Understanding the Prostate Cancer Stages

By Tim Gorman 

There are 5 relevant prostate cancer stages that one must be aware of to understand the full scope of the disease. Prostate cancer is one of the deadliest cancers affecting men today. More men die from Prostate Cancer then any other form of cancer. Yet, Prostate cancer is one the few cancers that, if it is caught early enough, can be corrected or controlled.
The first of the 5 prostate cancer stages is usually only found through a blood test or biopsy in the affect region of the body. It is usually found through a prostate-specific antigen level in the blood test. This stage is called T-1, professionally. It consists of a microscopic tumor that is only in the prostate itself. It is undetectable by rectal exams and ultrasounds and usually presents no symptoms. T-1 cancers are usually local cancers.
The second stage of prostate cancer is called T2, professionally. This stage is one where the tumor can be felt through a digital rectal exam. It can also be viewed through ultrasound. The tumor is still confined to the prostate area. T2 cancers are usually local cancers.
The third stage of prostate cancer is a spreading tumor. This stage is professionally known as stage T3. The cancer at this stage will now start to move to the seminal vesicles and close-by tissues. It has not spread yet to the lymph nodes in the body. T3 cancers usually are regional cancers that affect areas just beyond the prostate.
The fourth stage of prostate cancer is afflicting the organs and tissues that reside nearest the prostate. This stage is professionally known as T4. T4 cancers are usually cancers that are regionally located. They reach just beyond the prostate area of the body.
The fifth stage of prostate cancer is afflicting the whole of the body. It can affect any organ, bone or lymph node. This stage is professionally known as N+ or M+. The N+ portion means that it is affecting the pelvic lymph nodes. The M+ portion of this stage means that the cancer is affecting the other lymph nodes, organs and bones that are distant from the prostate area of the body. All the parts that are mentioned for Stage M+ do not have to be afflicted with cancer in order to be classified as M+. At this stage, the cancer is considered to be a metastatic cancer, meaning that the cancer is reaching lymph nodes or other parts of the body.
Prostate cancer stages are hard to diagnose without the help of your doctor. Early detection can save your life or the life of someone you know. The National Cancer Center for Health Statistics stated that of prostate cancer sufferers on record, 99.9% had survived 5 years. Though there were people who had lived considerably longer than that, the study didn't indicate any further life expectancies beyond this one.

For more detailed information on prostate cancer stages try visiting http://www.onlineprostatehealthguide.com, a popular website that offers prostate cancer related tips, advice and resources to include information on prostate cancer surgery.

Breast Cancer Stages - Importance of Knowing Breast Cancer Stages

By Michael Lee 

Determining the breast cancer stages is important since it enables the patient and doctor to identify the treatment necessary for one's condition. Also, it is essential in assessing the risk of the given condition and what lifestyle changes the patient can do to improve their health.
Identifying A Breast Cancer's Stage
When talking about stages, it is aimed at describing the extent of the cancer in the body. Doctors often start to classify whether it is invasive or non-invasive. Other factors considered are the tumor size, number of nymph modes involved, and what other parts of the body it has managed to affect.
Determining a cancer's stage is helpful during prognosis and deciding on a treatment option.
To determine the stage, a few standard procedures are done by the doctor on a patient. They undergo physical exam and biopsy to acquire the data needed by the doctor for the diagnosis.
If needed, further tests are also conducted such as imaging tests that include x-ray, bone scans, mammograms for the breasts, CT scans, positron emission tomography (PET), and magentic resonance imaging.
Now that the importance of determining the different breast cancer stages have been clarified, as well as the methods used to identify them, it is now time to move on to discussing each of them. Take note of the features and extent of the disease in each of the stages:
Breast Cancer Stage 0
This stage renders the case of breast cancer to be non-invasive. At this point, cancer or non-cancerous cells cannot be detected yet.
The abnormal cells are still at the stage wherein they try to spread out within the specific part of the breast where the cells are rooted. Also, they can try to expand on the neighboring tissues as the cancerous cells continue to grow.
Breast Cancer Stage I
Once it enters this stage, it is now categorized as an invasive type. Meaning, the cancer cells have now worked their way towards the neighboring tissues. Stage I breast cancer also exhibit the following characteristics:
o The cancerous tumor has reached the size of 2 centimeters.
o No lymph modes are affected.
Breast Cancer Stage II
For this particular stage, it is also known as an invasive type of cancer and is broken down into two more categories:
1) Stage IIA
Even in this particular stage, the conditions can be different:
o A tumor does not exist in the breast but cancerous cells are detected in the lymph nodes.
o A tumor could exist but measures less than 2 centimeters;
o The tumor has expanded beyond 2 centimeters but less than 5 centimeters without reaching the lymph nodes.
2) Stage IIB
This invasive level of the cancer are recognized as either one of the following:
o The tumor exceeds 2 centimeters in size but less than 5 centimeters, while also reaching the lymph nodes.
o The tumor is more than 5 centimeters in size but has not yet reached the axillary lymph nodes.
Breast Cancer Stage III
1) Stage IIIA
In this stage, the tumor could either be detected or not. Aside from the axillary lymph nodes, cancer can also stick to other structures outside of the lymph nodes and become clumped together.
2) Stage IIIB
In this stage, the tumor can grow in size and affect other areas of the body outside of the actual breast, whether th chest wall or skin of the breast. This is the stage wherein inflammatory breast cancer takes place.
3) Stage IIIC
In some cases, sign of breast cancer might not be detectable yet. However, the tumor could already be spreading towards the breast skin, chest wall, and below your collarbone.
Breast Cancer Stage IV
In this level, the cancerous cells have managed to spread to various organs of the body. Therefore, the cancer is no longer restricted on the breast and lymph nodes, which signifies the initial diagnosis of breast cancer. The reason why diagnosis is done only during this stage is because cancerous cells were not detected while still within the breast.
Recognizing breast cancer stages does more than just identifying treatment options, but also enables doctors and patients to understand the developmental pattern of the disease.

If you want to uncover the truth about a new cancer cure claiming to be scientifically proven to cure cancer and ALL types of diseases (including AIDS, heart diseases, diabetes and many others), go to http://www.squidoo.com/newcancercure

