Re: Study Suggests Cancers May Go Away on Their Own

[Guest guest]

As soon as a possible breast cancer is located on a mammogram, the

woman is informed in such a way as to induce extreme panic and

stress. This undermines " spontaneous " remission. Then she is given

a biopsy to confirm the mammogram. Many times I hear that the biopsy

showed no cancer, but then cancer grew like wildfire at the site of

the " benign " lesion. The healing from the needle intrusion often

triggers rapid growth. I see this in biopsies of the breast, lung,

prostate, liver, and kidney.

I have seen a number of cases where a woman had a breast lump for

years. One woman had a breast lump for nine years. It did not

change in shape or size. Her physician convinced her to have a

needle biopsy -- her first. The pathology report indicated that it

was benign. Within weeks cancerous tumors rapidly grew at the site

of the needle insertions. She refused conventional treatment and now

five years later she is still in remission -- and she still has her breast.

It can be difficult for a person to turn down a biopsy. The

physician and the patient's family often demand it. No non-invasive

test can give the quality of information that a biopsy gives. It

takes a strong person to say, " No, I just want to tweak my lifestyle

and watch this thing for a while. "

[Guest guest]

Yes, it need a courage to say, ok I will wait to see what will happen with my

cancer and continue your life as nothing happen.

 

But reg mamograhy, I don't know if it give clear picture if there is cancer in

the breast or not, when I feel that I have a lump I make mamograhy, but the

doctor look at the picture and said it is not known unless to make biopsy, so if

somebody suspect breast cancer, (I mean can touch and feel it,) can skip

mamograhy and directly go to biopsy.

Also from my own experience, my doctor suggest instead of biopsy, to make minor

surgery to remove the lump and send it to laboratory, and now when I read how it

is dangerous to make biopsy I am glad that I agree with him and he removed my

whole lumb.

 

but after the laboratory shows IDC (invasive ductal carcenoma) , they informed

me it is necessary to do mastoctomy on the whole right breast, and I agreed as

that time I was unable to think about other alternative.

 

my question is , after removing the lump could I stay as I was without

continuing to mastoctomy and later the harmful chemo, and so on. Could it be

safe for my life???

 

thanks  for attention and would like to hear more opinions

 

Nelly

From: VGammill <vgammill@...>

Subject: Re: Study Suggests Cancers May Go Away on Their Own

cures for cancer

Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:59 PM

As soon as a possible breast cancer is located on a mammogram, the

woman is informed in such a way as to induce extreme panic and

stress. This undermines " spontaneous " remission. Then she is given

a biopsy to confirm the mammogram. Many times I hear that the biopsy

showed no cancer, but then cancer grew like wildfire at the site of

the " benign " lesion. The healing from the needle intrusion often

triggers rapid growth. I see this in biopsies of the breast, lung,

prostate, liver, and kidney.

I have seen a number of cases where a woman had a breast lump for

years. One woman had a breast lump for nine years. It did not

change in shape or size. Her physician convinced her to have a

needle biopsy -- her first. The pathology report indicated that it

was benign. Within weeks cancerous tumors rapidly grew at the site

of the needle insertions. She refused conventional treatment and now

five years later she is still in remission -- and she still has her breast.

It can be difficult for a person to turn down a biopsy. The

physician and the patient's family often demand it. No non-invasive

test can give the quality of information that a biopsy gives. It

takes a strong person to say, " No, I just want to tweak my lifestyle

and watch this thing for a while. "

[Guest guest]

Why do these researchers miss the obvious conclusion! Regular

mammograms increase cancer - side effect of the radiation! The increase

was 22% in women who got regular mammograms every year over 6 years

versions the women who got only the initial mammogram.

So, the second set of women received 5 additional mammograms. One can

calculate that each mammogram increases your risk of breast cancer by 5.5%.

Even more reason to avoid mammograms and get a Thermoscan instead.

Steve

Classicaledmom@... wrote:

> New York Times

>

> *Study Suggests Cancers May Go Away on Their Own*

> One group of 109,784 women was followed from 1992 until 1997.

> Mammography screening in Norway was initiated in 1996. In 1996 and 1997,

> all were offered mammograms and nearly every woman accepted.

>

> The second group, of 119,472 wo men, was followed from 1996 until 2001.

> All were offered regular mammograms and nearly all accepted.

>

> It might be expected that the two groups would have roughly the same

> number of breast cancers, either detected at the end or found along the

> way. Instead, the researchers report, the women who had regular routine

> screens had 22 percent more cancers. For every 100,000 women who were

> screened regularly, 1,909 were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer

> over six years as compared with 1,564 women who did not have regular

> routine screening.

--

Steve - dudescholar4@...

Take World's Smallest Political Quiz at

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

" If a thousand old beliefs were ruined on our march

to truth we must still march on. " --Stopford

[Guest guest]

My 5.5% was off. 22% / 5 is closer to a 4% increase in breast cancer

per mammogram.

Steve

Steve wrote:

> Why do these researchers miss the obvious conclusion! Regular

> mammograms increase cancer - side effect of the radiation! The increase

> was 22% in women who got regular mammograms every year over 6 years

> versions the women who got only the initial mammogram.

