Medical Questions > Cancer > Breast Cancer Forum

Anyone With Breast Cancer Refuse Tamoxifen And Radiation? (Page 1)

I was just wondering if anyone had a lumpectomy here but refused the tamoxifen and radiation due to the horrible side effects and possibly causing increased risk of more cancer with radiation?

I know of several people who are alive today who have done both.

Would like to hear from you.
Did you find this post helpful?
First Helper User Profile TriciaHealthy
|

replied May 2nd, 2009
refusing radiation & tamoxifen
I had a partial mastectomy (lumpectomy) in March 2009 for Stage one invasive ductal carcinoma, no lymph node involvement and clear margins, pea sized tumor. I am refusing both radiation and tamoxifen because of serious side effects. I am 58 years old. I'd like to know who else has done this and has anyone had recurrence. Roseann
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied January 7th, 2014
I have the same diagnosis. However at 61 they want to give me Anastrozole, which had many bad side affects the same or worse than tamoxifin. My doctors are going nuts because I came so close to having a double mastectomy they were pushing. Because I refused they broke down and did the lumpectomy. I am refusing radiation. I feel if cancer returns, then I can decide to do more extensive measures. I have implants now which would be most likely capulated. If I have radiation and cancer returns you can not have implants instead a radical measure of removing stomach muscle and skin to make breasts and tons of surgeries and pain. I am taking my chances. I have asthma and stenosis and pain issues already. I have researched a lot and feel what they are selling to women is archaic and many new treatments are being done, just getting doctors to change is the problem. It's billions of dollars for these surgeons and oncologist, but don't care of the suffering from their so called cures.

To add my gene test was negative for cancer, I am HER2 positive and the invasive ductal cancer was so small the biopsy actually got most all of it, but they still took out sentinel lobes (which now cause pain and lymphedema) and took out tissue and breast is healing but is a bit lopsided and hard around scar. I am a single woman, family all passed, and have no support of people. Therefore I felt I can not go through all this with me alone. I believe I have made the right decision.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 2nd, 2009
tamoxifen and radiation can have miserable side effects; however recent clinical trials offer hope of eliminating the need chemotherapy and surgery. Immunotherapy is a new treatment with clinical trials underway. The treatment is suppose to enable the immune system to locate and attack cancer cells specifically. The research is being funded primarily by a publicly traded company called Mentor Capital, which has a 20% stake in the company.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied March 21st, 2010
Refusing radiation and Tamoxifen
To Roseann - none of my business, but I would strongly suggest that you rethink your decisions to decline 2 treatments designed to prevent recurrence. You have had a very serious form of cancer; can you afford to play the likelihood of recurrence like one plays horse races? I know a little about breast CA: my daughter was treated for it 8 years ago - not the same type as yours...actually one which is notoriously less threatening. She also declined Tamoxifen, though she did have chemo and radiation. 2 days ago, we sat in the hospital waiting room while she had surgery in the other breast, for removal of microcalcifications. Should she have taken Tamoxifen, Arimidex. or some such? Did she end up tempting the Fates? I don't know,and we won't know until her path report comes back next week, but I think that you can see where this is heading. I hope that you will give some more thought to this.
Sheila
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 8th, 2011
Dear Sheila, so sorry to hear about your daughter. How is she doing? I hope surgery and everything went well.if you don't mind me asking, what type of breast cancer did she originally have? I'm assuming it might have been an early stage invasive cancer since she had to do chemo(?) Good thoughts are with you all. Take care.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied March 31st, 2010
If you would like to drop tamoxifen & radiation, then make sure that you:
1. Take herbs/multivitamins to boost your immune system in hoping that your immune system will work against cancer
2. Adopt healthy diet as your life style. Avoid processed food, deep fried food, red meat. Eat lots of vegetables & fruits. Instead of eating chicken/beef/pork meat, you can consume fish & beans.
3. Live a stress free life, join yoga club.

