Study confirms that many survivors of breast cancer chemotherapy treatments suffer from brain damage

Tuesday, December 13, 2011 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer (Natural News) Just like they often do in response to the numerous health problems brought about by things like Morgellons Disease and the HPV vaccines Gardasil and Cervarix, doctors commonly deny that the cognitive problems reported by breast cancer patients following chemotherapy are in any way related to the toxic treatment. But a new study published in the journalArchives of Neurologysuggests otherwise, as it points to clear evidence of what is known as "chemo brain," or brain damage caused by chemotherapy. Shelli Kesler from the Stanford University School of Medicine in California evaluated 25 breast cancer patients that had been treated with chemotherapy, 19 breast cancer patients that had surgery, and 18 healthy women, as part of her study. All the women were instructed to solve various problems and complete a variety of tasks. They also filled out questionnaires about their perceived cognitive abilities. During the process, researchers monitored the women's brain activity using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and discovered that those in the chemotherapy group had reduced cognitive ability in three key areas of the brain's prefrontal cortex -- two of the areas were associated with working memory, cognitive control, and monitoring, while the other was associated with executive function, or the area where planning activities take place in the brain. "This is a huge validation for these women who are telling their doctors 'something is wrong with me'," Kesler is quoted as saying by Reuters Health. "This shows that when a patient reports she is struggling with these types of problems, there's a good chance there has been a brain change." That any doctor would even deny a potential link between chemotherapy and brain damage in the first place is quite disturbing. Chemotherapy drugs, of course, are widely known to damage both healthy and malignant cells in the body -- and many chemotherapy drugs admittedly cause permanent DNA, heart, and other damage And the new findings give breast cancer patients yet another valid reason to reconsider going the conventional treatment route. With so many other safe, alternative methods of breast cancer prevention and treatment, why would any woman want to subject herself to potentially permanent brain and other damage caused by chemotherapy? http://www.naturalnews.com/034391_breast_cancer_chemotherapy_brain_damage.html

Pro-active breast health prevents cancer

Sunday, December 11, 2011 by: Tara Green (NaturalNews) Protecting your health requires more than a good diet and regular exercise. It also involves having the courage to look beyond the received wisdom of the day. This is especially true in avoiding diseases which have reached epidemic proportions in our culture such as breast cancer. Just as the medical experts of other eras had blind spots that make modern experts shake their heads, present day mainstream medicine relies almost exclusively on three tools: surgery; invasive and/or painful and/or toxic diagnostic procedures; and pharmaceuticals with severe side-effects. Most physicians do not learn in medical school that other models of healing, many of them proven by centuries of success are equally as valid as scalpels, drugs and radiation. This means consumers have to educate themselves in order to actively prevent diseases like cancer. Below is our review of some of the breast cancer prevention routes your physician might fail to mention.

Vitamin D One recent French study shows that Vitamin D actually kills cancer cells, in much the same way Tamoxifen has been shown to do, but without that drug's side-effects. The study indicates that the best results in cancer prevention derive from a combination of Vitamin D supplements as well as natural Vitamin D absorbed from sunshine on the skin.

Green Tea A study reported in the January 2009 edition of Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, found that consuming three or more cups a day of green tea results in a 37% reduction in breast cancer risk for women under the age of 50. Researchers compared data from 5,082 women with breast cancer between the ages of 20 and 74 alongside 4,501 age-matched controls. An earlier Japanese study demonstrated that green tea can halt the progress of breast cancer among premenopausal women. The Japanese researchers, working with a population sample of 472 women with stage I, II and III breast cancer, found that increased green tea drinking was correlated with lower incidences of recurring cancer. Health experts believe the polyphenols in green tea inhibit the growth of breast cancer cells.

Reduce External and Internal Toxins Getting more Vitamin D and drinking green tea are holistic healing measures, meaning they work best as part of an overall lifestyle which promotes health and seeks to eliminate poisons. While some environmental toxins are so omnipresent in our culture that it is difficult to avoid them, each individual can reduce her toxic load through careful choices. Avoid using personal care products and foods which are little more than cocktails of industrial poisons. Educate yourself, via articles on NaturalNews, as well as other publications and websites, about the dangers of pesticides, GMO's and fake-food ingredients. Maintain a proactive stance in regard to eliminating as many toxins as possible from your home and your diet. But also realize that long periods of worry and anger can be internal toxins, draining your health. Take some time to experience joy, laughter, love and peacefulness through relaxing with friends, family and companion animals, spending time in nature, walking, dancing, yoga, tai chi or other forms of movement, watching funny movies, meditating, drawing, painting or using your creativity in other ways.

