitely not the case, however surprising that may be to people. There is no law requiring industrial chemicals be tested for safety before being put on the market.

To make matters worse if you consult the National Toxicity Program (an agency whose mission is to evaluate agents of public health concern), which is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services they quite openly state “More than 80,000 chemicals are registered for use in the United States. Each year, an estimated 2,000 new ones are introduced for use in such everyday items as foods, personal care products, prescription drugs, household cleaners, and lawn care products. We do not know the effects of many of these chemicals on our health, yet we may be exposed to them while manufacturing, distributing, using, and disposing of them or when they become pollutants in our air, water, or soil.” See for yourself here - http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/about/index.html

So it certainly seems that nobody has any responsibility to focus on the introduction of chemicals, and whether they present any health problems to the community. If you consider the fact that chemicals in combination is a completely different concern, it is virtually impossible to determine safety levels to any satisfactory degree.

By the way in another report just this week it has been found that some chemicals when combined in the body may trigger cancer. I will also post that report.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Take Care if Donating Your Money for Cancer – Four Cancer Charities Deceived Donors.

Take Care if Donating Your Money for Cancer – Four Cancer Charities Deceived Donors. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Four “sham charities” and their top executives siphoned $187 million from unsuspecting Americans who thought they were donating money to help fund cancer research, federal regulators said Tuesday. ...
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

It has been found that four cancer charities in the US have defrauded US$187 million from donations. The charities are Cancer Fund of America, Cancer Support Services, Children’s Cancer Fund of America, and Breast Cancer Society.

According to the Federal Trade Commission, which sued the four charities, perhaps only 3% of the money raised, actually went to cancer patients.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Diet Contributes to 20% to 42% of All Human Cancers and 50% to 90% of Colon Cancer

Diet Contributes to 20% to 42% of All Human Cancers and 50% to 90% of Colon Cancer | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
A hidden lesson here may be that instead of waiting until after one is diagnosed with a serious health condition such as colon cancer it would make sense to incorporate smaller, culinary doses of these beneficial compounds on a daily basis as a food-as-preventive-medicine approach
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

It would behoove medical professionals and their patients to take seriously this preliminary research by using non-toxic dietary modifications and/or therapeutic concentrations of these bio-active food ingredients early on as a preventive medicine strategy.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Is Medical Cannabis The Future of Breast Cancer Therapy?

Is Medical Cannabis The Future of Breast Cancer Therapy? | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Is Medical Marijuana The Future of Breast Cancer Therapy?
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Studies show that cannabinoid receptors are over-expressed in the tumor cells of certain cancers, such as cancers of the liver, lung, prostate and breast. Researchers have been led to believe that the endocannabinoid system may be up-regulated in cancer in an innate biological effort to fight off this disease.

Studies also show that when cannabinoids are administered and bind to these receptors, they are able to inhibit cancer cell growth by preventing the proliferation of cancer cells and by inducing cancer cell death (apoptosis). Furthermore, cannabinoids have been found to impair both tumor angiogenesis – the increase in localized blood flow induced by tumor cells – and metastasis – the spreading of cancer to other organs.

Research suggests that synthetic cannabinoids and phyto-cannabinoids (mainly THC and CBD) may be useful in treating all 3 subtypes of breast cancer, with the strongest evidence of therapeutic potential pointing to treatment of HER2-positive and triple-negative breast tumors.

Cannabinoids are considerably safer and less toxic than conventional treatments. Cannabinoids are non-toxic to non-tumor cells and are well tolerated by patients.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

What If Bacteria Could Be Made to Detect Cancer, Signal its Presence and Treat the Cancer? Well it is Possible!

What If Bacteria Could Be Made to Detect Cancer, Signal its Presence and Treat the Cancer? Well it is Possible! | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it

Synthetic biologist Tal Danino had a thought: What if we could create a probiotic, edible bacteria that was "programmed" to find liver tumors?

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Our body is like a complex eco-system and provides a habitat for bacteria and other organisms. In fact 90% of the cells in our body are bacteria cells, not human cells, each containing their own genetic makeup. They provide essential life-support to our physiological processes, and are collectively known as our microbiome which evolves just as we do.

Today it is possible to modify and program the DNA of bacteria cells, and this experimentation is being done. Bacteria can naturally exist and grow inside of tumors. Especially when you consider that tumors may be areas where the immune system has limited access.