Lung Cancer - Symptoms & Treatments

By Mohd Izahan Idris 

Cancer is a class of diseases characterized by out of control cell growth. Lung cancer occurs when this uncontrolled cell growth begins in one or both lungs. The lungs are two large spongy organs located inside the chest cavity. Air is breathed into the trachea and moves down two tubes called bronchi, each going to a lung. Lung cancer occurs most often in adults between the ages of 40 and 70 who have smoked cigarettes for at least 20 years.
Over 1,400 Victorians are diagnosed with every year. Only about 2% of those diagnosed with lung cancer that has spread to other areas of the body are alive five years after the diagnosis, although the survival rates are diagnosed at a very early stage are higher with approximately 49% surviving for five years or longer.
There are different types of lung cancer, depending on which cells are affected. The two main types are:
1. Small cell carcinom
Around 15 per cent are small cell carcinomas. This type of cancer spreads early and shows few early symptoms.
2. Non-small cell carcinoma
These cancers affect the cells that line the main bronchi.
Some lung tumors are metastatic from cancers elsewhere in the body. The lungs are a common site for metastasis. Since lung cancer tends to spread or metastasize very early in its course, it is a very life-threatening cancer and one of the most difficult cancers to treat. While lung cancer can spread to any organ in the body.
Symptoms are varied depending upon where and how widespread the tumor is. Warning signs of lung cancer are not always present or easy to identify. Lung cancer symptoms may take years before appearing, usually after the disease is in an advanced stage.
Below is the following symptoms of lung cancer include:
1. Pain in the chest shoulder or back from coughing
2. A cough that does not go away or gets worse over time
3. Breathlessness and swallowing
4. Recurring pneumonia or chest infections
5. Wheezing or hoarseness may signal blockage
6. Unexplained weight loss
Lung cancer is categorized into stages according to its spread. This helps the doctors to decide on appropriate treatments. The treatments also depend on the type of cancer, age, health status and additional personal characteristics. As there is usually no single treatment for cancer, patients often receive a combination of therapies and palliative care. More than one type of therapy may be prescribed.
Although the diagnostic techniques provided important information, extracting cancer cells and looking at them under a microscope is the only absolute way to diagnose lung cancer. This procedure is called a biopsy. If the biopsy confirms lung cancer, a pathologist will determine whether it is non-small cell or small cell.
Small cell lung cancer has two stages which is:
1. In the limited stage, the tumor exists in one lung and in nearby lymph nodes.
2. In the extensive stage, the tumor has infected the other lung as well as other organs in the body.
For non-small cell lung cancer, these stages are labeled from I to IV. The lower numbers indicate earlier stages where the cancer has spread less:
1. Stage I is when the tumor is found only in one lung and in no lymph nodes.
2. Stage II is when the cancer has spread to the lymph nodes surrounding the infected lung.
3. Stage III is when the cancer has spread to lymph nodes around the trachea, chest wall and diaphragm on the same side as the infected lung.
4. Stage IV is when the cancer has spread to lymph nodes on the other lung or in the neck.
5. Stage IV is when the cancer has spread throughout the rest of the body and other parts of the lungs.
As with most cancers, the results are best if the cancer is diagnosed in its earliest stages. However, some lung cancers aren't diagnosed until they are quite advanced. Treatment may then be limited to easing the symptoms. Treatment decisions depend on whether SCLC or NSCLC. Treatment options include:
1. Chemotherapy is an anti cancer drugs are given to stop cancer cells from multiplying. This treatment is most effective for small cell carcinoma.
2. Surgery to remove the affected part of the lung or an entire lung. This offers the best chance of cure if the cancer has not spread beyond the lungs.
3. Radiotherapy use of x-rays to target and kill cancer cells. It may be used against some early stage lung cancers and to stop cancer in the lymph nodes from spreading further.
4. Targeted therapy is use of small molecules, often in tablet form that may be used after chemotherapy.
5. Clinical trials is a participation in a clinical trial that investigates the safety and effectiveness of novel drugs may be offered.
Cancers that are closely linked to certain behaviors are the easiest to prevent. If you are a current tobacco user, quitting can still greatly reduce your chances of getting cancer. The most important preventive measure you can take is to quit smoking. Many products such as nicotine gum, nicotine sprays, nicotine inhalers have been successfully used to help people trying to quit smoking.
There are common causes of lung cancer:
1. A person who smokes more than one pack of cigarettes per day has a risk 20-25 times greater than someone who has never smoked.
2. Cigar and pipe smoking increases the risk of lung cancer but not as much as smoking cigarettes.
3. Asbestos fibers are silicate fibers that can persist for a lifetime in lung tissue following exposure to asbestos. The workplace is a common source of exposure to asbestos fibers.
4. Radon gas is a natural chemically inert gas that is a natural decay product of uranium. With an estimated 12% deaths attributable to radon gas.
5. Air pollution from vehicles, industry, and power plants can raise the likelihood of developing lung cancer in exposed individuals
Screening techniques are designed to find cancer at the earliest stage so that the most treatment options are available. This cancer are detected in the late stages of the disease after they have spread and are harder to treat. Possible lung cancer screening tests include analysis of sputum cells, fiberoptic examination of bronchial passages and low-dose spiral CT scans.
Cancer and cancer treatments can make a person feel too tired to exercise. However, studies show that, physical activity can boost the energy levels of a person who has cancer.
Regular exercise improves functioning of the immune system and may increase survival rates in some cases. Aim for five to 20 minutes of moderate intensity exercise on most days of the week. But do not exercise without your doctor's knowledge and support because inappropriate exercise may be harmful.
Get more information about cancer here, Treatments For Cancer

Get more info about cancer from this blog, Treatments For Cancer

Lung Cancer - Are Women More Preoccupied About Breast Cancer?

By Ben O'Rourke 

Lung cancer is among the most common cancers in the Western world. Lung cancer occurs due to the growth of malignant or abnormal cells in the lung. It is the third most common cancer in males and the fifth in females. Yet lung cancer is increasingly becoming a woman's problem. The risk for dying of lung cancer is 20 times higher among women who smoke two or more packs of cigarettes per day than among women who do not smoke at all. Lung cancer is a cancer that originates in the tissues of the lungs. It can be very difficult to detect at an early stage because the symptoms often do not appear until the disease is far advanced.
Health experts say more needs to be done to educate women about the risk of lung cancer. Bearing in mind that breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women, studies show that since 1987, more women have died each year of lung cancer than from breast cancer. Researchers have found that women who had one or more children had nearly a 40 percent lower risk of contracting lung cancer compared to women without children. Recently, research has suggested that women who don't smoke are two to three times more likely than non-smoking men to develop lung cancer. In women, the three types of cancer most commonly seen are breast cancer, lung cancer, and colon cancer. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in women (behind lung cancer), and the most common cancer in women.
Lung cancer kills more people than breast or prostate cancer, primarily because by the time it is detected, lung cancer is usually in an advanced stage. Also when cancer spreads to the lung from the breast, the resulting cells are breast cancer cells, not lung cancer cells. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in American women behind lung cancer, yet surveys have shown that women are more worried about getting breast cancer than lung cancer. Breast cancer has surpassed lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer death in women worldwide, accounting for more than 400000 deaths per year.
Today there are many treatment options available to lung cancer patients. The type of treatment for lung cancer depends on the cancer's specific type, how far it has actually spread, and the patient's status. It is important to know the stage in order to plan treatment. Treatment for a secondary lung cancer depends on the primary cancer. However, new anti-cancer drugs, improved staging and imaging techniques, combined with new surgical procedures have all contributed to dealing with the disease. Finding early-stage lung cancers is crucial in the treatment results for lung cancer. While having treatment for any stage of lung cancer, you will be able to manage some side effects that may accompany lung cancer or any cancer treatment.
Summary:
Lung cancer is the uncontrolled growth of abnormal cells in the lung. We already know that the best way to prevent lung cancer is to quit or never start to smoke in the first place. Small cell lung cancer is a bit more common in men than women. But lung cancer is increasingly becoming a woman's problem. The links between your smoking history and lung cancer is clear. Lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world. It is the most deadly of cancers worldwide, resulting in up to 3 million deaths annually.

