If You've Had Cancer, What Do You Think Causes Cancer?

Discussion in 'Ask For Help or Advice' started by GreenTrails, Oct 13, 2020.

  1. Maljam

    Maljam Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2020
    Messages:
    494
    You want me to go through each of that list and explain to you how they damage the body?
     
  2. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    558
    I focus in on this - it sounds like me. I'm also 5'6" and top out about 115. I've never gained much weight - 4 pregnancies and the heaviest I ever got was 130 lbs. I've also been "very healthy" - my cholesterol normally runs under 160. Very healthy, except for the autoimmune scalp condition, and root canal for 30 years, and a high stress personality, exemplified by a brain that was never quiet, but could stew and fester on perceived (and real) injustices etc. Plus a genetic predispostion (CHEK2 deletion).

    I think cholesterol is a big player. I should have worked harder to raise mine, and that's a puzzle that is intertwined with thyroid, stress and all the other players.

    Nick Gonzales talked (and wrote) alot about balancing the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems - those who are overly sympathetic dominant tend to get tumors, while the overly parasympathetic dominant get the blood cancers and lymphomas. I think that perspective ties to the whole stress influence in cancer equation. A lot of what Peat writes about, and haidut has some good interviews, keeping cortisol in check, blocking seratonin etc. all I feel act to also bring the nervous systems into balance.

    The question I have is why don't some people get cancer? My dad, for example, likely had the same genetic factors that I do, and also my stress tendencies (skinny) but didn't have cancer - though he did have some other health issues. Everyone (especially in old age) has some cancerous cells in them, it is really a question of whether the body can keep them in check, or if they proliferate.
     
  3. Ableton

    Ableton Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2019
    Messages:
    1,111
    Gender:
    Male
    No but by what mechanism? Is it the physical/chemical property of a substrnce that interfers with a chemical process in the body which causes this effect?
    I.e. this substance binds on this receptor, which means that.
    This premise, as you can tell, means our bodies are slave to the environment, and not reacting to it as a response (i.e. becoming catabolic despite having the fuel to be anabolic to prevent cancer).
    In my theory our bodies are reacting the way they do as a response that keeps us alive, not as a helpless slave. This does not mean you cannot alter natural responses with certain powerful substances, say synthetic thyroid.

    the premise that our bodies even keep overweight people hypothyroid without any other reason other that environmental factors interfere on a chemical/physical level with natural chemical processes in the body could be seen as close minded because evolutionary biology teaches us things happen for a reason. Cancer happens to be the n1 threat to our species. Decline in metabolism is a result of this threat, not causing it. N1 is survival, n2 is quality of life/physical prosperity
    Otherwise we would all be 6‘4 chadwick bosemans who die from cancer in their 40s looking 25 in this environment
     
  4. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    558
    Unfortunately, abortion is one of those things that will never be properly studied, because of politics. If you think about hormone buildup during a pregnancy, and then a sudden, unnatural cessation of those hormones (progesterone etc), how does that affect the body? What kind of response mechanism does that generate? Does the body go into fight mode, thinking it's under attack? All aside from the external influence of the drugs. In a miscarriage, the process is much more gradual, I think the body figures things out a little better because it has time. Still, even a miscarriage is not a zero-sum game, because *something* went wrong there too.

    Then there is the mental side of the equation. The female body and mind are uniquely created to cherish and nurture the life it is incubating. Purposely stopping that, even if the individual thinks she is ok with it, is unnatural - so you have the issue of the abrupt cessation, as well as the artificial thought that seems to suppress basic nature/nurture instincts. Again, contrasting with a miscarriage, there is usually a more healthy grieving process.
     
  5. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    tankasnowgod: Thanks for Haidut's Summary of PUFA. Walnuts, sunflower seeds, flaxseeds, fish (salmon, albacore tuna and trout), all seed oils, as well as fish oil, cod liver oil, and legumes (peanuts and beans) contain high amounts of PUFA.
     
  6. metabolizm

    metabolizm Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2019
    Messages:
    402
    Gender:
    Male
    I suspect gut health is an incredibly important factor which is often overlooked.
     
  7. PxD

    PxD Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2020
    Messages:
    54
    Gender:
    Male
    I find that theory interesting. One thing that I would point out though is that I do think stress can simply be defined as a deficit of energy production relative to energy needs.
     
