Quote:A team of researchers looking into why cancer cells are so resilient accidentally stumbled upon a far more important discovery. While conducting their research, the team discovered that chemotherapy actually heavily damages healthy cells and subsequently triggers them to release a protein that sustains and fuels tumor growth. Beyond that, it even makes the tumor highly resistant to future treatment.

Reporting their findings in the journal Nature Medicine, the scientists report that the findings were ‘completely unexpected’. Finding evidence of significant DNA damage when examining the effects of chemotherapy on tissue derived from men with prostate cancer, the writings are a big slap in the face to mainstream medical organizations who have been pushing chemotherapy as the only option to cancer patients for years.

The news comes after it was previously ousted by similarly-breaking research that expensive cancer drugs not only fail to treat tumors, but actually make them far worse.

(08-08-2012, 12:29 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: Awww...what a bummer for the drug companies!

Quote:A team of researchers looking into why cancer cells are so resilient accidentally stumbled upon a far more important discovery. While conducting their research, the team discovered that chemotherapy actually heavily damages healthy cells and subsequently triggers them to release a protein that sustains and fuels tumor growth. Beyond that, it even makes the tumor highly resistant to future treatment.

Reporting their findings in the journal Nature Medicine, the scientists report that the findings were ‘completely unexpected’. Finding evidence of significant DNA damage when examining the effects of chemotherapy on tissue derived from men with prostate cancer, the writings are a big slap in the face to mainstream medical organizations who have been pushing chemotherapy as the only option to cancer patients for years.

The news comes after it was previously ousted by similarly-breaking research that expensive cancer drugs not only fail to treat tumors, but actually make them far worse.

http://naturalsociety.com/chemotherapy-makes-cancer-far-worse/#ixzz22vN0MWHj

(11-27-2012, 01:19 AM)jacrob Wrote: I recently bought a family member a green glass plate and uv light (as per Edgar Cayce's recommendation) and he's using it as instructed. Unfortunately he's also on chemo. As his cancer cell count has been slowly rising I'm very interested to see what the uv light/green glass does to his overall health.

Quote:Tim Shannon, ND 112 days ago

For those who are interested, this appears to be the citation for this article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22863786
The only SHOCK of this study is in the article. There are numerous studies that show that chemo induces more cancer, nothing new here. This is mostly a sensationalist article to get readers, nothing more. The multibillion dollar cancer industry won't bat an eye, never do when studies come out that show problems with chemo/radiation. In addition, this study cites one type of cancer - prostate. The article makes it appear as if the study talks about ALL chemotherapy and ALL cancers, it doesn't. It's exclusively about prostate cancer and some of the common chemotherapies related to prostate cancer.
Of course, this type of article will bring out the chemo lovers and the chemo haters. But it won't even make a ripple. Don't now what ever really will as long as there is SO much $ to be made by this industry.

Quote:Nat Med. 2012 Sep;18(9):1359-68. Treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment promotes prostate cancer therapy resistance through WNT16B. Sun Y, Campisi J, Higano C, Beer TM, Porter P, Coleman I, True L, Nelson PS.

Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Acquired resistance to anticancer treatments is a substantial barrier to reducing the morbidity and mortality that is attributable to malignant tumors. Components of tissue microenvironments are recognized to profoundly influence cellular phenotypes, including susceptibilities to toxic insults. Using a genome-wide analysis of transcriptional responses to genotoxic stress induced by cancer therapeutics, we identified a spectrum of secreted proteins derived from the tumor microenvironment that includes the Wnt family member wingless-type MMTV integration site family member 16B (WNT16B). We determined that WNT16B expression is regulated by nuclear factor of κ light polypeptide gene enhancer in B cells 1 (NF-κB) after DNA damage and subsequently signals in a paracrine manner to activate the canonical Wnt program in tumor cells. The expression of WNT16B in the prostate tumor microenvironment attenuated the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy in vivo, promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression. These results delineate a mechanism by which genotoxic therapies given in a cyclical manner can enhance subsequent treatment resistance through cell nonautonomous effects that are contributed by the tumor microenvironment.

Quote: promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression.

Quote:nonautonomous

(11-27-2012, 11:08 PM)Pickle Wrote:

Quote: promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression.