So synthetic biologist, Tal Danino, had a left-field thought: What if we could create a probiotic, edible bacteria that was "programmed" to find liver tumors? He created a programmed-probiotic bacteria that would detect particular bacteria inside a liver tumor, and (via programmed DNA) produce a particular color in the urine as a marker for the presence of the tumor. He then went on to program the probiotic bacteria to not only detect the tumor but also to produce therapeutic molecules from within the tumor environment to shrink the existing tumors. His experiments showed that all of this was possible and successful using a mouse-model.

The ability to program bacteria opens up new possibilities and paths of thinking for dealing with cancer and other diseases.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

New Test Discovered for Early Detection of Cancer.

New Test Discovered for Early Detection of Cancer. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it

Telomeres aged much faster in individuals who were developing but not yet diagnosed with cancer.

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

A study from Northwestern University in collaboration with Harvard University has found that the length of telomeres at the end of each strand of DNA which protect our chromosomes may be a new biomarker to detect the presence of cancer.

The study involved multiple measurements of telomeres over a 13-year period in 792 persons, 135 of whom were eventually diagnosed with different types of cancer, including prostate, skin, lung, leukemia and others. They discovered telomeres aged much faster (indicated by a more rapid loss of length) in individuals who were developing but not yet diagnosed with cancer. Telomeres in persons developing cancer looked as much as 15 years chronologically older than those of people who were not developing the disease.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Nutritional Guidelines for Cancer Prevention.

Nutritional Guidelines for Cancer Prevention. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
A new report shows that global spending on cancer drugs reached $100 billion last year—a 10.3 percent increase from 2013. Experts predict that, at this rate,
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

The cancer ‘industry’ has now become a US$100 billion per year industry and continues to increase. With at least one-third of cancers being preventable by lifestyle changes, according to the World Health Organisation, there are steps we can all take to reduce the risk of cancer.

Doctors from the Physicians Committee of Responsible Medicine and dietitians have released a list of six dietary recommendations to help individuals lower their cancer risk. The Physicians Committee of Responsible Medicine makes these six recommendations:

1) Avoid dairy products to reduce risk of prostate cancer.

2) Limit or avoid alcohol to reduce the risk of cancers of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, colon, rectum, and breast.

3) Avoid red and processed meat to reduce the risk of cancers of the colon and rectum.

4) Avoid grilled, fried, and broiled meats to reduce the risk of cancers of the colon, rectum, breast, prostate, kidney, and pancreas.

5) Women should consume soy products in adolescence to reduce risk of breast cancer. Breast cancer survivors should consume soy products to reduce risk of cancer recurrence and overall mortality.

6) Eat a diet rich in fruits and vegetables to reduce risk of several forms of cancer.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Milk and Prostate Cancer: The Evidence Mounts

A cancer-prevention diet includes plenty of:

Vegetables: sweet potatoes, carrots, broccoli, spinach, asparagus
Fruits: strawberries, kiwi, melon, bananas, apples
Whole grains: breads, cereal, oatmeal, pasta, rice
Legumes: beans, peas, lentils

The most healthful diets eliminate meat, dairy products, eggs, and fried foods.

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Many studies have indicated a link between milk consumption and prostate cancer.

- 2 cohort studies (research studies following groups of people over time) found an increased risk with higher milk intakes

- 5 studies comparing cancer patients to healthy individuals found a similar association

- 1 study conducted in northern Italy found that frequent dairy consumption could increase risk by 2.5 times

- in 1997, the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research concluded that dairy products should be considered a possible contributor to prostate cancer

- a study in April 2000 pointed to a link between dairy and prostate cancer: Harvard’s Physicians’ Health Study followed 20,885 men for 11 years, finding that having 2.5 servings each day boosted prostate cancer risk by 34%, compared to having less than a half serving daily

Not only does milk boost the amount of insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I) in the blood, which in turn promotes cancer cell growth, but there are other characteristics to consider. The high level of calcium ion milk depletes the body’s vitamin D. Most dairy products are also high in fat and can interfere with the hormone balance. The biological purpose of cow’s milk is to support rapid growth in all parts of a calf’s body for only a short period of time until weaned. This is similar to the role of human milk from mothers.