They have good herbs, esp for cancer patients.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied March 2nd, 2011
Length of weeks to receive radiation treatments
What I don't understand, is why there is a "standard of care" for women who have a lumpectomy for Stage 1 breast cancer to have 6-1/2 weeks of radiation, when other women with Stage 3 and 4 breast cancer get the same radiation? Shouldn't there be a sliding scale of how many weeks of radiation are needed depending on what stage number the cancer is?
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied April 14th, 2011
I was thinking the same thing. I think one day they will determine a different treatment plan with people with different stages after trials are completed for a longer length of time. I actually have DCIS Stage 0, Inter. grade 2 CM, and undergoing the same 6 1/2 week standard of care radiation treatment. I think its for preventive care in my case. I had 3 dr opinions and they all gave the same plan:)
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied April 14th, 2011
Thank you for replying gg2011. You sound like a very thorough person by having 3 opinions. Since writing it was determined that my DCIS was a bit larger than shown on the ultra sound and mammograms, putting me in a higher risk group where I might need chemotherapy. Some tissue was sent to a lab in CA that recommended that I did NOT have to have chemo (thank you Lord). I felt so against radiation because of what my dad went through with lung cancer & radiation, but with talking to my doctors I decided that I didn't want to take any chances of a shorter life, or recurrence. Today I had the first of 33 radiation treatments. Good luck to you.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied May 12th, 2011
Hi Ginger77777....so glad you did not have to have chemo!! i know i was so against radiation too but i only have 9 treatments left now (out of 33)...it hasn't been too bad for me..been keeping up with my exercising....just now on the 5th week, feeling more fatigue. how are you doing? will you have to do tamoxifen after? hope you are doing well.
take care
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied June 8th, 2011
Experienced User
The 50% vs. 1% benefit given for Tamoxifen is the difference between a relative statistic (e.g. 1% is 50% of 2%) and an absolute (the actual difference, or 1 vs. 2) statistic. And what's sad is that drug companies always express a drug's benefit in relative terms, which is merely the relationship between outcomes -- not the bottom line difference.

This week's "exciting" headlines about Aromasin showing a 65% benefit in preventing first time breast cancer is a classic example of this very misleading numbers game. The absolute difference was something like 1.5 recurrences per 100 women in the non-Aromasin group to .5 in group taking Aromasin -- a difference of less than one per 100.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 8th, 2011
Hi Triciak
I agree with you.
I've been torn whether to take tamoxifen. I was getting so confused over the recurrence rates....they always tell me a 49% benefit but like you said not the absolute difference. and also doesn't the time period make a difference...such as if its 10% risk ...that's not yearly but over a 10yr period.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied June 9th, 2011
Experienced User
Looking for Alternative to Tamoxifen
Hi gg2011,

After much consideration, my cousin (who has BC) has decided that it is not worth it to take Tamoxifen.

Instead, she is going to use diet, exercise (rebounder), several supplements like iodine, fish oil, vitamin D, plus DIM/I3C and bio-identical progesterone to reduce her odds of a recurrence, all supervised by a prevent doc, (when we find her one). After what she and I discovered, I can't say that I blame her. If I were in her shoes, I would probably do the same.

At the end of the day though, what ever decision we make, it is important to do our research first and make the decision that feels right for us.

For anyone who is interested, I posted a new thread,"Calling All Hormonal Girls", for us to ask questions, get advice about the best foods to eat, herbs to take etc.

Take care,


Tricia
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied June 12th, 2011
Experienced User
Dr. Burzynski: Antineoplastons Treatment
Antineoplastons (ANP) are peptides and amino acid derivatives, discovered by Dr. S. Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D. in 1967.

looking Dr. Burzynski first identified naturally occurring peptides in the human body that control cancer growth. He observed that cancer patients typically had deficiency of certain peptides in their blood as compared to healthy individuals. According to Dr. Burzynski, Antineoplastons are components of a biochemical defense system that controls cancer without destroying normal cells.

Chemically, the Antineoplastons include peptides, amino acid derivatives and organic acids. They occur naturally in blood and urine and they are reproduced synthetically for medicinal use. The name of Antineoplastons comes from their functions in controlling neoplastic, or cancerous, cells (anti-neoplastic cells agents).

Antineoplastons act as molecular switches, which turn off life processes in abnormal cells and force them to die through apoptosis (programmed death of a cell). While they trigger the death of cancer cells, they do not inhibit normal cell growth. They specifically target cancer cells without harming healthy cells.

It is generally known that the cancerous process results from increased activity of oncogenes and decreased expression of tumor suppressor genes. Antineoplastons "turn on" tumor suppressor genes and "turn off" oncogenes restoring the proper balance in gene expression

The FDA permits cancer patients to be treated using Antineoplastons in FDA approved clinical trails. Since brain cancer is one of the most difficult cancers to treat, he places a focus on brain cancer in his clinical trials. However he has successfully treated breast cancer patients too.