For More Information On Lung Cancer: http://healthinfodocs.com/category/lung-cancer/

Seven Secrets About Breast Cancer

By N

ikki Mattei 

Secret #1 The Money Spent On Research Into Breast Cancer Is Not Ensuring That Less Women Get Breast Cancer.
Secret #2 You Do Need To Act Against Getting Breast Cancer Before You Reach 50 And You Cannot Rely On Mammograms.
Secret #3 You Are At Risk Of Getting Breast Cancer Even If You Don't Have It In Your Family.
Secret #4 Most Of The Money Spent On Research Is Not Going Into Prevention To Ensure That Less Women Suffer The Devastating Effects Of Breast Cancer In The Future.
Secret #5 Most Women Are Not Breast Aware And Are Afraid Of Breast Cancer.
Secret #6 Women Are Not Given Lots Of Advice On How They Can Protect Their Breasts Against Breast Cancer.
Secret #7 Most Women Do Not Appreciate How Important Their Breasts Are And Do Not Do Everything They Can To Look After And Protect Them.
The above "secrets" are things which are not commonly known by most women and may be surprising to you. In this article, I intend to shed light on these facts and allow women to make up their own minds how they approach their breast health.
SECRET #1 THE MONEY SPENT ON RESEARCH INTO BREAST CANCER IS NOT ENSURING THAT LESS WOMEN GET BREAST CANCER.
The Pink Ribbon and Breast Cancer Awarenss Month was introduced in the US in 1985 and introduced to the UK in 1993. The Pink Ribbon Foundation is fronted by the Estee Lauder group of companies (known for cosmetics and skincare).
Since then the pink ribbon symbol has become synonymous with breast cancer and during the past 15 years billions of pounds have been raised in its name. Every October the world celebrates Breast Cancer Awareness Month and fund raising during that month is phenomenal. All the breast cancer charities vie with each other to see who can come up with the most innovative "pink" fundraising. They run pink parties and sell pink products in order to raise money. Many companies take part and do special promotions during October for their preferred charity. "Pink" is big business.
So with all this money being raised during October and also at other times during the year through events like charity runs and walks, is there an impact on the breast cancer rates in the UK and around the world? Are they coming down? Are fewer women suffering from the devastating effects of breast cancer?
Unfortunately, the answer is 'no'.
In the UK, from 1993-2004, breast cancer incidence has increased 18.5%, that is 1% per year. 1 in 9 women will get the disease during their lifetime with current projections of 1 in 7 by 2010. 45,500 women were diagnosed in 2005, which equates to 125 women every day. Worldwide more than a million women are diagnosed with breast cancer every year. It is also projected that breast cancer rates will rise most in developing countries, where women do not have access to top quality care and where they can also be treated as outcasts in certain societies.
Breast cancer survival rates have improved. Every year more than 12,300 women and 70 men die from breast cancer. Since the peak in the late 1980s breast cancer death rates have fallen by a third. Breast cancer drugs have helped to save women's lives but, as with any drugs, can have long-term side affects. Also the cost of these drugs puts great strain on the NHS. If breast cancer rates continue to increase as they have been doing, then, according to Professor Karol Sikora as reported in the Daily Mail on 09/09/08, "the next generation of drugs would keep patients alive longer, but could swallow half of the current NHS cancer budget within four years. (this refers to all cancer drugs at a cost of £50 billion).
With the billions being raised by people around the world in the name of breast cancer, is it right that actually more women are getting this devastating disease every year?
SECRET #2 YOU DO NEED TO ACT AGAINST GETTING BREAST CANCER BEFORE YOU REACH 50 AND YOU CANNOT RELY ON MAMMOGRAMS.
Women in the UK are offered breast screening by mammogram every three years from the age of 50. This is because breast cancer is still more common in women over 50 but also because the breast tissue of younger women is denser and, therefore, makes it more difficult for a mammogram to pick up on a potential breast lump.
However, this could be giving the message to younger women that they don't need to check their breasts themselves. Based on my experience during my breast health talks, very few younger women check their breasts. The main reasons for this are that no-one has shown them how to, they don't know what to do, they think that they only need to worry if breast cancer is in the family (see Secret #3) or they are afraid that they might find something.
For a younger woman it is even more important to check her breasts from her mid-twenties as breast cancer in younger women is usually much more aggressive as the breast cancer cells can multiply more rapidly than in older women. If girls were taught by their mothers to check their breasts from their mid-twenties, they would not be afraid - it would just be part of their general regime of looking after themselves. Also they would feel confident about what to do. Breast self-examination is easy to do once you have been shown how and there are even devices on the market which can help you do so with confidence and greater accuracy.
Breast cancer is the biggest killer of women aged 35-54, which means it makes sense for women in this age bracket to do everything they can to protect their breasts.
Furthermore, I do not believe that we should rely on mammograms either. Women are only screened every three years and, usually, a mammogram can only detect a breast tumour once it has been growing for 8 years. By the time the tumour reaches 10 years, it could be too late. The other thing to remember is that a mammogram can only screen the part of the breast which can be put into the "clamp". It cannot screen under the armpit or between the breasts for example.
Lastly, there is growing concern over the safety of mammograms. The following are extracts from an article written by Peter Leando PhD.
"Controversy has raged for years as to whether the risks related to the radiation exposure suffered from mammography are justified by the benefits gained ...... new evidence relating to the particular type of radiation used and the hard evidence relating to the clinical benefits of mammography have caused a serious re-evaluation of the justification of mammography as a screening test.
Radiation from routine mammography cannot be directly compared to other types of X-ray like chest X-ray etc because they are very different types of radiation.
The comparisons that have been used between a chest x-ray and mammography, 1/1,000 of a rad (radiation-absorbed dose) for a chest X-ray and the 1 rad exposure for the routine four films taken of both breasts for a mammographic screening exam results in some 1,000 times greater exposure. (This refers to the US, where they do four-way screening. In the UK typically only two-way screening is offered.)
This is considered a significant risk factor when extended over a ten year screening period and a potential accumulative dose of 10 rads. Unfortunately this is not the major risk posed by the particular type of radiation used by mammograms, mammography X-rays use a low energy form of ionising radiation that causes greater biologic damage than the high energy X-ray. The very low energy electrons affect the density of ionisation tracks that pass through the tissue, which can cause complex damage to the DNA and carcinogenic changes.
The radiation used by mammography is almost 5 times more effective at causing cancer." So, women do need to start checking their breasts from their early twenties and we cannot rely on mammograms 100%, particularly for younger women who would have a greater exposure to radiation during their lifetime if they were offered mammograms from a younger age. Also mammograms do not detect Inflammatory Breast Cancer (IBC) which is a much rarer form of the disease and does not involve a lump. This would only detected by a woman looking for changes to her breasts and reporting them to her doctor.
SECRET #3 YOU ARE AT RISK OF GETTING BREAST CANCER EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN YOUR FAMILY.
Amongst the hundreds of women I have talked to about breast health, the vast majority were under the false impression that breast cancer is primarily hereditary. They were surprised to hear that fewer than 10% of cases occur to women who have breast cancer in the family.
In fact, every woman is at risk and should take control of her own breast health to give herself the best possible chance of prevention or early detection.
The other most common acknowledged risk factors are:

• Age - breast cancer is more common in women over 50
• Early puberty - it is worrying that puberty is starting younger, with most girls starting their periods at primary school
• Late pregnancy - many woman are opting to have children later
• Late onset menopause
• Not having children and not breastfeeding - this was known as early as the 18^th century when a doctor in Italy noticed that nuns had higher levels of breast cancer than the general population
• Being overweight - this applies mainly to post-menopausal women
• Alcohol - over-consumption increases the risk of breast cancer