This article advises that a cancer-prevention diet should include plenty of vegetables, fruits, whole grains, and legumes. The most healthful diets eliminate meat, dairy products, eggs, and fried foods.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Evidence Based Lifestyle and Self Help Strategies After Cancer

'Together Against Cancer' Conference October 2013. A PowerPoint presentation entitled "Evidence based lifestyle and self help strategies after Cancer". By Pr...
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

This is an informative presentation (46 mins) delivered by Professor Dr. Robert Thomas, a Consultant Oncologist at Addenbrooke's and Bedford Hospitals, a visiting Professor at Cranfield University and a clinical teacher at Cambridge University.

 

He talks about the benefits of lifestyle, exercise and diet in relation to cancer.

 

You may want to recommend to your doctor to watch this.

more...
Graham Player Ph.D.'s comment, April 13, 12:28 PM
The results of the UK NCRN Pomi-T study referred to by Professor Dr. Robert Thomas can be seen here published in Nature Magazine - http://www.nature.com/pcan/journal/v17/n2/full/pcan20146a.html
Tambre Leighn's curator insight, April 17, 11:16 AM

Yes, yes, yes...a pathway to wellbeing - nutritious food and physical activity!

Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

MRI Can Detect 90% of All Breast Cancer Compared to Only 37.5% for Mammography and Ultrasound Combined.

MRI Can Detect 90% of All Breast Cancer Compared to Only 37.5% for Mammography and Ultrasound Combined. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Around 90 per cent of all breast cancers can be definitively diagnosed using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), researchers report. This compares to the combined methods of mammography and ultrasound which yielded a detection rate of just 37.5 per cent.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

It is known that the use of mammography and ultrasound cannot detect all types of cancer.

A study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology done in Vienna “clearly shows the superiority of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) over mammography and breast ultrasound examinations," says Thomas Helbich, who led the study with Christopher Riedl.

The study involved 559 women at increased risk of breast cancer, and performed 1,365 screening examinations. It revealed that 90% of all breast cancers can be clearly detected by MRI compared to the combined methods of mammography and ultrasound which yielded a detection rate of just 37.5%. None of the cancers were detected by ultrasound alone. The results were similar for non-invasive cancers and for benign breast lesions.

The results of the study should encourage the increased use of MRI for breast screening.

According to OECD 2011 published information Austria has 18 MRI scanners per million inhabitants -- putting the country above the EU average (10 scanners / million inhabitants). If MRI is to be used more frequently, Italian or Greek ratios would be better: in these countries, there are 23 and 22 MRI scanners per million inhabitants respectively. In the USA there are 31 MRI scanners per million population, and in Japan 46. Whereas in Australia and the UK each have only 5, and New Zealand has 11.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) publishes the number of MRI units per million population of each of its 34 member countries. See details here - http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/health_glance-2013-en/04/02/index.html?itemId=/content/chapter/health_glance-2013-33-en&mimeType=text/html

more...
No comment yet.
Rescooped by Graham Player Ph.D. from Pharmaguy's Insights Into Drug Industry News
Scoop.it!

Why Are Cancer Drugs So Expensive in the United States?

Why Are Cancer Drugs So Expensive in the United States? | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
The fact that engaged Dr. Kantarjian's interest and disapproval was that prices for cancer medications increased from an average of $5,000 - $10,000 before 2000 to more than $100,000 by 2012, during a time when average household income in the U.S. fell by 8%.

Via Pharma Guy
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Prices for cancer medications increased from an average of $5,000 - $10,000 before 2000 to more than $100,000 by 2012, during a time when average household income in the U.S. fell by 8%.

The U.S. pays 50-100% more than other advanced countries for the same medications. Overall, health care consumes 18% of the U.S. GDP, contrasted to 5-9% for the European countries. Yet the outcomes in the U.S. are worse, according to numerous sources such as the Commonwealth Fund, the Institute of Medicine, the World Health Organization and others.

Dr. Hagop Kantarjian authored a study for the Mayo Clinic Proceedings, titled, "Why Are Cancer Drugs So Expensive in the United States"? In that he asserts that the main reason for the higher cost of drugs is that the U.S. operates a for-profit health care system.  This need to pursue profit drives all of the arguments that pharma uses to justify its exorbitant prices. Kantarjian examined every one of those justifications for high prices and found each to be incorrect or blatantly misleading.