Quote:nonautonomous

Sounds like they piss off something intelligent.

(11-29-2012, 11:45 PM)Pickle Wrote: Perhaps someday you will find the metaphysical component and erase some of your textbook belief. It does not help humanity to pick up the same shovel and dig the same pit that has already been established.

You have already stated your opinion of "control" as being an sts trait. Yet "killing" is still acceptable as you have yet to get off the fence. No sense in that at all, as killing is only control coupled with fear.

(11-30-2012, 12:35 AM)Pickle Wrote: This is where our perceptions are different. I work in the metaphysical. As such, i am aware of karmic interactions, and that i am not allowed to "kill".

Quote:By "controlling" microorganisms in my body i am allowed to command them, but not destroy them.

Quote:All neutralizing or deactivations are done by the innate body by way of my signalling to the metaphysical.

Quote:"My will be done". This does not work with belief, it works within awareness.

Quote:Killing is a taught belief. Useless for the future.

Quote:What do you command them to do?

Quote:What do you mean by that? That killing doesn't really exist?

Quote:The belief in the need to kill anything is belief. You can ask that those on the other side of the veil take care of these matters in the proper way. When you take matters into your hands and kill, it is like blood on your hands.

Quote:Most that face this concept scoff at it, planting the seeds for later catalyst.

Quote:In fact that is one of my services is planting these seeds LoL!

Quote:Even made a new friend in this way.

Quote:The common theme is to tear down the body by way of ingestion, then to try and kill or cut out those portions of the body that rise up to stop your warfare against it.

Quote:In the case of caring for one's own health, it is essential to practice a vitality-based lifestyle, one based on increasing your health, rather than a recovery-based existence that seeks to treat individual symptoms. People who are recovery-based will constantly be looking at past dis-ease in their physical forms. They will be searching to prevent some illness from reoccuring. This is a type of fear.

(12-01-2012, 09:22 AM)norral Wrote: whether metaphysical or physical i would think that strengthening the immune system would be beneficial to the healing.

(12-01-2012, 06:48 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: The immune system is where the physical meets the metaphysical.

(12-01-2012, 11:10 PM)Pickle Wrote: Do academics describe the immune system center of command as the thymus?

Quote:Coincidentally green foods boost the green ray. picking up on enough of the coincidences can form a bigger picture.

Quote:The Rosicrucians describe the thymus as well, and the timing of the changes, which sort of cioncides with "other stories" of old as well.

Quote:Forward-thinking Cancer Experts Suggest Abandoning Chemotherapy, Radiation, and Surgery To Treat Cancer

Three recent studies published in the journals Nature and Science shed new light on why chemotherapy, a common conventional treatment for cancer, is typically a complete failure at permanently eradicating cancer.
Based on numerous assessments of how cancer cells multiply and spread, researchers from numerous countries have confirmed that cancer tumors generate their own stem cells, which in turn feed the re-growth of new tumors after earlier ones have been eliminated.

...

What they discovered was that, although chemotherapy appeared in many cases to successfully kill tumor cells and temporarily stop the growth and spread of cancer, the treatment ultimately failed to prevent new tumors from forming. And the culprit, it turns out, was cancer stem cells that persisted long after chemotherapy, which quietly prompted the re-growth of new tumors later down the road.

,,,

"Traditional therapies like surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation do not destroy the small number of cells driving the cancer's growth," says UM's Comprehensive Cancer Center. "Instead of trying to kill all the cells in a tumor with chemotherapy or radiation, we believe it would be more effective to use treatments targeted directly at these so-called cancer stem cells. If the stem cells were eliminated, the cancer would be unable to grow and spread to other locations in the body."

Alternative cancer therapies like the Gerson therapy (www.gerson.org) and Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski's antineoplastons (www.burzynskiclinic.com), for instance, are already successfully treating cancers in this way.

But because of censorship issues and medical tyranny, these treatments are still not widely accepted, and are actually considered to be fraudulent by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and virtually all state and federal medical boards in the US.

(12-05-2012, 03:02 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: which quietly prompted the re-growth of new tumors later down the road.

(12-05-2012, 03:15 AM)Pickle Wrote: I looked up the side effects of a pill for liver treatment that a lady was taking. A listed side effect was at least one of two types of cancer at about the two year mark. It described getting cancer even if you had quit taking the script. How weird is that..........sounds like an activator.