Acknowledged risk factors account for around 50% of breast cancer cases. For the remainder, there are no definite reasons.
There are a growing number of scientists, commercial companies and individuals who believe that this remaining 50% is due to the rise of the number of chemicals which have been introduced over the past 50 years. They are used in our food, in our toiletries, in the workplace, in our clothes, in our furnishings - in fact, in every aspect of our lives. Many of these chemicals are endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDC's), also known as hormone disruptors or oestrogen mimickers. In simple terms, they act like oestrogen in our bodies and could be responsible for changing our delicate hormone balance which controls events like pregnancy, puberty, menopause.
An interesting example of the levels of oestrogen of British women was examined in a collaborative study undertaken in the late 80's between Oxford University, the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine Beijing, Guys, and the Dept. of Preventive Medicine, L.A., California. They compared blood-serum concentrations of hormones linked to breast cancer between women in rural China and in Britain. The results showed that British women who are exposed to toxic chemicals in their everyday lives had increasingly higher levels of oestradiol (oestrogen) than women living a rural lifestyle in China (see table below).
On this theme, the Guardian online reported on 22/05/07 that 'Beijing blames pollutants for rise in killer cancers'.
Oestradiol levels higher in British women by: Age 35 - 44 36% Age 45 - 54 90% Age 55 - 64 171%
SECRET #4 MOST OF THE MONEY SPENT ON RESEARCH IS NOT GOING INTO PREVENTION TO ENSURE THAT FEWER WOMEN SUFFER THE DEVASTATING EFFECTS OF BREAST CANCER IN THE FUTURE.
As we know, billions of pounds are raised every year worldwide in the name of breast cancer and most of this money is received by the mainstream breast cancer charities. In my opinion, the areas which should be targeted by these funds are prevention, treatment and care. You would probably expect these areas, at least, to be treated with equal importance and the funds available allocated accordingly.
Let's first take a look at the mainstream breast cancer charities in this country, namely Cancer Research UK (who obviously deal with all cancers), Breakthrough Breast Cancer, Breast Cancer Campaign and Breast Cancer Care.
Cancer Research UK has done a huge amount of research into breast cancer and their website has a wealth of useful information with a lot of detail on breast cancer. Their slogan is 'Together We Will Beat Cancer'. The charity offers funding schemes to scientists. Their research strategy is directed at reducing mortality from cancer and more women are surviving breast cancer than ever before. Cancer Research UK is looking trying to prevent breast cancer in women known to be at high risk of developing it (approx 10% of sufferers). Doctors have looked into using tamoxifen and other hormone blocking drugs such as anastrozole (Arimidex) to lower the risk of breast cancer in women with a strong family history. This work has to be done very carefully. These women are healthy and the treatment aimed at preventing breast cancer must not risk their health in other ways.
Breakthrough Breast Cancer supports a programme of cutting-edge biological research to reach their vision of 'a future free from the fear of breast cancer'. Breakthrough set up the UK's first dedicated breast cancer research centre in 1999, the Breakthrough Toby Robins Breast Cancer Research Centre. Breakthrough is funding The Generations Study whosepurpose is primarily to investigate environmental, behavioural, hormonal and genetic causes of breast cancer, and secondarily to investigate the causes of other cancers and diseases, by means of a UK cohort study to be established of more than 100,000 women in the UK aged 18 years and older at entry.
However, when you look at environmental factors as a possible risk factor, it seems to be dismissed because it is too difficult to research due to the huge amount of chemicals to which we are exposed in our everyday lives. You can read more at their website under "risk factors".
As I have mentioned, I am one of the many people who believe that certain chemicals which act like oestrogen in our bodies are a contributing factor in rising breast cancer rates. I am disappointed to see that Breakthrough are not even including this as a possible risk factor, particularly as we know that excessive oestrogen has been linked to breast cancer cell growth.
Breast Cancer Campaign cites its mission is to beat breast cancerby funding innovative world-class research to understand how breast cancer develops, leading to improved diagnosis, treatment, prevention and cure. The charity is supporting 97 projects worth over £12.8 million in 41 locations throughout the UK. Over the past 13 years, Campaign has awarded 232 grants with a total value of over £23 million to universities, medical schools / teaching hospitals and research institutes across the UK. Campaign's breast cancer research gap analysis document has been published by the open access journal Breast Cancer Research. The document entitled 'Evaluation of the current knowledge limitations in breast cancer research: a gap analysis' is the product of two and a half year project. It involved around 60 of the key breast cancer scientists in the UK.
Through their website, they sell products of various types and the companies who own those brands donate part of their profits to the Campaign. They include things like lip gloss, perfume, toiletries, clothing and stationery. Some of us would say that many of the products include harmful ingredients and are not actually contributing to the breast health of the ladies buying them! I was also disappointed that, although they mention prevention in their mission statement, I have one of their leaflets that shows prevention only receives 1% of their budget.
Breast Cancer Care, as its name suggests, is primarily concerned with the care and treatment of ladies going through breast cancer. It provides invaluable information and support.
I applaud all of these organisations who are dedicated to their work to help us understand and treat breast cancer.
However, I still believe that the risk factor of certain chemicals affecting our delicate hormone balance should be taken seriously and that all the available research should be studied. It is important to note that only 50% of breast cancer cases can be put down to one of the acknowledged risk factors. What is this remaining 50%? What has changed in our world over the past 50 years? It is also interesting that other countries are recognising the dangers of these chemicals and banning substances. I also believe in adopting the 'precautionary principle', which means that if there is a doubt over the safety to public health, then we should not wait until it is too late but take action as soon as possible. It has also been proved that there are alternatives to these potentially harmful chemicals when we see the growing number of companies who are selling safer food, cosmetics and toiletries.
This is why I am an active supporter of Breast Cancer UK, the only charity whose main focus is primary prevention. We are determined that breast cancer should be a 'preventable' disease not an 'inevitable' one. There is lots of research available on the link between endocrine disrupting chemicals and breast cancer. It is time that this was taken into account when looking at breast cancer risk factors.
SECRET #5 MOST WOMEN ARE NOT BREAST AWARE AND ARE AFRAID OF BREAST CANCER.
Despite the huge focus on being breast aware, particularly during Breast Cancer Awareness month in October, the majority of women are not breast aware. In fact, most women pay little attention to their breasts and do very little to look after them, except maybe during breastfeeding. Our breasts represent our femininity - they make us feel sexy and they nourish our children. Yet most women don't even know what their breasts feel like, let-alone check them for anything unusual.
It is so important that women take control of their own breast health by undertaking monthly self-examination to check for any changes. If they find a lump and go to their doctor straight away, the chances are the lump will be benign (80% are) or, if it is cancerous, they are giving themselves the best possible chance of recovery. At Stage One, women have around a 95% chance of surviving beyond 5 years. At Stage One the lump is less than 2cm and has not spread to the lymph nodes or anywhere else in the body. At Stage Four this survival rate drops to 1 in 10. The average size of lump discovered accidentally by women who don't check their breasts regularly is approximately 3.6 cm.
I have spoken with hundreds of women through my breast education work and most women do not check their breasts because they don't know what to do, they don't realize that all women are at risk, they don't know about the four stages of breast cancer and the corresponding survival rates, they don't really think about the need to do anything to look after their breasts or they are afraid that they might find something.
According to research by Breast Cancer Campaign, breast cancer is the most feared disease amongst women. Fear is usually due to a lack of knowledge. This is certainly the case here. If women understood everything detailed here, they would want to give themselves the best chance of survival should they get the disease. The current approach to women's breast health obviously isn't getting through, which is why I believe it is time to get women to take control themselves and empower other women to do the same.
SECRET #6 WOMEN ARE NOT GIVEN LOTS OF ADVICE ON HOW THEY CAN PROTECT THEIR BREASTS AGAINST BREAST CANCER.
In the past, GP surgeries used to run Well Woman clinics where any woman could go and see a doctor or nurse and be given advice about looking after herself with practical information like being shown how to check her breasts. Very few surgeries offer these clinics now. This is one of the reasons that I started my Breast Health Presentations. I talk to women in the workplace or in other gatherings and empower them with information, which helps to remove some of their fear. I also show them how to check their breasts and talk to them about their bra-wearing habits, how to avoid harmful chemicals in their everyday lives and how to benefit from detoxifying breast massage.
As we know, breast cancer is the most feared disease amongst women and understanding how it develops, the risk factors and, most importantly, how to protect against it, will make women feel more in control and positive towards their breast health.
During October and other events during the year, the focus is on breast cancer rather than breast health. I am one of those people who believe that the more you focus on something negative, the more you will get of it. This is why it is time to change that focus.
I believe that it is definitely time for women to take their breast health into their own hands, which is why I have launched my new campaign "Healthy Breasts For Every Woman". You can read more at www.healthybreastscampaign.co.uk.
SECRET #7 MOST WOMEN DO NOT APPRECIATE HOW IMPORTANT THEIR BREASTS ARE AND DO NOT DO EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO LOOK AFTER AND PROTECT THEM.
As I mentioned before, most women give very little thought to their breasts. They get up in the morning and they may give them a wash in the shower. They then shove them into a cage we call a bra (and most women wear a bra that doesn't fit them properly) and forget about them for the rest of the day. It is amazing that we live in a society which is obsessed with breasts and women do very little to protect this most precious part of their body. It is also amazing that women spend a fortune on looking after every other part of their body with creams and lotions and forget about their breasts! I know that once women understand more about breast health and don't feel so helpless in the face of breast cancer that they do want to be proactive and take control of their breast health.