For decades pharma's trade association, the PhRMA, has trotted out the excuse that the high costs of R&D require the drug companies to charge steep prices. Kantarjian shows that explanation to be nonsense. He reveals how pharma behaves as a classic, oligopoly cartel with only negligible pricing competition.

Drug prices are high, according to the economists, mainly because pharma possesses the economic muscle to keep them that way. In fact, this lack of price competition amounts to the functional equivalent of "monopolistic agreements."

Kantarjian next goes on to show that higher profits for drug companies do not result in better drugs. Instead, he concludes that, "High profits are often channeled toward higher salaries and bonuses of drug companies’ CEOs, not invested back into cancer research."

Other culprits include branded pharma's efforts to delay the appearance of cheaper generics (through such tactics as "patent evergreening,"  "pay for delay," and "approved generics") and the industry's use of political connections to prohibit drug re-importation from Europe and the Commonwealth countries.

He believes that pricing must be based on "fairness," which he defines as pricing in which profit does not jeopardize affordability to patients and the country. This was in fact part of pharma's historic mission, which its current pricing practices have abandoned "in favor of maximizing profits regardless of the potential consequences to patients."

To read the full study see here - http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.org/article/S0025-6196%2815%2900101-9/fulltext

more...
Pharma Guy's curator insight, March 24, 1:53 PM


Kantarjian next goes on to show that higher profits for drug companies do not result in better drugs. Instead, he concludes that, "High profits are often channeled toward higher salaries and bonuses of drug companies’ CEOs, not invested back into cancer research."


It's interesting to note that 86% of pharmaceutical executive attendees at today's #e4pbarca pharma conference in Barcelona agree that pharmaceutical companies need to become genuine healthcare providers! Yikes! That would really boost the pay of pharma CEOs! Read my summary of this conference: http://bit.ly/re4pbarca

Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

The UK ‘Medical System’ Denies a Potentially Life Saving Smear-Test to a 21 Year Old Mother with Cancer Symptoms, Because She is Under 25 Years of Age.

The UK ‘Medical System’ Denies a Potentially Life Saving Smear-Test to a 21 Year Old Mother with Cancer Symptoms, Because She is Under 25 Years of Age. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
aged 21, is now undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy which will leave her unable to have any more children.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Here is a classic example of the medical system protecting its own system, no matter what the consequences for the patient may be. Obviously in this case protection of the system far outweighed the importance of protection of the patient’s life.

While it is commendable and necessary to have guidelines to protect from system abuse, it makes you wonder what role common sense plays in the practice of medical diagnosis today. Doctors are trained well to make diagnoses and understand presenting symptoms. Yet simply because of a patient’s age they are in this case not permitted to carry out the proper diagnoses they are trained to practice.

In the case reported here a young mother suffered in pain with cervical cancer for six months before she was diagnosed - because doctors said she was too young to have a smear test. Now aged 21 she is now undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy which will leave her unable to have any more children.

As a community we need to question whether this is the type of medical system we really want.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Chemicals in Common Use Found to Cause Cancer! 20% of Cancer Diagnoses Could be Due to Chemicals!

Chemicals in Common Use Found to Cause Cancer! 20% of Cancer Diagnoses Could be Due to Chemicals! | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Current research estimates that up to one in five cancer diagnoses could be caused by chemical exposures in the environment.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Researchers have published their findings on the links between common chemicals and cancer risk. They studied 85 different chemicals that are not considered carcinogenic on their own. They found that, when combined, 50 of the chemicals supported key cancer-related mechanisms at exposure levels currently found in the environment.

Paola Marignani, a professor at Dalhousie University, participated in the research project. She said the chemicals of concern are commonly found in our environment, as well as in products we use on a daily basis. "(They include) some of the fuels, some of the plastics, and some of the cosmetics we use," and “They're in our food, our products, our preservatives, our pesticides."

Current research estimates that up to one in five cancer diagnoses could be caused by chemical exposures in the environment.

On the subject of chemicals, there are approximately 85,000 in current use and listed with the Environmental Protection Agency. A logical conclusion of most people is that they have of course been thoroughly tested and confirmed to be safe. That is definitely not the case, however surprising that may be to people. There is no law requiring industrial chemicals be tested for safety before being put on the market.

