Sunday, 21 July 2013

New MRI research reveals cancer cells thrive on processed sugar

(NaturalNews) Do you have a sweet tooth? If so, your dietary habits could be significantly adding to your risk of developing cancer. New research published in the journal Nature Medicine has confirmed that processed sugar is one of the primary driving forces behind the growth and spread of cancer tumors, so much so that the future of cancer screening could rely on scanning the body for sugar accumulation.

Scientists from University College London (UCL) in the U.K. made this discovery after experimenting with a new cancer detection method that involves utilizing a unique form of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). After sensitizing an MRI scanner to look specifically for glucose in the body, it was revealed that cancer tumors, which feed off sugar, light up brightly as they contain high amounts of sugar.

"The new technique, called 'glucose chemical exchange saturation transfer' (glucoCEST), is based on the fact that tumors consume much more glucose (a type of sugar) than normal, healthy tissues in order to sustain their growth," explains a recent UCL announcement, noting that tumors appear as "bright images" on MRI scans of mice.

Traditionally, cancer screenings have involved the use of low-dose radiation injections to identify the presence of tumors, which makes sense as radiation is another known cause of cancer. The things that trigger and promote cancer development and spread, in other words, can also be used by doctors to detect it inside the body. And now sugar can officially be added to this list.

"The method uses an injection of normal sugar and could offer a cheap, safe alternative to existing methods for detecting tumors, which require the injection of radioactive material," says Dr. Simon Walker-Samuel, lead researcher of the study from the UCL Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging (CABI).

Interestingly, it was also noted by the study's senior author that the amount of sugar in "half a standard sized chocolate bar" is all it takes to effectively identify the presence of tumors using the glucoCEST method. This is astounding, as it suggests that even relatively low amounts of sugar have the potential to promote cancer proliferation.

Many cancer tumors respond directly to insulin produced by sugar consumption

The UCL study is hardly the only one to have identified a connection between processed sugar consumption and diseases like cancer. Other research, including that being currently being conducted by Dr. Robert H. Lustig, M.D., a Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), confirms that the bulk of chronic illnesses prevalent today are caused by sugar consumption.

You can watch a presentation from Dr. Lustig entitled Sugar: The Bitter Truth here:
http://youtube.com

As far as cancer is concerned, hormones produced by the body in response to sugar consumption also feed cancer cells. This means that every time you down a soda or eat a piece of cake, your body produces certain chemicals that tell cancer cells to not only start taking up sugar, but also to grow in size and spread.

"What we're beginning to learn is that insulin can cause adverse effects in various tissues, and a particular concern is cancer," says Dr. Lewis Cantley, head of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) at Harvard University, as quoted during an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes.

"If you happen to have a tumor that has insulin receptors on it, then it will get stimulated to take up the glucose that's in the bloodstream," he adds. "So rather than going to the fat or to the muscle, the glucose now goes into the tumor, and the tumor uses it to grow."

Sources for this article include:

http://www.mdtmag.com

http://cancerdefeated.com

http://youtube.com

Monday, 15 July 2013

Cancer Industry Exposed as Fraud “The Science is False”

Major studies within cancer research have been proven to be false which suggests that the mainstream treatments we use are based on fraudulent findings and false science.

Recent news has shown that the majority of studies geared towards cancer research are inaccurate and likely fraudulent by nature. Findings published in the journal Nature show that 88% of major studies on cancer that have been published in reputable journals over the years can not be reproduced to show their accuracy. This means that the research findings published are not based on accurate results.

Author of the review and former head of cancer research at Amgen C. Glenn Begley was unable to replicate the results of 47 of the 53 studies he examined. This suggests that researchers are fabricating their findings simply to create the illusion of positive findings instead of publishing their actual results. This ensures the continuation of their steady stream of funding and grants.

Begley stated: “These are the studies the pharmaceutical industry relies on to identify new targets for drug development, but if you’re going to place a $1 million or $2 million or $5 million bet on an observation, you need to be sure it’s true. As we tried to reproduce these papers we became convinced you can’t take anything at face value.”

Although Begley was unable to publish the names of those who published the false findings, this recent development shows that the vast majority or modern cancer treatment approaches are invalid given they have been built off of a poor base.

The University of Michigan’s Comprehensive Cancer Center published an analysis in 2009, that revealed popular cancer studies to be false. Unsurprisingly the primary cause of fabricated results was determined to be conflicts of interest that created results that work out best for drug companies rather than for the people.

Personally I have always felt the cancer industry to be transparent when it came to their research and treatments. In many ways it is common sense. If someone said to you “This body is sick and we need to some how make it better.” Would you think to completely poison and destroy every healthy cell in it in order to make it better? While it can show results in minimal cases, it isn’t the most ideal approach. We are using highly carcinogenic treatments to cure a disease that is created through carcinogens.

The very fact that incredible amounts of money have been funneled into cancer research by people over the years and yet no cure has been found should be a tell tale sign things aren’t what they seem. This reveals in itself that the money is not going where we might think it is and there is not a complete effort to find a cure. While many people are aware of this and more are continuing to learn about it, the vast majority of us continue to believe in what we are told from government, education and the media about their findings that have been proven false time and time again.