Nikki Mattei
http://www.bestthinkpink.com

Do Bacteria Cause Cancer?

By Frank Vanderlugt 

Microbes are all around us, on our skins, in our nasal passages and in our intestines, and even in our blood and tissues.
Usually they exist in harmless balance with the immune system. Some are even beneficent : bacteria in the human intestine help digest food, produce vitamins, and crowd out toxic pathogens. In fact, the human body contains more bacterial cells than somatic (body) cells.
Mitochondria, organelles which produce energy within human cells, have their own DNA and are thought to be descended from free-living bacteria. Bacteria are highly integrated into functions of the entire human body.
The mainstream medical community is now willing to accept that a few type of bacteria or viruses may indeed be responsible for a few forms of cancer, such as Kaposi's sarcoma, stomach and cervical cancer, but they are unwilling to recognize that infectious agents may be inextricably linked to the development of most other tumors as well.
Yet, there scientific evidence dating back more than one hundred years which points to an bacterial cause cancer, a pleomorphic (many-formed) bacteria, related to or resembling mycoplasma, which has been seen in microscopic slides of numerous tumors.
At the beginning of the 20th century, bacterial genesis of cancer was considered a mainstream theory, and papers about it were published in the Lancet. However, it was eventually sidelined despite a large body of substantiating evidence.
Over the past century hundreds of independent researchers have noted a link between bacteria and cancer in both animals and humans, but their findings were treated as a scientific curiosity and rarely followed up by the general medical establishment.
However, the theory never went away, and individual scientists continued searching for ways to identify and eliminate the suspect bacteria.
In 1890 the German physician and bacteriologist Robert Koch formulated a standard criteria still in use today for judging whether a given bacteria is the cause of a given disease.
"Koch's Postulates," while not always valid, provide a useful benchmark for disease investigators.
Koch's postulates are as follows:
The bacteria must be present in every case of the disease.
The bacteria must be isolated from the host with the disease and grown in pure culture.
The specific disease must be reproduced when a pure culture of the bacteria is inoculated into a healthy susceptible host.
The bacteria must be recoverable from the experimentally infected host.
However, Koch's postulates have their limitations, which even Koch recognized. They may not hold if:
The particular bacteria (such as the one that causes leprosy) cannot be "grown in pure culture" in the laboratory.
Animal test subjects are immune to the infection.
In addition, a usually harmless bacteria may cause disease if:
It has acquired extra virulence factors making it pathogenic.
It gains access to deep tissues due to trauma, surgery, an IV line, etc.
It infects a patient with a compromised immune system.
Not all people infected by a bacteria develop serious disease; subclinical, low-grade infection may be more common than clinically obvious, symptomatic infection.
The different species of infectious agents linked to various cancers fit fairly well within Koch's postulates, since they can be isolated from tumors and grown in a petri dishes or cell cultures, and they sometimes produces tumors when injected into test animals.
However, many are also found in lower concentrations in healthy subjects, and it appears that these microbes only cause disease when their host is weakened.
The host's immune system limits the amount of damage any infectious agent can cause. For instance, H. pylori stomach infections can lead to stomach ulcers and gastric cancer, but many people are asymptomatic carries. Not every woman who has been infected with HPV develops cervical cancer.
Similarly, we should not expect all carriers of other "cancer microbes" to become ill. Also, these bacteria may have the potential to produce diseases besides cancer, since H. pylori can cause stomach ulcers as well.
History
Probably the first official mention of "cancer microbe" occurred on December 3, 1890 when William Russell, a pathologist in the School of Medicine at the Royal Infirmary in Edinburgh, gave an address to the Pathological Society of London. He described histopathologic findings of "a characteristic organism of cancer" that he observed microscopically in fuchsine-stained tissue sections from all forms of cancer that he examined, and also from some cases of tuberculosis, syphilis and skin infection.
The microbe was seen both around and within tissue cells, and ranged in size from barely visible to one and half times the size of a red blood cell. Russell felt that the large size of some of these organisms was suggestive of a yeast or fungal infection.
Russell tentatively called the microbe a possible "blastomycete" (a type of fungus); and called the round forms "fuchsine bodies" due to their bluish-red staining qualities.
Nine years later in 1899, Russell published a report in the Lancet on "The parasite of cancer," and stated that finding the suspect bacteria present in diseases other than cancer presented a "stumbling block" to the idea of a definitive function for the organisms.
Cultures yielded numerous species of bacteria, and injection of the bacteria into animals gave ambiguous results. Subsequently, many scientists concluded that Russell bodies were merely the result of cellular degeneration.
In the 1920s and 1930s, the scientist Royal Raymond Rife pioneered the use of radiofrequency devices to kill bacteria. Rife discovered that a certain spectrum of radio waves was lethal to bacteria, while harmless to human tissue. He also invented a new form of microscope which used monochromatic light, and was accurate enough to see viruses without the use of electron microscopy.
Working from a laboratory in La Jolla in the 1930s, Rife claimed to have a 100 percent success rate in treating cancer. Rife's lab was shut down due to political pressure by the American Medical association , most of his papers were destroyed, and currently the only known example of his microscopes exists in a museum.
Rife's discovery of radiofrequency devices to kill bacteria was picked up by Hulda Clark, a Canadian scientist, who began her work in the 1960s. Clark also claimed that many other diseases, including diabetes, allergies, epilepsy, Crohn's disease, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, are caused by bacteria and parasites such as liver flukes.
She improved on Rife's technology, and invented a small raidofrequency device she called the "Zapper" that she claimed eradicated bacteria and other parasites from the body. Instructions on how to build the devices were made available to the public, and can be found on the Internet today.
Clark was harassed by the American authorities until she left to set up her cancer clinic in Mexico, where in 2001 the authorities forbade her from offering alternative treatment for cancer. Like Rife, Clark claimed an extremely high success rate in treating cancer, nearly 100 percent, but no independent analysis of her claims, or those of Rife, exist.
In the 1960s, Dr. Virginia Livingston antagonized the scientific establishment by claiming to have found the microbe responsible for causing cancer, naming it "Progenitor cryptocides", which means "hidden killer". She felt that that the microbe had an intrinsic, symbiotic function in the human body, that was responsible for initiating life and for healing of tissue, and that the microbe was ultimately responsible for eventual degeneration and death of all life.
When the cultured organism was injected into animals, it caused tumors to develop in some, but not all, of the test subjects.
In 1974, Livingstone became the first scientist to discover that both cancer bacteria and cancer cells produce the human hormone HCG. This hormone, normally secreted by the human fetus to protect it from the maternal immune system, also protects cancers from immune system attack.
Livingstone concluded that bacteria secrete mutagenic factors such as actinomycin-D with damage human cell DNA, and that they can also interchange genetic material such as bacterial growth factors with human cells. Vaccines targeting HCG-producing and cancer-promoting bacteria deprive cancer cells of a key source of HCG.. As the levels of HCG are lowered, the immune system's ability to launch an assault on cancer cells increases.
Livingstone cultured patients' own bacteria from blood and urine to create "autogenous" vaccines to stimulate the immune system. She published many articles and books, such as "Cancer, A New Breakthrough" (1972); "The Microbiology of Cancer" (1977); and "The Conquest of Cancer" (1984).
Her research has been confirmed by other scientists, such as microbiologist Eleanor Alexander-Jackson, cell cytologist Irene Diller, biochemist Florence Seibert, and dermatologist Alan Cantwell, among others.
Milton Wainwright, a microbiologist at the University of Sheffield, UK, has written extensively about the bacteriology of cancer in recent publications such as: "Nanobacteria and associated 'elementary bodies' in human disease and cancer" (1999); "The return of the cancer germ; Forgotten microbiology - back to the future" (2000); "Highly pleomorphic staphylococci as a cause of cancer" (2000); and "Is this the historical 'cancer germ'"? (2003).
Currently, one of the most well-known popular proponents of the link between cancer and bacteria is Dr. Alan Cantwell, who has written numerous articles and books on the subject. Cantwell isolated and reported cell wall deficient bacteria in breast cancer, Kaposi's sarcoma and Hodgkin's disease. He states, " If a disease like cancer is indeed caused by microscopic bacteria, it would indicate physicians have been unable to see what was quite plain for some nineteenth and twentieth century scientists to observe using simple light microscopy.
And with powerful electron microscopes there is now little excuse for not "seeing" bacteria."
Mycoplasma
Mycoplasma, the oldest suspect in the bacterial theory of cancer, has also been implicated as a direct cause or a signficant cofactoer in a host of other degenerative and inflammatory diseases.
Mycoplasmas are frequently found in the oral and genito-urinary tracts of normal healthy subjects, with females four times more frequently infected than males, which just happens to be the same gender-skewed incidence rate as rheumatoid arthritis, fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue and other related auto-immune disorders.