To make matters worse if you consult the National Toxicity Program (an agency whose mission is to evaluate agents of public health concern), which is part of the US Department of Health and Human Services they quite openly state “More than 80,000 chemicals are registered for use in the United States. Each year, an estimated 2,000 new ones are introduced for use in such everyday items as foods, personal care products, prescription drugs, household cleaners, and lawn care products. We do not know the effects of many of these chemicals on our health, yet we may be exposed to them while manufacturing, distributing, using, and disposing of them or when they become pollutants in our air, water, or soil.” See for yourself here - http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/about/index.html

So it certainly seems that nobody has any responsibility to focus on the introduction of chemicals, and whether they present any health problems to the community. If you consider the fact that chemicals in combination is a completely different concern, it is virtually impossible to determine safety levels to any satisfactory degree.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Cancer Drugs Rankings Suggest Many Are of Little Benefit to Patients.

Cancer Drugs Rankings Suggest Many Are of Little Benefit to Patients. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Leading experts call on pharmaceutical industry to focus on coming up with meaningful drugs and boost levels of effectiveness
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Many modern cancer drugs are of very little benefit to patients, according to a group of leading European experts (members of the European Society for Medical Oncology), who have devised a way to score them and have published results. Among the drugs that do badly is Erlotinib for pancreatic cancer, which offers just 15 extra days of life.

The publication, which includes scores for more than 70 cancer drugs, has been published in the Annals of Oncology Journal, and can be read here - http://static.guim.co.uk/ni/1432986420413/Ann-Oncol-2015.pdf .

Prof Richard Sullivan from Kings College London stated that “Over the past decade, more and more medicines have been going on to the market with lower and lower levels of benefit.” He questions “Are we really designing the trial that needs to be designed to prove clinical benefit or are we just trying to get [the drug] into the market? Is it genuinely for patients or to sell medicines?”

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Can We Eat to Starve Cancer? Yes We Can!

Dr. William Li presents a new way to think about treating cancer.

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

I have reported on this important subject before, and do so again as a reminder of its relevance. I have summarized the key points in the video, for those who would rather read the text.

Our bodies use a process called angiogenesis to grow blood vessels.

There are 60,000 miles of blood vessels in a typical adult, and they have the ability to adapt to whatever environment they are in. We have 19 billion capillaries in our body, which are the smallest blood vessels.

We get almost all of our blood vessels while we are still in our mother’s womb. As adults our blood vessels don’t normally grow, except in a few circumstances. In women blood vessels grow every month to build the lining of the uterus, and during pregnancy they form the placenta. After any injury, blood vessels grow in order to heal the wound. The body is able to release a protein stimulator (angiogenic factor) to encourage blood vessels to grow as needed, and also to release angiogenesis inhibitors to prune back any excess blood vessels. The normal healthy body tries to maintain a baseline complement of blood vessels. This ability to balance angiogenesis, when working properly, prevents the development of blood vessels to feed most cancerous cells, and is one of our most important defense mechanisms against cancer.

However in some diseases the body loses the ability to grow enough blood vessels, and is unable to prune back any excess blood vessels in order to restore the baseline. In these situations angiogenesis becomes out of balance. Insufficient angiogenesis can result in heart attacks, circulatory problems, stroke, nerve damage, and more. Excess angiogenesis can result in cancer, arthritis, Alzheimer’s disease, and more. It is known that there are over 70 major diseases that share abnormal angiogenesis as their common denominator.

Angiogenesis is a characteristic of every type of harmful cancer, and is a tipping point between a harmless cancer and a harmful cancer. Cancers don’t start out with a blood supply. They are only an accumulation of microscopic cancerous cells that cannot get any larger because they lack a supply of oxygen and nutrients, which come from a blood supply. Without a blood supply most of these cancers will never become dangerous.

Autopsies have shown that about 40% of women aged 40-50 have microscopic cancers in their breasts, and 50% of men aged 50-60 have microscopic cancers in their prostate. Virtually all of us by the time we reach our 70s will have microscopic cancers growing in our thyroid. Fortunately without a blood supply most of these cancers will never become dangerous.

So if we could cut off the blood supply to cancerous cells then a cancer tumor would not be able to develop. This is called anti-angiogenic therapy. It is quite different to chemotherapy, as it is selectively aimed at the blood vessels that are feeding the cancers. Tumor blood vessels are unlike normal healthy blood vessels. They are poorly constructed and highly vulnerable to treatments that target them. Anti-angiogenic therapies have been around for at least the past 10-years, and many of these drugs have already been developed for various cancers. Clinical experience using anti-angiogenic drugs has shown a 70% to 100% improvement in survival for some cancers, such as kidney, multiple myeloma, colorectal cancer, and gastro-intestinal tumors. But for other cancers, improvements have not occurred to the same extent.