Thermography A new diagnostic tool makes the potentially harmful breast compression and radiation involved in mammograms unnecessary. Pre-cancerous and cancerous masses require an abundant supply of nutrients to maintain their growth. They gain these nutrients by sending out chemicals to keep existing blood vessels open, recruit dormant vessels, and create new ones (neoangiogenesis). This process results in increased regional surface temperatures of the breast which can be detected and analyzed via thermal or infrared imaging. The medical establishment favors mammograms because hospitals and clinics are already heavily invested in this expensive equipment and prefer not to update to thermography. However, women's health expert Dr. Christiane Northrup writes "Thermography's accuracy and reliability is remarkable." It's important to remember that you may not always get the whole story from your physician. Looking to other treatments and preventative measures can not only save you money, it can possibly save your life.

http://www.naturalnews.com/034376_breast_cancer_prevention_vitamin_D.html

Removing unaffected breast in women with cancer results in little benefit, many problems
Thursday, December 08, 2011 by: S. L. Baker, features writer (NaturalNews) Several celebrities have been in the news lately, because after being diagnosed with cancer in one breast, they decided to have both breasts removed. The procedure, known as contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM), is offered to women as a kind of insurance. Supposedly, it will greatly reduce the odds they will not get breast cancer again. Although the rates of this surgical procedure are soaring, the real proof of whether it is worthwhile has been lacking. However, researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania have just announced the results of research showing CPM provides little significant benefit -- but it can have significantnegativeeffects on women. In fact, the study shows that the surgery actually reduces the measure of life expectancy that takes into account quality of life (technically called "quality-adjusted life expectancy") among women who do not have hereditary breast cancer. About 90 percent of women with breast malignancies do not have cancers known to be caused by genetic factors. So that means the new findings apply to the vast majority of women diagnosed with breast cancer who are treated with mastectomy. A research team headed by Robert G. Prosnitz, MD, MPH, assistant professor of Radiation Oncology in the Perelman School of Medicine, reported on their study at the CTRC-AACR (Cancer Therapy & Research Center American Association for Cancer Research) San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium. Dr. Prosnitz pointed out there has been a whopping 150 percent increase in surgical removal of healthy, non-cancerous breasts in recent years. In a media statement, the researchers said they hope their findings will assist patients and doctor to make informed decisions about treatment strategies, based on a clear understanding of the real benefits and risks involved in preventive mastectomies -- and the potential for the surgery to have a negative impact on a woman's quality of life.

Current medical enthusiasm for removing healthy breasts is a bad idea "We suspect that many of the women who elect to undergo CPM are acting on the belief the surgery will substantially reduce their overall risk of dying of breast cancer," Dr. Prosnitz noted. "However, our study shows that a woman's risk of death from her primary breast cancer far outweighs her risk of death from a potential breast cancer developing in the unaffected breast. Additionally, the modest increase in life expectancy resulting from CPM may ultimately be negated by a reduction in quality of life." The study showed that CPM produced modest gains in life expectancy, primarily in younger women with early-stage cancers whose type is known to carry a favorable prognosis anyway. However, even in these women, their risk of dying from their primary breast cancer far exceeded any risk of dying from a breast malignancy that might develop at some time in the future in the opposite breast. Specifically, in patients who forego CPM, the risk of death from the primary breast cancer within 20 years was 10 times higher than the risk of death from a breast cancer that might later be found on the unaffected side. What's more, the new study revealed the negative side to CPM that is rarely discussed. The surgery

appears to reduce the quality of life as the result of surgical complications, loss of sensation in the breast, and other medical problems. Bottom line:Dr. Prosnitz and his colleagues concluded that not undergoing this procedure is the preferred strategy for all patients, regardless of age, cancer stage or tumor molecular subtype.. "At the outset of the study, we already knew that CPM was not going to help women with locally advanced breast cancers," Dr. Prosnitz explained. "What surprised us, however, was how small the benefits were for women with even the most favorable breast cancers."

http://www.naturalnews.com/034351_double_mastectomy_breast_cancer_prevention.html

Breast cancer prevention alternatives - know your options before leaping

Monday, December 05, 2011 by: Tara Green

(NaturalNews) Fear, pain, poison, and "pre-emptive" surgery characterize mainstream medicine's philosophy of breast cancer awareness. The cancer industry's attitude toward breast health is rooted in harrowing more than healing, its motives based in profit rather than prevention.

Dangerous Diagnostic Procedures Although many thoroughly indoctrinated scientists would have you believe that measures such as self-exams, mammograms and in some cases even pre-emptive breast removal are wise precautions, there are dissenting voices even within the medical community. The Cancer Prevention Coalition founded by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., states "Mammography screening is a profit-driven technology posing risks compounded by unreliability." The same article notes that routine mammograms can result in "significant, cumulative" radiation risks as well as the risk of cancer from breast compression. Mammograms readings, the Coalition notes, are often inaccurate, and increased mammograms in recent years have failed to reduce rates of breast cancer mortality.

Negative consequences of self-exams Self-administered breast exams are equally unreliable and can also result in unnecessary treatment. A 2003 Danish study found that regular self-exams increased the risk of unneeded medical procedures. The Danish researchers found no difference in cancer mortality rates between those who performed self-exams and those who did not. Women's health expert Dr. Christiane Northrup points out that, as currently taught, breast self-exams tend to encourage a "search and destroy" attitude. Northrup encourages women to avoid this approach: "Examining your breasts in a spirit of fear simply increases the fear and is the opposite of what you need to create healthy breast tissue."