In 1997, the National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, published the article, Mycoplasmas : Sophisticated, Reemerging, and Burdened by Their Notoriety, by Drs. Baseman and Tully who stated:
"Nonetheless, mycoplasmas by themselves can cause acute and chronic diseases at multiple sites with wide-ranging complications and have been implicated as cofactors in disease.
Recently, mycoplasmas have been linked as a cofactor to AIDS pathogenesis and to malignant transformation, chromosomal aberrations, the Gulf War Syndrome, and other unexplained and complex illnesses, including chronic fatigue syndrome, Crohn's disease, and various arthritides."
The first strains of mycoplasma were isolated from cattle with arthritis and pleuro-pneumonia in 1898 at the Pasteur Institute. The first human variety was isolated in 1932 from a wound abscess.
The first connection between Mycoplasmas were identified as a cause of rheumatoid diseases in 1939 by Drs. Swift and Brown. In the late 1950's a specific strain was identified as the cause of atypical pneumonia, and named Mycoplasma pneumonia.
The association between immunodeficiency and autoimmune disorders with mycoplasmas was first noted in the mid 1970s in patients with primary hypogammaglobulinemia (an autoimmune disease) due to infection with four species of mycoplasma localized in joint tissue.
Since that time, more than 100 different mycoplasma species have been identified and recorded in plants, animals, and humans.
There are hundreds of studies from scientists all around the world linking various species of mycoplasma with cancer.
The research of Dr Shy-Chung Lo at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology in Washington, D.C., confirms the multistage, malignant transformation of embryo cell lines persistently exposed to mycoplasma infection as well as animal models so exposed.
According to research by P.J. Chan, published in Gynecologic Oncology (1996), "The oncogenic potential of mycoplasmas was only recently realized when they were shown to cause chromosomal changes and in vitro cell transformations through gradual progressive chromosomal loss and translocations." Chan and colleagues also report the prevalence of mycoplasma DNA in ovarian cancer.1
In 1993, a research team led by C. Ilantzis at the McGill Cancer Centre, Montreal, Canada analyzed cancer-related markers which are specific to various organs in the body. These markers, called "organ-specific neoantigens" (OSNs), elicit specific immune responses. After analyzing OSN proteins from human colon adenocarcinomas, researchers found the OSNs to be mycoplasmal in origin.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Chan P.J et al Prevalence of Mycoplasma Conserved DNA in Malignant Ovarian Cancer Detected Using Sensitive PCR-ELISA Gynecologic Oncology 1996 pp. 258-260(3)
(2). C Ilantzis, DM Thomson, A Michaelidou, S Benchimol Identification of a human cancer related organ specific neoantigen Microbiol Immunol, 1993;37(2):119-28
Microscopic Findings
The "cancer bacteria" have a variable appearance, both in tissue samples and in cultures. They can appear as cocci (spheres) 0.1 micrometer in size (a micrometer is 1/1000 of a millimeter), called "ultramicroscopic" since they can still be seen by an ordinary light optical microscope.
Scientists have used the term "nanobacteria" to describe extremely small bacteria which range from .05 to 0.2 micrometer in size. Viruses, which measure 0.01 to 0.02 micrometers, can be viewed only with an electron microscope. The smallest forms of bacteria pass easily through a standard viral filter with pores 0 .2 micrometers in size, which microbiologists assumed (until recently) would catch all bacteria, which tend to be much larger.
Once these tiny cocci are placed in a petri dish and the resulting culture is observed over time, the bacteria also produce larger rods and branching, fungus-like strands.
Mycobacteria are known to exist in different forms, and the tuberculosis microbe, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, is a good example of this complex life cycle. Some forms of the bacillus are round "coccoid" forms; other forms are more typically "acid-fast" and "rod" forms. All mycobacteria form a phylogenetic link or bridge between the bacteria and the "higher" fungi. "Myco" is Greek for fungus. This is the origin of the term "mycobacteria." Mycoplasmas also have a flowing plasma-like structure without a cell wall - hence "plasma".
Unlike common bacteria, the suspected cancer microbe Mycoplasma has no cell wall. It invades tissue cells, and uses the cell to replicate itself, much like a retrovirus. When the Mycoplasma breaks out of the cell, it takes a piece of the host cell membrane with it. When the immune system attacks the Mycoplasma, it may also mistakenly attack the host cell, causing an autoimmune condition. It can invade the Natural Killer cells of the immune system, causing immune system disorders. Because it can hide deep within cells, it is extremely difficult to detect and eradicate.
Treating Mycoplasma With Antibiotics
Antibiotic treatment must be tailored to the specific bacterial infection. Many bacteria, especially mycoplasma, are unaffected by many common antibiotics. However, some targeted treatments which are known to kill specific cancer-causing bacteria have proven effective, at least in the early stages of disease.
Mycoplasmal infections are treatable with long cycles of high-dose antibiotics such as doxycycline and tetracycline, followed by a long period of low dose antibiotics. Due to their lack of cell walls, mycoplasma are unaffected by penicillins. Since the organism is a slow-growing, intracellular species with a long life cycle, several long term courses of antibiotics may be necessary. The infection may need to be treated for several months or years, much the same protocol as for Lyme Disease.
No clinical trials have been published in regards to the treatment of cancer with antibiotics against mycoplasma.
Vaccines Against Mycoplasma
Maruyama vaccine is similar to BCG vaccine, both of which are made from mycobacteria tuberculosis isolates. Both have been used extensively as immune system stimulants in cancer patients. Murayama vaccine is made from mycobacteria tuberculosis isolates, and BCG is derived from an attenuated bovine tuberculosis bacillus. However, BCG has more side effects than Maruyama vaccine.
Maruyama vaccine, invented by Dr. Chisato Maruyama more than 50 years ago, can be used by itself or in combination with standard therapies. Some Japanese physicians claim to have achieved complete remissions in poor-prognosis cancers, but no large scale clinical trials exist. No negative side effects from the vaccine have been reported.
Murayama vaccine is approved by the FDA to treat terminal cancer patients. Some forms of health insurance will cover the cost if the vaccine is used as part of standard therapy, because it is officially approved only as an immune system stimulant to counteract the side effect of bone marrow suppression caused by radiotherapy.
Maruyama vaccine is supplied by The Research Institute of Vaccine Therapy for Tumors and Infections Disease, Nippon Medical School Hospital in Tokyo, as long as the patient supplies a request from their physician. It is not expensive, approximately 9000 yen (100 USD) for a 40 day course of treatment.
According to an article published in Cancer Detection And Prevention, 2003, by Tetsuo Kimoto M.D., Ph.D., Maruyama vaccine does not have direct cytotoxic effects on tumors, but rather causes their encapsulation by collagen fibers.
This leads to the containment and sometimes necrosis (death) of tumors and their metastasis. Survival time increased in both animal and human subjects with tumors, and Kimoto stated that Murayama vaccine "may benefit patients in whom the tumor is inoperable and resistant to conventional chemotherapy." 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Tetsuo Kimoto M.D., Ph.D The antitumor effects of Maruyama vaccine (SSM) Cancer Detection and Prevention Volume 22 Issue 4 Page 340 - August 1998 .
Herpes Virus
Cervical cancer, caused by the human papilloma virus, strikes more than 10,000 U.S. women each year, killing more than 3,700. A new vaccine against the virus, Gardasil, was approved by the FDA in 2006. The vaccine is effective against HPV types 16 and 18, which cause approximately 70 percent of cervical cancers and against HPV types 6 and 11, which cause approximately 90 percent of genital warts.
Less well known is the fact that HPV is also implicated in squamous cell head and neck cancers, especially cancer of the tonsils. 1,2 Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Oncology Center tested tumor tissues from 253 patients with head and neck cancers and found 25 percent of the cases were HPV-positive. In 90 percent of those HPV-positive tumors, HPV16, the type of virus most often associated with cervical cancer, was present.3
Multiple studies confirm the link between HPV and head and neck cancer. Approximately 31,000 people in the United States are diagnosed each year with cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx, which causes 8,500 deaths annually.
The vaccine against HPV only works if it administered before infection, indicating the importance of immunization before potential exposure to the virus. Also, Gardasil does not protect against less common HPV types not included in the vaccine, thus routine and regular pap screening remain critically important to detect precancerous changes in the cervix to allow treatment before cervical cancer develops. It is a preventative measure, not a treatment for existing cervical or head and neck cancer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Paz IB et al., Human papillomavirus (HPV) in head and neck cancer. An association of HPV 16 with squamous cell carcinoma of Waldeyer's tonsillar ring. Cancer 1997 Feb 1;79(3):595-604.
(2) Klussman JP et al., Human papillomavirus-positive tonsillar carcinomas: a different tumor entity? Med Microbiol Immunol (Berlin) 2003 Aug;192(3):129-32. Epub 2002 Sep 14.
(3). Gillison ML, Koch WM, Capone RB, Spafford M, Westra WH, Wu L, Zahurak ML, Daniel RW, Viglione M, Symer DE, Shah KV, Sidransky D, Evidence for a causal association between human papillomavirus and a subset of head and neck cancers. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2000 May 3;92(9):709-20