Trying to treat cancers once they have become mature is known to be difficult. However preventing them from developing may be the answer.

It is believed by many people that dietary habits may account for the development of one third of all cancers. If this is the case then an obvious solution would to modify our diet, if we can be sure of which dietary habits to change. Another beneficial approach may be to use food as a way of controlling angiogenesis so that blood vessels would not develop to enable cancers to grow. This was the hypothesis of Dr. William Li, and he set out to show that it is entirely possible by eating to starve cancer.

He discovered through scientific laboratory testing that many natural foods, beverages and herbs contain natural inhibitors of angiogenesis. Some notable examples include resveratrol from red grapes which inhibit angiogenesis by 60%, ellagic acid from strawberries, and genistein from soy beans. In fact soy extract, artichoke, parsley, berries, garlic, and red grapes were better inhibitors of angiogenesis than many of the pharmaceutical drugs. It was also discovered that combining certain foods together created a synergy that produced an even greater and more potent inhibitor of angiogenesis.

Dietary cancer prevention with focus on anti-angiogenesis may be one of the preferred solutions to cancer instead of the high cost of end-stage cancer treatment.

Research continues to reveal that many naturally occurring foods are as good, and in some cases better, than drugs in the control of angiogenesis. This is a major step forward in the strategies we have at our disposal for cancer prevention. To learn more visit the Angiogenesis Foundation - http://www.angio.org/

For a list of the dietary sources of naturally occurring anti-angiogenic foods see here - http://blog.ted.com/2010/02/10/dr_william_lis/

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Curcumin and Cancer Cells - A Preventative and Treatment.

Curcumin and Cancer Cells - A Preventative and Treatment. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
more than 40 biomolecules that are involved in cell death induced by curcumin
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

I choose to report this more as a reminder than a new discovery. All too often traditional approaches that seem to work in combatting disease get passed over in favor of the profitable patented man-made drugs. But in this case we should not let that happen, and should continue to be mindful of this amazing natural compound.

Cancer is usually treated by chemotherapeutic agents that are toxic not only to tumor cells but also to normal cells. These chemotherapeutic agents typically produce major side effects, are very expensive, and are not considered candidates for cancer prevention.

On the other hand traditional medicines are generally free of the deleterious side effects, are usually inexpensive, and are often used in many cultures to promote health and prevent all types of disease including cancer.

Curcumin, a component of turmeric, is one of the traditional foods that has been consumed for thousands of years across Asia, and is regarded by many of the traditional cultures as an important medicine in maintaining health. Curcumin has been shown to inhibit the proliferation and survival of almost all types of tumor cells. Many studies indicate the selective role of curcumin towards cancer cells than normal cells.

It has a diverse range of molecular targets, supporting the concept that it acts upon numerous biochemical and molecular cascades. Curcumin physically binds to as many as 33 different proteins, including thioredoxin reductase, cyclooxygenase-2, (COX2), protein kinase C, 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX), and tubulin. Various molecular targets modulated by this agent include transcription factors, growth factors and their receptors, cytokines, enzymes, and genes regulating cell proliferation, and apoptosis. There are more than 40 biomolecules that are involved in cell death induced by curcumin.

Curcumin seems to be universally useful for almost every type of cancer, and has the ability to modulate genetic activity and expression—both by destroying cancer cells and promoting healthy cell function.

If you wish to learn more about this please look at the research article I have shown here (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2758121/), as well as the considerable information freely available by searching the subject.

I have also written about curcumin before here - http://www.scoop.it/t/cancer-advances-knowledge-integrative-holistic-treatments?q=curcumin

more...
Troy Sing's comment, June 16, 1:08 AM
Tumeric is such a great herb !
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Teaching the Immune System How to Fight Cancer

Teaching the Immune System How to Fight Cancer | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Immunotherapy research continues in the search for ways to beat cancer.

Typically treatments are targeted to work in two different ways - either by boosting the immune system or training the immune system to specifically attack cancer cells.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

An Improved Test for Ovarian Cancer to be Made Available in the UK.