Be sure to watch, on YOUTUBE,the first 36 of 108 minutes of
"Burzynski - Cancer Is Serious Business"

You can also visit the main site by GOOGLING "Burzynski Clinic"

I am very interested to hear your thoughts. Idea

Tricia
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 15th, 2011
I am 18 months into my journey to beat Invasive Ductal BC, grade 11/111. I have just hooked up with a wonderful C.A.M. practitioner but must travel 5 hrs to see him as Mass. does not protect the rights to C.A.M. medicine. I'm doing very well, had no surgery, no chemo, no rad, but am taking lots of wonderful nutrients and natural meds, I walk a LOT, and follow a strict diet. It takes all that. If you refuse conventional trtmt (and I applaud you for that) you must have the best holistic guide you can find. depending on your state, you'll find oncologists that are practicing C.A.M. who can help you. Do not browse the interent all day looking for a cure; there is no one cure. It takes a complete change of your body chemistry, thus a new lifestyle. I wish you the best and hope you'll post your progress.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 17th, 2011
Alternative Approaches:

There are a number of clinics in the U.S. and around the world that are having good successes treating breast cancer. Some of the approaches used include: Iscador (mistletoe), homeopathy, Essiac, Green tea, 714X, diet, nutrition, enzymes, laetrile, use of progesterone creams for hormone imbalances, mushroom extracts, MGN3, IP6, and more. Most of the therapies listed on our Choice of Therapies page can be used with breast cancers.

Calcium D-glucurate has been shown in animal studies to reduce tumor formation by 50-70% and the levels of serum estradiol were decreased by 23%. It may be worthwhile to add this to one's program.


Mistletoe, also known as Iscador, is used at quite a few clinics in Mexico, overseas, and in the states. http://www.cancer.gov/cancerinfo/pdq/cam/m istletoe -

For more info, visit iscador.com. They can put you in touch with physicians who use it.

Applying progesterone transdermally (directly to the breast) may help to curtail the proliferation of breast cancer cells.

Flaxseed oil & cottage cheese have been pretty successful as a protocol.

See article entitled: Flaxseeds May Help Fight Breast Cancer

Dr. Day has a 10 Step approach to treating cancer. Go to her website for more information. She has a program that can be done at home; however, I strongly encourage you to work with an alternative physician to oversee any program.

Clinical Trials using more alternative
approaches:

Burzynski's Clinic is doing a clinical trial using antineoplastons. There may be other clinics offering this approach.

Additional clinical trials can be searched by going to some of the links on our Clinical Trials
page.

Breast cancer
prevention:

Breast cancer prevention includes watching your diet; exercising and avoiding toxins. It is most important to lower the saturated fat content in your diet, but to include "good fats" such as fish oils
and olive oil.

Eating organic foods will help you avoid pesticides, which have been linked to this and many other forms of cancer.

Daily exercise reduces the risk of breast cancer significantly.

Minimize your exposure to ionizing radiation.

Recurrence:

Once a person has had breast cancer, there is a greater risk of reoccurrence. A diligent maintenance program and lifestyle change is important to optimize the duration of remission. The use of a mega-nutrient nutraceutical, plus detoxification will enhance traditional approaches and may function on its own as a good adjunctive program. Using these protocols not only
detoxifies the body, but strengthens the immune system.

Bi-annual check ups are important for physical exams, overall blood tests (chem panel/CBC
differential), selective tumor mark blood tests, such CA15-3 or CA-27.29 (Breast), and/or various instrumental techniques to monitor a possible reoccurrence of cancer. Early detection of a breast cancer reoccurrence can enhance success of various treatment modalities for cancer.

Miscellaneous Info:

Info on a Fraudulent study on using ultrahigh doses of chemotherapy followed by a bone marrow transplants to treat breast cancer.


There is a good website for information on breast cancer - AnnieAppleseed - and a good breast cancer forum at Amazon - for those people who are using alternative approaches. Some have done surgery but chosen not to do chemo and radiation. Others have taken a totally alternative route. These people are very supportive.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 20th, 2011
Tamoxifen was the cause of my mother's death.
My mother had breast cancer, she had her left breast removed and tissue under the left armpit as that is where the cancer appeared, under the arm, not in the breast itself. They put her on Tamoxifen. The doctors said that it would prevent cancer in the other breast.

I will tell you that it would have been better if they were worried about more breast cancer to do a double mastectomy than to put her through what Tamoxifen did to her.