Stomach Cancer
In the December 2000 edition of the Journal of The National Cancer Insitute, a research team led by Columbian pathologist Pelayo Correa reported that antibiotics, vitamin C, or beta-carotene (precursor of vitamin A) can reverse precancerous stomach conditions caused by Helicobacter pylori.
Stomach cancer is the second most common cancer worldwide, and is most common in countries such as Colombia and China, where H. Pylori infects more than half of the population in early childhood. In the U.S., where H. pylori is less common, stomach cancer rates have decreased since the 1930s.
The two main risk factors for stomach cancer are H. pylori infection, and a diet low in vitamin C and beta carotene, which the body converts to vitamin A. There is also ample evidence that a diet including fresh fruits and vegetables, which are rich in those nutrients, protects against stomach cancer.
In 1992, the researchers studied 631 patients with aberrant gastric cell growth, which falls into one of three successive premalignant stages--multifocal nonmetaplastic atrophy, intestinal metaplasia, and dysplasia.
Patients received either a placebo pill, a vitamin C or beta-carotene supplement, or antibiotics against H. pylori. Some others received a combination of drugs and supplements.
The scientists took stomach biopsies of the patients after 3 and 6 years of treatment. Patients with atrophy were roughly five times as likely to experience regression of this premalignant cell growth as those getting a placebo.
Among those with metaplasia, the volunteers who were taking supplements or drugs were three times as likely to improve as those getting placebos were. However, patients with dysplasia, the last stage of stomach disease before cancer, showed no significant improvement with any of the treatments. "The earlier in the process [that we intervened] the better the chance of regression," Correa said. 1
This study is encouraging because it shows that treating carcinogenic bacteria produces clear benefits against precancerous conditions. However, once the tissue damage caused by infection had progressed to the premalignant stage, the antibiotics produced no benefits, and would likely produce no improvement in cases of outright malignancy either.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Correa, P., et al. 2000. Chemoprevention of gastric dysplasia: Randomized trial of antioxidant supplements and anti-Helicobacter pylori therapy. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 92(Dec. 6):1881-1888
Lymphoma
The common antibiotic doxycycline effectively treats a type of ocular lymphoma associated with chlamydia infection, according to a study published in the October 4 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
A team of researchers led by Andres J. M. Ferreri, M.D., of the San Raffaele H Scientific Institute in Milan, Italy, gave 27 patients with ocular adnexal lymphoma (OAL) a 3-week course of doxycycline therapy, whether they tested positive or negative for chlamydia.
The researchers observed for tumor progression every 6 months, and found that doxycycline caused caused lymphoma to regress in patients regardless of whether they tested positive or negative for chlamydia.
The study suggested that doxycycline is a useful therapy even in patients where other treatments have failed, and it is a valid alternative to chemotherapy and radiation without causing the same toxic side-effects. Patients treated with doxycycline had a 66% rate of disease-free survival. 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Andrés J. M. Ferreri, Maurilio Ponzoni, Massimo Guidoboni, Antonio Giordano Resti, Letterio S. Politi, Sergio Cortelazzo, Judit Demeter, Francesco Zallio, Angelo Palmas, Giuliana Muti, Giuseppina P. Dognini, Elisa Pasini, Antonia Anna Lettini, Federico Sacchetti, Carlo De Conciliis, Claudio Doglioni, Riccardo Dolcetti Bacteria-Eradicating Therapy With Doxycycline in Ocular Adnexal MALT Lymphoma: A Multicenter Prospective Trial Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2006 98(19):1375-1382
Cautionary Note On Indiscriminate Use Of Antibiotics
So far, no antibiotic treatment has been discovered that is successful in treating most types of cancer, and a study linking antibiotic use to an increased risk breast cancer appeared in the February 2004 Journal of the American Medical Association. The study, which examined 10,000 Washington state women, found that those who took more than 25 courses of antibiotics over an average of 17 years had double the risk of breast cancer compared to women who did not take antibiotics. Women who took between one and 25 prescriptions over the same period had a one-and-a-half times increased risk for breast cancer. 1
Correlation does not always imply causation, and this study raises intriguing questions as to the mechanism of this effect. Perhaps it is due to direct cellular damage by the antibiotic. Maybe the disruption of the body's normal bacterial homeostasis by antibiotics causes proliferation of pathogenic bacterial species.
It could be that women with poorly functioning immune systems (due to genetics or poor living conditions) are more prone to infections as well as cancer. A need for antibiotics may indicate an underlying inflammatory or infectious condition which is responsible for the development of cancer.
However, the study illustrates the perils of using broad spectrum antibiotics indiscriminately. This practice evidently does not ward off cancer, and cannot be recommended.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Roberta B. Ness, MD, MPH. Jane A. Cauley, DrPH Antibiotics and Breast Cancer--. What's the Meaning of This? Journal of The American Medical Association Feb 2004 291:77, 880-881
Antibiotics To Treat Cancer
In 2006, researchers at the University of Illinois discovered that siomycin, a poorly known antibiotic first discovered in the 1960s, caused cancer cells to undergo apoptosis (cell death) while leaving normal cells unharmed. This is due to a direct effect on the FOX M1 gene, which is activated in tumor cells and causes their rapid growth. Siomycin is currently being evaluated for possible clinical trials. 1
Neomycin, another old antibiotic first discovered in 1949, inhibits angiogenesis (development of blood vessels) of prostate tumors, and prevents them from growing and spreading in animal subjects, according to researchers Hu and Yoshioka in the Sept 2006 edition of the Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. 2
In both cases, the action of these antibiotics is due to a direct chemotherapeutic effect, not antibacterial action. However, both of these agents show promise for the development of chemotherapy without the current horrendous side effects.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1). Senthil K. Radhakrishnan, Uppoor G. Bhat, Douglas E. Hughes, I-Ching Wang, Robert H. Costa and Andrei L. Gartel Identification of a Chemical Inhibitor of the Oncogenic Transcription Factor Forkhead Box M1 Cancer Research 66, 9731-9735, October 1, 2006
(2). Hu G-F. Neomycin inhibits angiogenin-induced angiogenesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95: 9791-9795, 1998
Integrated Treatment Clinics
Livingstone-Wheeler claimed an 82% success rate in her book "the Conquest of Cancer".
One of the largest clinics offering treatment based on the bacterial hypothesis of cancer is the Livingstone Wheeler Foundation Medical Center, San Diego, California. Livingstone-Wheeler claimed an 82% success rate in her book "the Conquest of Cancer". Here, patients are given vaccines and other measures purported to enhance immunity to the pleomorphic bacterium believed to be the cause of cancer.
BCG vaccine is used along with a multifocal treatment program: vegetarian diet, vitamins, antioxidants, detoxification, nutritional counselling, support groups. Patients are monitored with tests of immune function and vitamin levels.
However, a 2001 study by the Centre for Alternative Medicine Research at the University of Texas found poor outcomes the 191 clinic patients followed, approximately half of whom had metastatic cancer. Only 28 patients out of 193 were found to be still alive five years later, giving a five-year survival rate of 14.5%, no better than conventional therapy for advanced cancer. These results refute Livingstone's claims of success.
However, other practitioners have had better results. The Issels Clinic, founded in 1951 in Germany by Dr. Josef Issels, specializes in immunotherapy (along with other alternative treatments) and and has a significant success rate documented by independent studies.
Since the late 1960s, German public health insurance has covered treatment at the Issels Clinic. From 1981 until his retirement in 1987, Dr. Issels served as expert in the Federal German Government Commission In The Fight Against Cancer.
In the Clinical Trials Journal (London 1970) a peer-reviewed study showed that Issels treatment plus standard therapy (chemo and radiotherapy) improved the five-year survival rate of patients with metastatic cancers to 87%, as compared to 50% with standard therapy alone.
In 1959, A. G. Audier, M.D., from the University of Leiden, Holland, reported that Issels therapy produced a 16.6% cure rate in 252 patients with metastatic malignant melanoma, which has only a 2% cure rate by conventional therapy.
This was confirmed by a study in 1971 by John Anderson, M.D., from King's College Hospital, which found a 17% cure rate for metastatic melanoma. The Issels clinic has documented long term cures (greater than 10 years) of advanced metastatic cancer, including astrocytomas (malignant brain tumors) and melanomas, which are virtually incurable by conventional treatment.
There are two Issels Medical Centers in the United States, in Phoenix, Arizona, and Santa Barbara, California.
Summary
Evidence for a causal link between infection and cancer appears to be overwhelming, but so far no universally applicable treatment has been developed from this knowledge.
In some cases, such as intraocular lymphoma, eradication of infection cures cancer; but in other cases, such as gastric cancer, it has no effect once the disease has progressed from pre-malignant to cancerous. So far, some success has been achieved by immunotherapy, but be sure to look for a reputable clinic with proven results, since patient outcomes vary greatly between practitioners.
This is definitely a field to watch closely, since new discoveries are being made constantly.