An Improved Test for Ovarian Cancer to be Made Available in the UK. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
The annual test pinpointed nine in ten cases of ovarian cancer in post-menopausal women over 50 and, most importantly, it was able to identify it in women who showed no noticeable sign of illness.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Early detection of ovarian cancer is known to be able to provide a better chance of cure. If caught early, 90% of women are cured. This drops to just 5% for advanced cases.

A new test called ROCA (Risk of Ovarian Cancer Algorithm) has been under trial for several years and is now well proven, indicating that it is twice as effective in picking up the disease as existing methods.

‘The screening has helped us pick up women with ovarian cancer who were displaying no symptoms,’ confirmed consultant gynecologist Dr Mourad Seif, who has led the trial in the Manchester area and will soon be offering the test to private patients.

The test is to be made available by private clinics this summer in the UK, and is expected to cost in the region of £150 per test.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Merck’s Former Doctor Predicts Gardasil To Become The Greatest Medical Scandal Of All Time

Merck’s Former Doctor Predicts Gardasil To Become The Greatest Medical Scandal Of All Time | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of […]

Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Dr. Marica Angell - physician, author, and the first woman to serve as editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine – has commented “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine”.

Gardasil is marketed as a vaccine focused on preventing infection by the Human papilloma virus (HPV), and therefore offering protection against cervical cancer, genital warts and cancers of the anus, vagina and vulva.

Dr. Bernard Dalbergue, a former pharmaceutical industry physician with Gardasil manufacturer Merck has started to raise his voice against the HPV vaccine. In an interview with the French magazine Principes de Santé (Health Principles), Dr. Dalbergue commented - “I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all time because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine, technical and scientific feat that it may be, has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers. Gardasil is useless and costs a fortune!

Another doctor making noise regarding the HPV vaccine is Dr. Diane Harper who helped design and carry out the Phase II and Phase III safety and effectiveness studies to get Gardasil approved, and authored many of the published papers about it. Dr. Harper has commented that “They created a huge amount of fear in mothers, and appealed to mothers’ sense of duty to get them to get their daughters vaccinated”.

A year ago the vaccine was taken off the recommended vaccine schedule in Japan due to its adverse effects.

more...
Troy Sing's comment, June 16, 1:22 AM
sheds light on what happens when the focus is on the business of medicine rather its practice. ...
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

What Happens When a Family That Usually Doesn’t Eat Organic Food Suddenly Starts?

Want to know what happens in your body when you switch from eating conventional food to organic? Watch this! The study was conducted by the Swedish Environme...
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

A study was conducted by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute IVL to know more about what happens in the body when switching from conventional to organic food.

Most of the food that is grown today that we purchase from supermarkets is treated with pesticides and chemicals. The driving force behind the use of pesticides and the ‘treatment’ of these food products has been to produce more food, with less damage from pests, extending shelf-life, and generally providing a more favorable economic return.

However there seems to have been very little, if any, regard to maintaining or enhancing the nutritional content of the majority of these products. In fact if you take time to look at the US Department of Agriculture database you will see that over the past 50-years the nutritional content of our food has diminished by an amazing extent. When time permits I will post more about that investigation I have done.

So we can logically conclude that in general there seems to be nobody in the growing or supply chain that has the interests of the consumer’s health and nutritional maintenance as a first priority.

For the study in Sweden a typical family of five members was chosen for the 2-week study during which they only ate organic foods. Prior to that they ate like most families, and did not frequently eat much organic food, but were interested in eating more.

At commencement of the study tests were done on all family members to determine their body’s present status of various chemicals. All family members were found to have had insecticides, fungicides and plant growth regulators in their body. At the end of the 2-weeks on an organic food diet further tests were done which showed that in all family members almost all of the pesticides had disappeared.

The study shows that choosing organic food can dramatically reduce the level of pesticides and chemicals in the body.

It has long been known that exposure to high levels of certain chemicals can cause cancer. There is now growing scientific evidence that exposure to lower levels of chemicals in the general environment is contributing to society’s cancer burden.

We all realize that the statements and justifications put forward by the growers and organizations with vested interests in chemicals will show study after study justifying that chemicals are safe. Today most of us have become wary of such statements, which are regarded increasingly with suspicion and disbelief.

