Angelina Jolie ~ wise call or insanity?

By Dr Janey

Tabloid newspapers and magazines have been in a frenzy over the Hollywood actress’ recent revelations of choosing to have a bilateral mastectomy to reduce her risk of breast cancer.  With her high profile in mind her actions are bound to have far-reaching consequences amongst her millions of followers around the world.  But just how wise was this choice of electing to have this radical surgery performed on an otherwise healthy body?

Angelina effectAngelina was advised by her doctors that because she had been identified as having the BRCA1 gene she stood an 87% risk of getting breast cancer.  If she were to elect to have a bilateral mastectomy she was advised this would drop to <5%.  Given these statistics it’s not surprising that she opted to go with surgery.

 

However digging a little deeper we find that this figure of 87% comes from the company that created the test designed for identifying the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and who stand to make millions from this latest spate of publicity.  What is concerning is that this same company who produced these statistics won’t allow their test results to be verified by other medical laboratories.

 

According to the ‘Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’ the truth is that only 3-5% of women with breast cancer actually have the mutated BRCA1 gene.  Those women who do have the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes should take further heart from the fact that they exercise a great deal of control over whether or not they will go on to develop breast cancer!

 

What is crucial to realise it that as the science of Epigenetics teaches us, our lifestyle and environment (and how we choose to perceive it) has an overwhelmingly greater influence on how our genes are expressed than hereditary factors do! 

 

Epigenetics 2

This is great news for us of course because we have control over these factors in the following ways:

A) We get to choose the type of food we put in our mouth and can opt to avoid those which are likely to be contaminated with hormones, antibiotics, preservatives, pesticides etc.

B)  We can educate ourselves on the products we use on our bodies, as well as those in our environment, avoiding those which contain harmful chemical ingredients which are toxic or potentially carcinogenic.
C)  We can choose to partake in regular exercise, particularly in nature where possible to benefit from the life-enhancing benefits of fresh air and nature

D) We can learn how to cleanse and detoxify our bodies which in the process will promote a healthy terrain which has no place for cancer.
E)    We can also learn improved ways on how we choose to perceive our world and the emotional patterns that follow from this – a seldom mentioned yet crucial factor in contributing to diseases of all types, including cancer.

 

All these above-mentioned factors have an influence on our cellular terrain and ultimately on the oxygenation of our tissues.  As Dr Otto Warburg (Nobel laureate), and numerous other esteemed doctors and scientists have confirmed, it is a deprivation of oxygen at the cellular level that ultimately cause genes to mutate and cancer cells to form.  Therefore when we learn how to address these environmental factors, we are also addressing the oxygenation of our tissues and therefore simultaneously reducing our risk of cancer!

 

In truth therefore, when we point to examples of women diagnosed with cancer from more than one generation of a family, and site that as evidence that breast cancer is hereditary, we are leaping to a false conclusion.  The risk of breast cancer being passed down through the generations is seldom due to true genetic inheritance but rather due to an ‘inheritance’ of similar dietary habits, lifestyle ways and emotional patterns.

 

Sadly, this false conclusion that breast cancer is primarily about inheritance of ‘bad genes’ is a serious one.  It leaves many women feeling as though they are helpless victims of their own genetics which in turn has its own dire consequences.  Feeling resigned to the fact that breast cancer is their likely destiny, many women will fail to take action on the multitude of environmental factors that play a significant role in preventing breast cancer.

 

A further consequence for many women living with the belief that they have a genetic predisposition to getting breast cancer is perhaps even more serious.  When we understand the power of the mind and how we create our own reality by the choice of our thoughts, we realise that women who become convinced of their likelihood of being diagnosed with breast cancer are inadvertently using their minds in the most detrimental of manners by setting the stage for ultimately creating the reality they fear the most!

 

And perhaps most sadly of all, we witness the error of elective mastectomies when these women who have undergone this mutilating surgery still succumb to cancer.  Why?  Quite simply because cancer is not about the tumour!  The tumour is merely a symptom and removing the symptom (tumour) or in this case the tissue which will likely inhabit the tumour is missing the point entirely!   The real disease is the health of the cellular terrain and the lack of oxygen and it is here that we should be placing our focus!

 

Andreas Moritz perhaps sums it up best on the subject of genes and cancer when he says,“Cancer has always been an extremely rare illness except in industrialized nations during the past 40-50 years.  Human genes have not significantly changed for thousands of years.  Why would they change so drastically now, and suddenly decide to kill scores of people?……. any good genetic researcher would tell you that such a belief is void of any logic and outright unscientific.”

 

 

How infinitely better is it to live knowing that you dictate the environmental factors that influence your risk of getting breast cancer (or any other cancer), as opposed to living with the fear that you could become the next victim of a genetic roll of the dice and perhaps opting for drastic surgical actions in line with that misplaced fear?