The purpose of Tamoxifen is to block Estrogen which they said that her cancer grew more in the presence of. Tamoxifen is a form of Testosterone. The doctors did not tell us that if Estrogen is blocked, you cannot absorb calcium. This lead to a severe fracture of her left leg. They never did a bone density test, they never put her on additional calcium, or told her to eat soy because women don't absorb calcium without estrogen. Plant estrogens would have allowed her bones to be nourished.

When I look at what happened to her from the leg surgery, as they had to redo a previous total hip replacement as well, the lack of calcium meant she couldn't heal. They inevitably opened the whole incision to let infection drain. The incision was 2 feet long. She lost so much blood her brain was oxygen deprived and she lost the ability of speech. She went into a coma. What she had to endure for doctors to make there fat pay check was monstrous.

No matter what medicine doctors put you on, you are the one who has to take the pills. Not them. They do not suffer the consequences, but you will.

Doctors do not seem to think you are a human being any longer, just a means to an end to keep enough hospital beds filled. Doctors are supposed to be smarter than this, you'd think but they have lots of bills to pay for all their education.

If I get breast cancer, they can keep their treatments, I'd rather do my own research and try other things out there. If I die, I'll go in one piece. My mother's operation for breast cancer was not life saving, her cancer was late in life and very slow growing. Her life expectancy was put at ten more years if we did nothing about the cancer. She lived 2 years after the cancer operation and six months was pure agony due to the effects of Tamoxifen. She would have lived 8 more years, probably, if they had told her to leave well enough alone.

But it wasn't their mother, was it!
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 20th, 2011
Sorry for your loss, courag1. It is unfortunate that your mother had to go through so much pain at her age. Cancer is a big dirty business. "A solution to cancer would mean the termination of research programs, the obsolescence of skills, the end of dreams of personal glory, triumph over cancer would dry up contributions to self-perpetuating charities....It would mortally threaten the present clinical establishments by rendering obsolete the expensive surgical, radiological and chemotherapeutic treatments in which so much money, training and equipment is invested....The new therapy must be disbelieved, denied, discouraged and disallowed at all costs, regardless of actual testing results, and preferably without any testing at all."--Robert Houston and Gary Null.

Thanks for sharing your mother's story. It will encourage us all to do our research and not rely on the doctors. It's clear they usually don't have our best interest in mind when they push their heavy drugs on us. I'm sure your mother is looking down from heaven and is happy you are informing others.

May God bless you.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied January 7th, 2014
Thank you so much for saying so eloquently what I have been saying since I learned of my breast cancer. 40 years ago my mother had no choice, they just did a radical mastectomy even though they had new research that lumpectomy was a new alternative. But established old doctors wouldn't change. Now this many years later, they won't change this archaic mutilation of a woman's body. NOW scaring them into double mastectomies with many surgeries to rebuild. It's a not about what is right for women but what they can get away with. Many test when not needed, it's all shameful. Thank you, for saying it so much better.
cindy
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 20th, 2011
Extremely eHealthy
PARDON my intellectual question;
What happened to JannieB who started this series BECAUSE she last checked in HERE 4 yrs ago?
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied November 11th, 2014
Any reply regarding JannieB
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 22nd, 2011
There are dozens of natural cancer cures, Google my nick name...
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 22nd, 2011
Extremely eHealthy
Living here i Nevada where Laetrile b17 was first hyped; it has failed every scientific study
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 22nd, 2011
Oh you're from US? I'm sorry...
Your medical doctors, corporations and presidents 'always' tell the truth and know what's best for the average Joe.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied February 19th, 2013
B17 does work! Kind of ironic, my mother knew some of Dr. Richardsons patients who were cured with Laetril in the 70s.Then, she herself, was diagnosed with advanced stage breast cancer about 10 years ago. She chose to opt out of chemo etc. Dr. was not happy! Six months later went in for a body scan, after she had been using B17 and a complete diet change, she was and still is cancer free!A friend of mine asked what my mom did. Her friend had advanced stage prostate cancer. Opted out of chemo etc. Chose to do B17 and vitamin c injections.Six months later he was cancer free and still is to this day. it has been a few years.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied July 11th, 2011
I also agree with you.If you see some cancer visit this site *link removed*
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 22nd, 2011
Extremely eHealthy
no I don't buy into that drivel, but laetrile which is apricot pits has failed every time AND I WAS here when it all started, MULTIPLE DECADES AGO

I will jump on all sorts of possibilities but the ones I already investigated and found to be WORTHLESS, I feel compelled to SAY SO
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied June 22nd, 2011
You are mistaken if you are quoting the FDA based studies.
Plz post some references.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

This post has been removed because it did not meet our Community Guidelines.