But there are some facts available out there. Here is a statement from the US Government, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website which I have kept (accessed on Dec 7, 2013) – “More than 80,000 chemicals are registered for use in the United States. However, we do not know the effects of many of these chemicals on our health.” Another important fact is that we know very little about the long term effects of eating food treated with pesticides, and we know even less about the possible effects of various combinations of these together in our body.

You can refer here for more information on the above study - https://www.coop.se/organiceffect

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Milk and Dairy Consumption in Childhood Associated with Major Increase in Adult Cancer Risk

A diet rich in dairy products during childhood is associated with a greater risk of colorectal cancer in adulthood.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

It is known that elevated IGF-1 (insulin-like growth factor-I) levels are associated with a variety of cancers, including colorectal, prostate, and premenopausal breast cancer.

A study involving 2,109 women from eight European countries found that elevated IGF-1 was associated with the consumption of protein (mainly from animal sources), including milk and cheese.

Another study from the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition published results of a 65-year follow-up study showing that dairy consumption affects biological pathways associated with carcinogenesis. They found a diet rich in dairy products during childhood is associated with a greater risk of colorectal cancer in adulthood. High childhood total dairy intake was associated with a near-tripling in the risk of colorectal cancer compared with low intake, independent of meat, fruit, and vegetable intakes and socioeconomic indicators.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Exercise is an Important Component of Cancer Treatment

Exercise is an Important Component of Cancer Treatment | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
Exercise can help slash your risk of cancer, lessen risk of cancer recurrence, and also helps diminish your risk of dementia.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

Mounting research suggests that exercise is an important part of cancer care and prevention. The British organization Macmillan Cancer Support recommends that all patients getting cancer treatment should be told to engage in moderate-intensity exercise for two and a half hours every week, stating that the advice to rest and take it easy after treatment is an outdated view. Exercise also improves circulation, driving more oxygen into the tissues, and circulating immune cells in the blood.

Previous studies have shown that exercise can have a powerful effect on cancer care and recovery. For patients who have gone through breast or colon cancer treatment, regular exercise has been found to reduce recurrence of the disease by up to 50% (read more here - http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/249636.php ).

Professor Dr. Robert Thomas, a Consultant Oncologist at Addenbrooke's and Bedford Hospitals, a visiting Professor at Cranfield University and a clinical teacher at Cambridge University, comments that, in terms of cancer, exercise reduces the side effects of treatment, makes patients feel better, reduce risk of relapse, and improves the chance of living an overall healthy long life. Rest during and after treatment is considered by Dr. Thomas as not the best thing to do.

A common side effect of chemotherapy is fatigue which can lead to anxiety and depression. Regular exercise during treatment can improve mood, reduce anxiety and contribute to prevention of ‘chemo-brain’. During initial treatments of chemotherapy and radiotherapy it is important to maintain activity and keep moving. After treatment is finished Dr. Thomas advises to exercise more vigorously, building up slowly to perhaps 2.5 to 3 hours per week in an enjoyable activity such as brisk walking.

Dr. Thomas delivered an interesting PowerPoint presentation entitled "Evidence based lifestyle and self-help strategies after Cancer", which you can see here - https://youtu.be/wrYXIbXccmM .

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Graham Player Ph.D.
Scoop.it!

Breast Cancer Classification Varies According to Hormone Receptor Status and HER2 Gene.

Breast Cancer Classification Varies According to Hormone Receptor Status and HER2 Gene. | Cancer - Advances, Knowledge, Integrative & Holistic Treatments | Scoop.it
(HealthDay)—Breast cancer isn't the same for every woman, even at the cellular level, according to a new statement from four major medical groups focused on the disease.
Graham Player Ph.D.'s insight:

A report issued by the American Cancer Society, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries, classifies breast cancers based on four molecularly defined subtypes according to their hormone receptor (HR) status and a tumor cell's activity around the HER2 gene.

The four tumor types, which respond differently to treatment and have different survival rates, are:
- Luminal A (HR+/HER2-),
- Luminal B (HR+/HER2+),
- HER2-enriched (HR-/HER2+), and
- Triple negative (HR-/HER2-).

Cancer registries across the United States are now recording these breast cancer subtypes.

Dr. Charles Shapiro, director of Translational Breast Cancer Research at the Tisch Cancer Institute at Mount Sinai in New York City, comments that "the biology of these subtypes is of critical importance to selecting the most effective treatments for breast cancer.”

more...
No comment yet.