 

Resource on Epigenetics: ‘The Biology of Belief’ by Bruce Lipton Ph.D

Chronic dehydration ~ why it causes cancer

By Dr Janey

“You are not sick, you are thirsty!”

There are good reasons and sound scientific explanations for these simple, yet sobering words uttered by Dr Batmanghelidj (author of ‘Your Body’s Many Cries for Water)

Yet in spite of this great truth, most people today are chronically dehydrated and unaware of the considerable negative health implications that they are enabling, simply by not drinking enough water.

Our body is predominantly composed of water.  Our muscles: 75% water; blood 82%; lungs 90%; brain 76% and even our bones are composed of 25% water.  Quite simply water is fundamental in allowing all normal body functions to take place!

water

Our blood requires an ongoing high water intake simply to ensure good circulation, thereby enabling effective distribution of nutrients and oxygen to all our cells.  Added to this, good hydration is essential in ensuring ongoing cleansing of metabolic wastes and toxins from our cells and tissues via our lymphatic system.  These physiological processes, enabled by water acting as a crucial vehicle, are all essential in the prevention and healing from all disease types, including cancer.

When we allow ourselves to dehydrate, the ratio of intracellular water (inside the cells) drops relative to that extracellularly (outside of the cells).  This leads to impaired function of the cellular enzymes and as a result, all the functions of the cell so crucial to energy production and the sustenance of vibrant life become disrupted.  If the dehydration continues unaddressed, the normal survival mechanism initiated by the enzymes in the cells that alert the brain of dehydration, and thereby trigger a thirst response, will in time also become ineffective, thereby disabling this crucial warning system.  This would explain why so many ill (and chronically dehydrated) individuals seldom feel the urge to drink water.

Added to this, and as another consequence of the enzyme dysfunction, passage of water through the cell membrane into the cell is then also impaired leading to fluid building up in the extracellular spaces, which in turn leads to water retention. In time, this can become evident in the form of swollen ankles and legs, swollen neck, bags under the eyes etc.  While these conditions are frequently treated with diuretics (drugs to promote water loss), one can see that the reverse is actually necessary.  In fact improved water intake is the only long-term solution.

We are inclined in modern times to treat (usually by masking or suppressing) the many symptoms of ‘disease’, when in truth these symptoms are merely cries by our body for more water.  These symptoms of dehydration can be numerous and diverse as determined by the cell types in the body that are affected.  General symptoms of fatigue or low energy levels, headaches and migraines, brain fog, weight gain, depression, skin disorders and pain of various types to name but a few, are invariably warning signs by the body that we have allowed ourselves to become dehydrated.

When we ignore these signs or worse, when we suppress these symptoms with quick-fix pharmaceuticals while not addressing the dehydration at the root of it, we inadvertently create a cellular terrain in our body that in time could progress to diseases of greater consequence such as heart disease and hypertension, obesity, MS, Alzheimer’s and cancer (amongst many others).

So how much water do you need to drink?  Approx 1 litre per 22kg of body weight (this includes your daily freshly juiced vegetables/fruits and herbal teas) but does not include black tea, coffee or alcohol and particularly not fizzy drinks which will all have the effect of aggravating dehydration.  If the ambient temperature increases, or your level of exercise increases, then water intake should also increase in line with this.

For those who are unaccustomed to drinking much water, it is important to start increasing your daily quota of good quality filtered/rain water in small increments of not more than ½ litre every few days.  If you are chronically dehydrated, you may initially find that as you increase your water intake you experience symptoms of detoxification (nausea, diarrhoea, weakness etc) as the waste and toxins are finally able to be flushed out from your tissues.  Persisting with this gradual increase in water intake will inevitably relieve these symptoms and your reward will be a healthier and less toxic body!

 

In summary; if we are after permanent solutions in health we need to change our focus from suppressing symptoms such as those mentioned above, to addressing underlying root causes instead which invariably stem from chronic dehydration so easily remedied by reaching for a simple, refreshing glass of water!

 

Mammograms – what your doctor won’t tell you!

By Dr Janey

“If screening was a drug it would have been withdrawn.  You don´t market a drug that harms so many people for such uncertain benefit“.

 Prof Peter Gotzsche (Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen)

 

If you want to do everything possible to prevent (or heal from) breast cancer you may want to consider avoiding mammograms!

Yes, you read that right.