(12-05-2012, 03:28 AM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I know a man who got hepatitis from using needles 30 years ago. They told him the treatment for hepatitis would cause liver cancer. He got the treatment anyway (even though there are natural alternatives). Sure enough, 2 years later he got liver cancer right on schedule, and died.

(12-05-2012, 11:05 AM)Pickle Wrote: The pill was for liver treatment. She had fatty deposits or something like that and rather than changing diet the doc told her she would need a liver transplant if she did not take the pill. She told me she would rather have the cancer than the transplant.

(11-27-2012, 10:57 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Interesting article! I found this in the comments:

Quote:Tim Shannon, ND 112 days ago

For those who are interested, this appears to be the citation for this article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22863786
The only SHOCK of this study is in the article. There are numerous studies that show that chemo induces more cancer, nothing new here. This is mostly a sensationalist article to get readers, nothing more. The multibillion dollar cancer industry won't bat an eye, never do when studies come out that show problems with chemo/radiation. In addition, this study cites one type of cancer - prostate. The article makes it appear as if the study talks about ALL chemotherapy and ALL cancers, it doesn't. It's exclusively about prostate cancer and some of the common chemotherapies related to prostate cancer.
Of course, this type of article will bring out the chemo lovers and the chemo haters. But it won't even make a ripple. Don't now what ever really will as long as there is SO much $ to be made by this industry.

So, I went and looked at the actual abstract of the study:

Quote:Nat Med. 2012 Sep;18(9):1359-68. Treatment-induced damage to the tumor microenvironment promotes prostate cancer therapy resistance through WNT16B. Sun Y, Campisi J, Higano C, Beer TM, Porter P, Coleman I, True L, Nelson PS.

Division of Human Biology, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Acquired resistance to anticancer treatments is a substantial barrier to reducing the morbidity and mortality that is attributable to malignant tumors. Components of tissue microenvironments are recognized to profoundly influence cellular phenotypes, including susceptibilities to toxic insults. Using a genome-wide analysis of transcriptional responses to genotoxic stress induced by cancer therapeutics, we identified a spectrum of secreted proteins derived from the tumor microenvironment that includes the Wnt family member wingless-type MMTV integration site family member 16B (WNT16B). We determined that WNT16B expression is regulated by nuclear factor of κ light polypeptide gene enhancer in B cells 1 (NF-κB) after DNA damage and subsequently signals in a paracrine manner to activate the canonical Wnt program in tumor cells. The expression of WNT16B in the prostate tumor microenvironment attenuated the effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy in vivo, promoting tumor cell survival and disease progression. These results delineate a mechanism by which genotoxic therapies given in a cyclical manner can enhance subsequent treatment resistance through cell nonautonomous effects that are contributed by the tumor microenvironment.

What they are talking about here is an already existing tumor gaining resistance to the chemo. Kind of like when a microbial colony gains resistance to an antibiotic.

I would mostly agree with the commenter. Especially in pointing out that all cancers are not the same. And neither are all forms of chemo the same.

The article is overblown. It borders on misinformation. I think this guy has been reading too much Mike Adams, The Health Ranger!

But that isn't to deny that there are many crackpots in the mainstream cancer field. And yes, even some frauds.

(12-14-2012, 02:14 PM)peelstreetguy Wrote: I had a friend who died of prostrate cancer 2 years ago. He still looked ok and was functioning normally until he started chemo. Then he rapidly degenerated and died. I wonder how much longer he would have lived if he had not taken the chemo "treatments".
I could write much more about the cancer industry, but it makes me too angry. so I'll leave it at that for now.

(12-14-2012, 06:40 PM)Pickle Wrote: Anger does not make sense when you understand that it was the choice of the individual to not educate themselves.

(12-14-2012, 02:14 PM)peelstreetguy Wrote: I had a friend who died of prostrate cancer 2 years ago. He still looked ok and was functioning normally until he started chemo. Then he rapidly degenerated and died. I wonder how much longer he would have lived if he had not taken the chemo "treatments".
I could write much more about the cancer industry, but it makes me too angry. so I'll leave it at that for now.