User Profile
replied June 23rd, 2011
Experienced User
NaturalNews) Are apricot seeds a source for a natural substance that kills cancer cells without destroying the cancer victim's health and wealth? The essential ingredient has been called laetrile or vitamin B 17. If there is any merit to it, why is this information being suppressed? Why are people who have been cured or have cured others being censured and imprisoned? Could be there is something to the claims.

Keep in mind that the cancer industry world wide is estimated at a 200 billion dollar a year industry. There are many in various associated positions within that industry who would be without a job if that cash flow dried up suddenly with the news that there are cheaper, less harmful, and more efficacious remedies available. Big Pharmacy would virtually vanish.

What is B17, or Laetrile Anyway?

In 1952, a biochemist named Dr. Ernst Krebb, Jr. in San Francisco decided that cancer was a metabolic reaction to a poor diet, and a missing nutrient from modern man's diet could be the key to overcoming cancer. His research led to a compound found in over 1200 edible plants throughout nature. That compound is amagdylin,

Amagdylin is found with the highest concentration and necessary enzymes in apricot seed kernels. A primitive tribe, the Hunzas, were known to consume large amounts of apricot seed kernels. The hard pit had to be broken to get into the soft kernels. There was no incidence of cancer with them at all, ever. And they had long, healthy life spans. Laetrile was created by simply extracting amagdylin from the soft apricot kernels, purifying it and putting it into a concentrated form.

Amagdylin is a nitrioloside. Nitriolisides are difficult to categorize since they are in foods but not foods themselves. As a nitrioloside, amagdylin resembled the B complex structures, so Dr. Krebb called it B17 since by that time 16 types of B vitamins had been isolated.

Dr. Krebb injected himself with laetrile to ensure there would be no toxic side effects. He conducted further lab animal and culture experiments to conclude that laetrile would be effective in the treatment of cancer. By the way, the FDA standard for drug safety is known as LD 50, LD stands for lethal dose, and the 50 is the percentage threshold of lab animals poisoned to death by the drug tested. As long as the percentage killed is under 50%, FDA will approve it!

Since laetrile is derived directly from a food substance in nature and not chemically developed in a laboratory, it is impossible to patent. And of course it's not toxic. In other words, just as with all natural healing substances, Big Pharma and the AMA can't make a fortune from the substance and from the remedies for the long term side effects. There have been several testimonies from cancer victims who cured themselves by chewing large quantities of the apricot seeds alone.

The seeds are more available to consumers now than laetrile because in 1971 the FDA banned laetrile. Laetrile is difficult, but not impossible, to purchase. The seeds are actually the soft almond shaped, bitter tasting kernels from inside the pits. A few users prefer extracting those soft kernels from the pits themselves. But the soft kernels are available and inexpensive.

So How Does It Work?

Amagdylin contains four substances. Two are glucose; one is benzaldyhide, and one is cyanide. Yes, cyanide and benzaldyhide are poisons if they are released or freed as pure molecules and not bound within other molecular formations. Many foods containing cyanide are safe because the cyanide remains bound and locked as part of another molecule and therefore cannot cause harm.

There is even an enzyme in normal cells to catch any free cyanide molecules and to render them harmless by combining them with sulfur. That enzyme is rhodanese, which catalyzes the reaction and binds any free cyanide to sulfur. By binding the cyanide to sulfur, it is converted to a cyanate which is a neutral substance. Then it is easily passed through the urine with no harm to the normal cells.

But cancer cells are not normal. They contain an enzyme that other cells do not share, beta-glucosidase. This enzyme, virtually exclusive to cancer cells, is considered the "unlocking enzyme" for amagdylin molecules. It releases both the benzaldyhide and the cyanide, creating a toxic synergy beyond their uncombined sum. This is what the cancer cell's beta-glucosidase enzyme does to self destruct cancer cells.

Amagdylin or laetrile in conjunction with the protective enzymes in healthy cells and the unlocking enzymes in cancer cells is thus able to destroy cancer cells without jeopardizing healthy cells. Chemotherapy, on the other hand, kills a lot of other cells and diminishes one's immune system while killing an undetermined amount of cancer cells.