Cancer drug that can cause cancer Women who have been identified as high risk of breast cancer may be prescribed the drug Tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor-modulating (SERM) drug. Side-effects of Tamoxifen include strokes, blood clots and uterine cancer. Tamoxifen is designed to prevent estrogen receptor-positive tumors. However, women who taken Tamoxifen but still develop breast cancer are more likely to have estrogen receptor-negative tumors, which have a worse prognosis. A 2006 study involving researchers from UC Davis, UCSF, the University of Pittsburgh and McMaster University in Ontario, Canada concluded that Tamoxifen does not increase life expectancy for women at high risk for breast cancer.

A closer look at genes and surgery Increasingly, the mainstream cancer industry has been urging women considered at extremely high risk because they carry abnormal breast cancer genes one (BRCA1) or two (BRC2) to undergo preemptive mastectomies. The fear-mongering literature on this topic is designed to make women believe their only choices are surgery or death. However, only five to ten percent of all new breast cancers occur among women who carry these genes. A research project at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center assessed breast cancer risk factors among 2,000 women from different countries. The study found that the mutated genes were only one risk factor among many, and that diet and lifestyle choices also determined the likelihood of breast cancer occurrence.

Profit-driven prevention campaigns Much of what seems to be health education is actually public relations and advertising. Breast Cancer Awareness Month is sponsored by AstraZeneca, the company who produces the cancer drug Tamoxifen. All broadcast and print media campaigns for this so-called health education effort are paid for by AstraZeneca. Diet and lifestyle changes which can prevent cancer are given less space in media campaigns compared with ads urging women to receive mammograms. Allopathic medicine tends to emphasize extreme heroic measures -- which is exactly what you need if you are a gunshot victim or have been in a car accident. However, the concept of wellness, of promoting and maintaining health through everyday measures such as dietary choices has not yet been integrated into the medical education. Since the medical profession has strong financial ties to the medical devices and pharmaceutical industries, this state of affairs is likely to continue. Other styles of healing, ironically referred to as "alternative" although most of them have a longer history than western medicine, take the approach of protecting and sustaining wellness, rather than waiting for a crisis to occur. In part 2 of this report, we will look at research on therapies which offer more hope for preserving breast health. http://www.naturalnews.com/034326_breast_cancer_prevention_alternatives.html

New study reveals expensive MRIs pushed on women for breast cancer screening have no medical benefit
Friday, November 18, 2011 by: S. L. Baker, features writer (NaturalNews) The use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, better known simply as MRI, for breast cancer screening is increasing and so is its use in guiding breast surgery when cancer is discovered. Obviously, that means healthcare costs are soaring, too, as more and more women are advised to get MRIs in addition to mammograms. The push started in 2007. At that time, the New York Times reported a breast MRI cost $1,000 to $2,000, and sometimes more -- at least 10 times the cost of mammography. So for every million breast MRIs performed each year, healthcare costs spike by at least a billion dollars. Sometimes, but not always, these test are covered by Medicare and insurance. Of course, despite this enormous cost, the only reason doctors and medical centers would be urging women to have these expensive tests is because there must be convincing proof breast MRIs are excellent for spotting breast cancer and/or for directing cancer therapy. But this is not true. Although it may be hard to believe, here comes the shocking truth, as just reported in the prestigious medical journalThe Lancet. Monica Morrow from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, and colleagues meticulously reviewed research from the past decade to examine the belief that breast MRIs are effective at finding and treating breast cancer. What they found was just the opposite. There is little to no evidence breast MRIs benefit the vast majority of women. In fact, there's not even evidence showing breast MRIs are particularly effective at helping direct breast-conserving surgery.

Selling women on breast MRIs with no proof the tests increase survival The new study did indicate breast MRI can be valuable in screening women at very high risk for breast cancer due to their genetic heritage. However, let's take a closer look at that finding. According to a media statement, the researchers noted that while a breast MRI can identify tumors missed by mammograms and ultrasound in women at risk of breast cancer due to a known gene mutation or their family history, "little is known about whether or not this improved detection has any impact on survival." "MRI has, over recent years, been widely adopted into clinical practice based on the assumption that its increased sensitivity at detecting cancer will improve outcomes for patients," the authors noted in a media release. Bottom line:they found there's no actual evidence having a breast MRI that spots cancer in a high risk woman means they will live any longer than they would have if they'd never had the test. According to the research team, that fact that breast MRIs produce more sensitive images does not translate into better surgical treatment or prognoses when used to evaluate women before surgery, either. "The available data does not support the idea that MRI improves patient selection for breast-conserving surgery or that it increases the likelihood of obtaining negative margins [no cancer cells found in margins of resection] at the initial surgical excision," they wrote. http://www.naturalnews.com/034190_MRIs_breast_cancer.html