Radiation, in the form of mammograms, is used as the premier method in conventional medicine to screen for breast cancer.  This practice continues in spite of the fact that it has been conclusively proven that radiation causes cancer, and in spite of the fact that safe and more accurate methods exist for detection and screening.

caution mammogram radiation

Let’s begin by looking at some of the expert opinions and studies conducted on the subject (excerpts taken from ‘Cancer is not a Disease’ by Andreas Moritz)

  1. Dr Charles Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at the National Cancer Institute said, “Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasising an existing growth”
  1. Each x-ray you are exposed to increases your risk of abnormal cell growth. One standard mammography test results in approx 1 rad(radiation absorbed dose) exposure, which is about 1000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray
  2. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) reports that among women under 35, mammography could cause 75 cases of breast cancer for every 15 it identifies
  3. Dr Samuel Epstein of the Cancer Prevention Coalition claims, “Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer for pre-menopausal women”
  4. A Canadian study found a 52% increase in breast cancer mortality in young women who received annual mammograms.
  5. Since mammogram screening was introduced, the incidence of the form of breast cancer called ‘ductal carcinoma in situ’ (DCIS) has increased 328%
  6. Each year, thousands of women unnecessarily undergo mastectomies, chemotherapy and radiation after receiving false positives on a mammogrammammogram
  7. Research has identified a gene, called the oncogene AC which is extremely sensitive to even small doses of radiation. A significant percentage of women in the US (and elsewhere) have this gene. An estimated 10 000 AC carriers in the US will die of breast cancer each year due to receiving mammograms
  8. In July 1995, ‘The Lancet’ wrote about mammograms, saying “The benefit is marginal, the harm caused is substantial and the costs incurred are enormous……”

While the conducting of mammograms has been hailed as a crucial screening program for the early detection of breast cancer by various cancer establishments, and the trusting public have come to accept this almost unquestioningly, the truth has been shown to be somewhat different:  mammography is NOT a technique for early diagnosis of breast cancer. In fact cancer in the breast usually has to be present for 8 years before a mammogram can detect it!

Added to this, there is substantial room for error in the interpretation of mammograms leading to frequent incorrect results:

False positives: It is not uncommon for both pre-menopausal women, as well as post-menopausal women on oestrogen replacement therapy to receive a falsely positive result of breast cancer leading to these women having to experience unnecessary anxiety, biopsies and more mammograms, not to mention unnecessary surgery, chemotherapy and radiation at times with the often considerable side-effects/trauma that these entail.

False negative results: It is common for cancers to be missed in pre-menopausal women due to the dense and highly glandular nature of the breasts at this stage of life. It is also easily missed in post-menopausal women on oestrogen replacement therapy because of the breast densities that can develop making radiological interpretation difficult.  In addition, and very crucially, mammograms are not good at detecting the most lethal forms of breast cancer (eg triple negative), leading to a failure to diagnose an existent cancerous tumour.

Over-diagnosis and over-treatment: in addition to false positive and negative results, over-diagnosis and over-treatment is a major hazard of mammography. As a direct result of mammogram screening there has been a significant increase in the diagnosis of DCIS (see above). What is important to note here is that while cancer is staged from 1-4, DCIS is Stage 0. It is a pre-invasive form of breast cancer and is not cancer!  In fact the DCIS survival rate after 10 years is almost 100%!

 

Treatment for DCIS however generally involves lumpectomy and radiation or even mastectomy and chemotherapy with the dire side-effects that go with them. The over-diagnosis and resultant over-treatment that results from mammography is considered by many as a monumental disservice to women!

 

In view of this, Laura Esserman (director of the breast cancer centre at the University of California) is campaigning to rename DCIS so that it is no longer called, nor treated as a cancer.

 

Important note: There has been no decrease in the incidence of metastatic cancer – the major cause of death from breast cancer – since the introduction of screening!

In view of the whole point of mammograms being to ‘save lives’, the question to be asked then is why, in view of the above facts, does the practice of regular use of mammograms persist?  The answer in short is that mammography is big business!

 

So if having regular mammograms is fraught with increasing our risks of breast cancer, is there a viable alternative?

Absolutely!  In fact the existence of a side-effect free, relatively inexpensive alternative that is more accurate than mammography makes the persistent use of mammograms all the more inconceivable.  The safer alternative is called Digital Infrared Thermal Imaging (DITI) or thermography.  It works by measuring the infrared heat radiating from the body and translates this into anatomical images. The breasts (and the entire body) can be scanned using this method, and abnormal growths will stand out clearly as a ‘hot spot’.

For more information on DITI, see article entitled ‘Thermography ~ the safer alternative!

While the industries who have much to gain from the huge profits generated by mammography, are quick to deny the above facts, the individual who chooses to inform themselves of the options available can exercise their right in making their own safer choices!

 

In summary therefore, the screening for breast cancer using mammograms is a profit-driven technology that offers poor reliability of results while posing considerable risks to the women who have them, while safe and viable alternatives exist!

 

Final Note: Your conventional doctor or nurse will most likely be insisting that mammograms are the best way forward and they are naturally entitled to offer their opinion and approach.  However, you may be left feeling confused by the hugely contrasting opinions available as to the right way forward.

To assist you in this decision-making process, you can enjoy our live recording in which we share further facts and insights on this important subject shared from our own natural and non-toxic approach to cancer.  Then, once you have considered both view points, you will be in a considerably more informed position to make the choice that resonates best with you!

To access this important information via our live recording for just R197, simply go to our website and find it in the category: Natural Cancer Programs, and entitled ‘Mammograms – dispelling the myths!