SOURCES:

University of Michigan report - http://www.uofmhealth.org/news/1147cancer-studies-report-conflict-of-interest

Yahoo Cancer Article: http://news.yahoo.com/cancer-science-many-discoveries-dont-hold-174216262.html

Grape Seed Extract May Beat Chemo in Late-Stage Cancer

The more advanced cancer is, the less effective chemotherapy is. However, a new study has shown that grape seed extract has exactly the opposite quality: The more advanced the cancer, the less extract that's needed to kill it. On top of that, the study also shows that grape seed extract targets the cancer cells that become most resistant to chemotherapy.

In the face of this remarkable new development, it's likely that grape seed extract is more effective in treating late-stage cancer than modern medicine's chemotherapy. Not only does it take less and less of the substance to kill cancer cells, it's able to target the cells that have become drug resistant, thus making chemo useless!

Yet again, the common misperception that modern medicine's treatments are stronger or more potent or better in any way is shown to be mistaken. Sadly, it's a mistake that can kill.
Grape Seed Extract Exposes Modern Medicine's Failings

The study in question was produced in the University of Colorado Cancer Center and published in the journal Cancer Letters. It was an in vitro study, not in vivo. That is, no living creatures were involved. The study was performed on cell cultures. That might make it seem relatively insignificant. However, much prior research has already documented grape seed extract's ability to control and kill cancer, so that's not in much doubt. What this study discovered is a plausible means by which it happens. This is the kind of information that modern medicine craves.

Have you ever noticed how there's so much focus on the idea that cholesterol causes heart disease? It doesn't, but that doesn't deter the ongoing research that assumes it to be true. That's because modern medicine demands to know how something works—or at least to be given an explanation, whether true or not. There's an assumption that, if you know that A is associated with B, then controlling A will prevent or cure B. It doesn't seem to matter if it's true, only that it sounds plausible.
The "Plausible" Mode of Action

Rather than focusing on what really counts—survival and return to health—medicine focuses on markers that are based on plausible modes of action.

Once a "plausible" mode of action idea has caught on, research funds get directed towards it. A search goes on to find ways to control that presumed connection. That's why we have statins. They're associated with heart disease. They don't cause it, but a seemingly plausible theory was produced saying that cholesterol causes heart disease. Therefore, since statins can reduce cholesterol, they're the first thing a doctor prescribes when someone has any sort of heart disease sign—even just being past the age of 40 or 50.

Statins don't produce health. In fact, they destroy it, causing memory loss, muscle damage, and death. But they're a perfect example of a plausible idea getting research funding, drugs being developed to cause a change in a marker, doctors prescribing it, and enormous profits getting funneled to Big Pharma.

Ultimately, does it matter whether a treatment can meet some arbitrary marker, or is it more important that it heals you? The answer should be obvious—and it is to everyone but a medical system that's gone awry. Modern medicine wants a product that's owned by Big Pharma because that apparently means it's science-based. That it invariably costs an exorbitant amount and doesn't cure isn't of concern. All that matters is that arbitrary markers be met.

Therefore, while it's interesting to learn something about how a treatment works, let's get on with it. Let's focus on the fact that grape seed extract does work and inform people so they can take advantage of it.
Health Benefits of Grape Seed Extract

It's well established that resveratrol, which is found in both grape seeds and skins, is the active ingredient that does so much good. So, what can resveratrol, or grape seed or grape skin extract do for you? Let's take a look at what studies have shown:

Pancreatic cancer cell proliferation is inhibited by resveratrol.
Resveratrol is protective against several types of viruses, though the means by which protection is accomplished is unknown:
Herpes simplex 1 infections.
Varicella zoster (chicken pox and shingles)
Human cytomegalovirus
Epstein-Barr virus
Enterovirus type 71 (which can cause paralysis, including the heart)
Growth of colorectal cancers are halted by resveratrol.
Resveratrol has been shown to stimulate cognitive function in mice.
Fungal infections, which are notoriously difficult to treat, have been shown to respond to resveratrol, and without the adverse effects of standard drug therapy.
Resveratrol exerts a protective effect on the cardiovascular system.
Autoimmune myocarditis in rats was shown to improve with application of resveratrol.
Alzheimer's disease may be warded off by grape seed extract.
Head and neck cancer cells are destroyed by resveratrol, but healthy cells are unharmed.

Every item in this list comes from a scientific study.

We must all make our own choices regarding health. However, the medical world is waiting for a Big Pharma-sanctioned product made from grape seeds—one that will likely have been sliced and diced until all symbiotic interactions with other ingredients are lost and harmful effects naturally mitigated through that symbiotic action are enhanced. Until that time, you won't see grape seed extract offered by any modern medical doctor.

But that doesn't mean you can't take it. At least, right now. The day is coming when agencies like the FDA will tell us that we don't have that right, as discussed in FDA Gives Sole Herbal Product Rights to Big Pharma. We're already seeing parents denied the right to have their children's medical needs treated naturally. If you care about your health, be sure that you can maintain access to all those natural substances that Big Pharma is maneuvering to have taken from us.

But that doesn't mean you can't take it. At least, right now. The day is coming when agencies like the FDA will tell us that we don't have that right, as discussed in FDA Gives Sole Herbal Product Rights to Big Pharma. We're already seeing parents denied the right to have their children's medical needs treated naturally. If you care about your health, be sure that you can maintain access to all those natural substances that Big Pharma is maneuvering to have taken from us.

Pages