Frank J Vanderlugt owns and operates [http://www.cancer-cure-now.com]
Conventional Theories Of Cancer Development [http://www.cancer-cure-now.com]

Skin Cancer - All About Skin Cancer

 By CD Mohatta 

Skin cancers are broadly divided into two types- Melanoma and non-melanoma. Melanoma is the most deadly of skin cancers. The three major skin cancers that are diagnosed in almost all the cases are- Basal Cell Carcinoma, Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Melanoma. All these cancers are named after the type of cell in which they begin. Thus Basal Cell Carcinoma begins in the skin cells located in the lowest layer of epidermis, which is called the basal layer. Squamous Cell Carcinoma develops from the upper layer of the epidermis named squamous layer and Melanoma begins from the melanocytes. Melanocytes are the cells that give skin its color.
Basal Cell Cancer
It is one the most frequently diagnosed skin cancers. It affects the basal cells, which are located in the bottom layer of the epidermis. Malignant cells proliferate excessively from the epidermis resulting in a tumor. The incidence of basal cell cancer increases with age. Almost all people diagnosed with basal cell carcinoma can expect to live at least another 5 years.
Though it generally does not spread to distant sites (metastasize), and is, therefore, less fatal. Basal cell carcinoma can invade normal tissue and damage deeper tissues of muscles and bones, and disfigure the skin. On its return, Basal cell carcinoma can be more aggressive. During recurrence it may grow faster and cause more tissue damage.
Squamous Cell Cancer
This type of cancer involves the malignancy and proliferation of squamous (flat, scaly) cells. The squamous cell or keratinocyte, is the most abundant cell in the epidermis. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is usually localized, but it can spread (metastasize). It is easily treated and cured when confined to the skin. Most cutaneous SCC develops in individuals with known factors, such as excessive exposure to the sun.
Melanoma
Malignant melanoma is an accelerated, metastatic type of skin cancer that originates in the cells of the epidermis. In this disorder, pigment-producing cells called melanocytes become cancerous, grow, and multiply at a devastating rate. Although melanoma is the least common type of skin cancer, it is the most serious form of skin cancer. Melanoma may be cured, if caught and treated early, but it is rarely curable in its later stages.
Melanoma skin cancer cells are more likely than non-melanoma skin cancer cells to spread or metastasize. This means that they break away from the original tumor, travel through the blood or lymphatic vessels, and then grow within other parts of the body.
The most well documented risk factor for malignant melanoma is exposure to UV radiation.
Melanoma affects equal number of men and women and affects any part of the body. It usually appears after age 50, though it can develop at any age. People with light skin are far more likely to develop melanoma than dark-skinned people.
This article is only for informative purposes. This article is not intended to be a medical advise and it is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Please consult your doctor for your medical concerns. Please follow any tip given in this article only after consulting your doctor. The author is not liable for any outcome or damage resulting from information obtained from this article.

DoctorGoodSkin.com is a popular skin care guide where you can find a lot of information, articles and tips about acne, skin care, STDs, skin diseases and conditions, skin treatments, procedures, skin care products, etc. If you love solving quizzes and tests, visit funquizcards. Myspace users, click myspace comments such as compliments, cool comments, flirty, birthday, holidays, religion, funny, cute, etc.