>

> So, the second set of women received 5 additional mammograms. One can

> calculate that each mammogram increases your risk of breast cancer by 5.5%.

>

> Even more reason to avoid mammograms and get a Thermoscan instead.

>

> Steve

>

> Classicaledmom@... wrote:

>> New York Times

>>

>> *Study Suggests Cancers May Go Away on Their Own*

>

>> One group of 109,784 women was followed from 1992 until 1997.

>> Mammography screening in Norway was initiated in 1996. In 1996 and 1997,

>> all were offered mammograms and nearly every woman accepted.

>>

>> The second group, of 119,472 wo men, was followed from 1996 until 2001.

>> All were offered regular mammograms and nearly all accepted.

>>

>> It might be expected that the two groups would have roughly the same

>> number of breast cancers, either detected at the end or found along the

>> way. Instead, the researchers report, the women who had regular routine

>> screens had 22 percent more cancers. For every 100,000 women who were

>> screened regularly, 1,909 were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer

>> over six years as compared with 1,564 women who did not have regular

>> routine screening.

>

--

Steve - dudescholar4@...

" If a thousand old beliefs were ruined on our march

to truth we must still march on. " --Stopford

[Guest guest]

>

> From: VGammill <vgammill@...>

> Subject: Re: Study Suggests Cancers May Go Away on

Their Own

> cures for cancer

> Date: Monday, November 24, 2008, 8:59 PM

>

>

>

>

>

>

> As soon as a possible breast cancer is located on a mammogram, the

> woman is informed in such a way as to induce extreme panic and

> stress. This undermines " spontaneous " remission. Then she is given

> a biopsy to confirm the mammogram. Many times I hear that the

biopsy

> showed no cancer, but then cancer grew like wildfire at the site

of

> the " benign " lesion. The healing from the needle intrusion often

> triggers rapid growth. I see this in biopsies of the breast, lung,

> prostate, liver, and kidney.

>

> I have seen a number of cases where a woman had a breast lump for

> years. One woman had a breast lump for nine years. It did not

> change in shape or size. Her physician convinced her to have a

> needle biopsy -- her first. The pathology report indicated that it

> was benign. Within weeks cancerous tumors rapidly grew at the site

> of the needle insertions. She refused conventional treatment and

now

> five years later she is still in remission -- and she still has

her breast.

>

> It can be difficult for a person to turn down a biopsy. The

> physician and the patient's family often demand it. No non-

invasive

> test can give the quality of information that a biopsy gives. It

> takes a strong person to say, " No, I just want to tweak my

lifestyle

> and watch this thing for a while. "

>

>

>

>

> I am all in favor of avoiding surgery, chemo and radiation. I

currently have breast cancer, infiltrating ductal carcinoma. I am

treating it very successfully with diet and amygdalin (laetrile, b

17.) The tumor had 3 lobes and covered an area over 3 inches

across. Now it has flattened out to little more than a network of

connecting fibers and scar tissue, and is still shrinking

Here are a few things that help: #1. T Colin 's

outstanding book, The China Study, is filled with extensive research

on nutrition and cancer. It clearly establishes that cancer doesn't

grow in the absence of animal protien. If you want your cancer to

stop growing, don't feed it meat, milk, eggs or cheese.

#2, naturally occurring nitrilosides kill cancer. They are most

concentrated in apricot pits and apple seeds. They are also found

in bamboo shoots, raspberries & blackberries, mung beans, macademia

nuts, millet, buckwheat and alfalfa sprouts (as well as other

things) but are most concentrated in apricot pits. I am using

apricot pits and the tumor is shrinking. When I stop taking them,

it stops shrinking. nitrilosides are also known as laetrile, b17,

and amygdalin. They are also available in pills as amygdalin

tablets. These are easier to take as a large amount of apricot

pits. The best ones are enteric coated.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/27/08 1:15:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,

sahalina9@... writes:

> But reg mamograhy, I don't know if it give clear picture if there

> is cancer in the breast or not, when I feel that I have a lump I

> make mamograhy, but the doctor look at the picture and said it is

> not known unless to make biopsy, so if somebody suspect breast

> cancer, (I mean can touch and feel it,) can skip mamograhy and

> directly go to biopsy.

>

Always get an ultrasound and MRI before biopsy. I do not do mammograms..too

dangerous.

**************

Life should be easier. So should your homepage. Try

the NEW AOL.com. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp & amp;icid=aolcom40vanity & amp;

ncid=emlcntaolcom00000002)

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/27/08 1:15:54 AM Eastern Standard Time,

sahalina9@... writes:

> my question is , after removing the lump could I stay as I was

> without continuing to mastoctomy and later the harmful chemo, and so

> on. Could it be safe for my life???

>

Nelly..there is no true answer to that. Many women do well with lumpectomy

and follow up with either radiation or more natural approaches...sometimes as

well as mastectomy. I think it depends how much it's spread. Did they check

the lymph nodes?

**************

Life should be easier. So should your homepage.

Try the NEW AOL.com.

(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp & amp;icid=aolcom40vanity & amp;

ncid=emlcntaolcom00000002)