  8. Recoen

    Recoen Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2020
    Messages:
    530
    Gender:
    Female
    DNA Methylation, Aging, And Cancer
     
  9. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    LucyL: Thank you. I have always had high cholesterol. I tried the KETO diet earlier this year, and my July labs showed that my cholesterol had shot up to 363; HDL 108; LDL 244. My triglycerides were 54. So I stopped eating KETO and in September my labs showed that my cholesterol was 247; HDL 75; LDL 165; with triglycerides of 35 mg/dL. My cholesterol has never been below 200, even when I was a lot younger. It's really hard to know what to eat. I have read a lot on different anti-cancer diets, and have tried some. I've studied Nick Gonzales, Gerson, Ray Peat. I really like Haidut's information. I listen to Mark Hyman and Dr. Berg on YouTube. I think stress is a large component of it all. My PCP has put me on Atorvastatin, which I took for three days and quit. I worry that he may refuse to treat me if I don't take it, but I am reading information on statins and I must conclude they are not for me.
     
  10. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    PxD: I agree with your definition of stress.
     
  11. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    558
    I did the Care Oncology protocol (Atorvastatin, Metformin, Doxy and Menbendazole) for 6 months following my surgery. It pushed my cholesterol even lower - 120s. I have read that being on a statin, for 6 months following surgery improved outcomes in breast cancer. Not sure the mechanism, but possibly the anti-inflammation. Also, I think 6 months isn't probably to terrible, not like many years would be. The COC Protocol™ in Breast Cancer - Care Oncology US

    Otherwise, have you read the book Hypothyroidism, the unsuspected illness, by Broda Barnes? He discusses thyroid and its influence on cholesterol.
     
  12. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    LucyL: Thank you for that information. If I may ask, what is "Doxy"? Menbendazole is for worms, isn't it? Six months would not be as bad as years, that's true. I took Atorvastatin for just three days, and I notice on those days I had a hard time walking even one mile. After stopping the Atorvastatin, I am back to walking two miles a day and not feeling so off balance as I had felt on the statin. I have an appointment with an oncologist tomorrow.
     
  13. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    558
    Doxy is Doxycycline. Menbendazole is the human version of fenbendazole, basically. Doxycycline has a large body of evidence with cancer, and is one of the favorite antibiotics on this forum.
     
  14. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    LucyL: Thank you. I asked my PCP about Doxycycline for cancer, and he looked at me and said, "It's an antibiotic." That was all he said. I asked about parasite medications, and he didn't say anything.
     
  15. Nicole W.

    Nicole W. Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2016
    Messages:
    287
    Gender:
    Female
    I think being “health conscious” can actually cause cancer. Being health conscious facilitates an ongoing cycle of denial in ourselves. When someone is trying to live their “best life” however they define it, they break down behaviors, food choices, exercise, even thoughts into good vs. bad. In Peat world, milk is good!... and salmon is bad. Fruit is good... nuts are bad. Beans and starch are bad, etc.. So we avoid those foods because: Health. Duh. But what if, one day, you feel like having those verboten foods? Or what if you’re hungry and just want to eat more than is, um, required? Would you give in to your desire or talk yourself out of it? Would you trust your body to make the decision for you or would you override and say: Oh no, I shouldn’t, my body is telling me that this sounds good, and I want it but,... no I shouldn’t...I don’t want to get sick.

    How many times can you override your body’s signals and still be well, though? Isn’t that damaging in itself?

    The reality is that when a person subscribes to a certain health philosophy they derail their internal regulatory system that is informed by their innate desires. Our sense of sight, smell, taste and touch facilitate these desires. What sounds good? What feels good? What looks good? What smells good? How many times has one of us thought, gosh, I’d really love some peanut butter right now.... on TOAST....but ah, no... starch and PUFAS. Or fries with my burger sound awesome, but no, I will never eat those again! Really missing fried chicken, but that’s a thing of the past! The oil, the skin, the arsenic ... no way! I mean, it goes on and on. When our body is telling us it wants something and we are constantly overriding that system, that has to be a form of self-harm and stress. It’s also self-harm to force ourselves to eat things that don’t appeal in the name of health or nutrition etc.. As an example, I eat liver a lot more frequently than I ever did before encountering Peat and its not because I suddenly started craving liver, or coconut oil or broth made with mustard greens. Ha.
    I’m seriously starting to wonder why I am doing this.

    I’m not trying to promote free-for-all hedonism here, but today’s society seems to be hell bent on coming up with creative ways to deny ourselves the things our bodies really want or forcing us to eat or do things our bodies don’t want. Keto, Paleo, Low Carb, High Carb, Veganism, Cross Fit, marathons, hot yoga etc... none of these diets/activities done in the name of health can possibly honor the diverse and complex desires of one human body. But if a person succeeds in doing it correctly, by denying themselves consistently, staying thin and fit and all that, then they get a societal badge of honor. You’re healthy! You’re beautiful! You made it!
    But are you really healthy?

    In my limited experience on this earth I have found that bodies like to eat, sleep, play, relax, do interesting things AND be given complete permission to do so. People who consistently refuse to give their bodies the things they really want create destructive emotions that can develop into pathological mechanisms.

    A long time ago, when my first baby was born I heard about an experiment where toddlers were given license to eat whatever they wanted for 30 days from a buffet style table of various foods and beverages. It was all there in terms of foods, not just ones traditionally perceived as healthy. Their nutrition was tracked as they consumed the various foods they chose to eat and the researchers concluded that they had satisfied their nutritional requirements perfectly. If 2 and 3 year olds can manage this just by honoring their desires, without guilt or reservation, is there a reason why can not do the same? It would require setting aside all the science, all the advice, all the caveats and all the unrealistic expectations.... and just trust our internal guidance system despite the fact that it might run counter to all the ideas we’ve been taught.

    Just an anecdote: for whatever reason, good health and longevity run in my family. I have had several members live to be over 100, and not because they were particularly careful in life. We have our fair share of smokers, alcoholics, addicts and generally health-UNconcerned people. Everyone loves to eat in my family. Most of them honored their hunger cues and beyond that didn’t give a f**k, about what was considered healthy or prescribed or whatever was popular at any given point in time. They certainly weren’t consumed with trying to be healthy, they just listened to their bodies. Lived their lives. I’m wondering if this is the overarching tenant of good health. Just having the the body and mind aligned and honoring the innate desires for delicious foods, sufficient rest and interesting play. Is this the forest we’ve been missing for the trees?
     
  16. lampofred

    lampofred Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,763
    Gender:
    Male
    Kids are born with sharp internal guidance but it's a vicious feedback loop where the less you follow your internal guidance system (by enduring short-term pain for long-term gain, not trusting your senses, etc., ideas which are heavily promoted in schools and general culture), the less sharp it becomes. The "wisdom of the body" as Gershom Zaijeck (recommended by RP) calls it gets disordered. Wilhelm Reich calls it character armoring.

    In addition to taking aspirin, RP has also recommended eating liver for cancer. In his article on breast cancer (Breast Cancer) he mentions that a strain of mice that was extremely susceptible to breast cancer became cancer-free for generations after being given liver extracts.
     
  17. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    Michael Mohn: Sorry about your mother's experience; how sad. Myself, I feel that pregnancy can often put an undue load on females. Abortion seems to be a horrible thing to do, yet some girls/women have no where to turn. The Government pushes for pro life, but surely doesn't provide for delivery and care of an infant born out of wedlock, or if a woman is in a position unable to have/care for a baby (so the govt. is not really pro life, rather they are pro birth). Two people were involved in a pregnancy, but the female has the weightier end of it. May I ask, what do you mean when you say "very high serotonin personality." Thanks for your comment: "avoiding estrogenic factors like pufa and hormones and chronic stress are probably the most important steps." My PCP won't allow me to have any progesterone. I would like to take a low dose (5mg.) of DHEA. I read (Haidut, I think) that "chronic stress (cortisol) causes disease, and substances that block the effects of cortisol are 1. DHEA; 2. testosterone; 3. DHT; and 4. progesterone"; it would seem that progesterone and low DHEA would both be good for me. Thanks for commenting on my post.
     
  18. OP
    GreenTrails

    GreenTrails Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2020
    Messages:
    60
    Gender:
    Female
    Regina: Thanks for the information about cooked mushrooms. I like them, and I will get some.
     
  19. Michael Mohn

    Michael Mohn Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2019
    Messages:
    50
    Be careful with Dhea, in a stressed organism and in females Dhea converts easily into estrogen. First step would be progesterone, vitamin E, maybe pregnenolone. Carrot salad and mushroom are simple methods to lower estrogen. Aspirin and caffeine are strongly anti carcinogenic. Don't trust you doc too much, he doesn't suffer from his advice. Supplementing estrogen is a big NO! Your doc might be confused about natural progesterone because progestins, synthetic progesterone derivatives which are actually estrogenic, are lumped together with natural (bio identical) progesterone.
     
  20. LucyL

    LucyL Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2013
    Messages:
    558
    Since you mentioned it, I can't pass up an opportunity to link to one of my all time favorite studies :): Self-selection of Diet by Newly Weaned Infants

    I think saying that a happy, joyous life will get you to very old age can be just a rigid as saying perfect nutrition will get you to old age. Neither is 1oo percent of the equation, because many (most?) people have genetic tendencies that push physiological instabilities. So the Middle Ages diet of beans and fish did in an awful lot of people very early, while Weston Price's work attested to better (Peatier even) diets resulting in good health for generations in other societies. And, as Pottenger showed, it's circular. You can become what you eat over generations. Most of us are here because we were/are sick. We're looking for ways to bring back the balance, to offset the effects of inbalance that have already begun to afflict us.
     
Loading...