Those cancer cells tend to return elsewhere because the patient's general health was reduced from the pervasive chemo toxins. The cancer industry has declared the bench mark for curing cancer as being cancer free for 5 years. It's estimated that of those who undergo the AMA big three for curing cancer, surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, no more than 3% make the 5 year cancer free mark. Besides the treatments' debilitating effects, they are much more expensive!

But for someone with cancer, it takes a considerable amount of daily B17 consumption to enable the amagdylin to reach the cancer cells with beta-glucosidase. That's because some of the amagdylin molecules will be neutralized by the normal cells containing rhodanese.

Many practitioners who use laetrile have an 85% cure rate among cancer victims who did not undergo much of the standard cut, burn, and poison that is main-stream - while the cure rate for those who come to laetrile therapy as a last resort after all that conventional medicine could only have a 15% recovery rate. There is a clinic in Mexico that claims a 100 percent cure rate!

The Medical Mafia's Suppression

Since around 1920, practitioners of alternative cancer therapies and remedies and their messengers have been marginalized, harassed, imprisoned, and even killed. Federal agencies have been used to bring about bogus charges or IRS tax liens that are enforced by US Marshals the way Dr. Gary Glum was hassled for even writing books on Essiac Tea. See Natural News article "Essiac Tea: A Cancer Cure Big Pharma Doesn't Want You To Know About."

A young Brooklyn man, Jason Vale, was imprisoned because he refused to stop telling others on TV and in lectures how he cured himself of cancer using those nasty apricot pit kernels! Jason is a more recent public example of the Medical Mafia's grip on the legal system regarding B17. Laetrile, which is non toxic, was banned by the FDA in 1971.

Shortly after the 1971 laetrile ban, a practicing physician in San Francisco, Dr. John Richardson, who had been using laetrile successfully on cancer patients, came to his friend G. Edward Griffin, a published investigative journalist, and asked Griffin if he could write up something to help him and others continue using laetrile on their cancer patients.

G. Edward Griffin's research evolved into his groundbreaking book, World Without Cancer. This book not only explained laetrile and chronicled several cancer cures, but Griffin's investigative nose led him down the rabbit hole and into the underbelly of the cancer industry's efforts at keeping alternative cancer cures from the light of day. That's how he discovered that the Sloane-Kettering Cancer Institute had buried documentation from scientists' research, which proved laetrile was "highly effective" at curing cancer.

Griffin received those documents himself from a Dr. Ralph Moss, who had been told to cover up that evidence and claim that laetrile was worthless. He refused and left his position as PR manager with Sloane-Kettering. Since that time in 1977, Dr. Ralph Moss has gone on to write or edit several books on cancer cure options. It's always encouraging to see an insider come out! Someone else filled Dr. Moss's vacant position and lied the lies about laetrile that filled the medical journals.

And what about those medical journals? Lately, the most prestigious New England Journal of Medicine dropped its standard of not allowing articles contributed to the journal from anyone who was receiving money from Big Pharma, as long as it's less than 10 grand annually. If they didn't drop that standard, there wouldn't be enough articles to fill the journal! Of course, most medical journals are glossy ad forums for Big Pharma anyway.

Both G. Edward Griffin with World Without Cancer and Phillip Day in his book Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth, make it very clear that the cancer industry does not really want a cure. Even non-profit organizations get millions in donations from the brainwashed, huddled masses along with funding for promoting Big Pharma. A non-profit organization can and will have key people working for 6 figure plus annual salaries, by the way.

Doctors mostly do as they are trained and told; medical journals contain false reports and lies. Cancer foundations have breast cancer months or whatever as PR to get people into the disease industry's money mill as early as possible, and at the top, there is Big Pharma. It's all about money and career. Not about public health and "The War on Cancer."

So far in mainstream medicine, it's been a losing battle with more getting cancer than ever. Around 1 out of 3 is destined to get cancer these days, and more are dying from cancer after conventional treatments. Talk about pandemics! All this with lots of cash going their way, enabling some to live a lush lifestyle and others hanging on to their comfy, secure jobs at the expense of our health.

Meanwhile, too many true humanitarian doctors and herbalists and writers concerned with the truth wind up being treated like criminals or nut cases, sometimes with their lives destroyed. That's tragic. And so is the fact that millions suffer and die while being conditioned against using effective and less painless procedures.

Laetrile Treatment

There are many success stories from people using just laetrile or apricot pit kernels. The usual recommendation for prevention is around 5 to 7 over the course of a day. For actual cancer cases use 2 to 3 times that. Some say one kernel for every 10 lbs of body weight. For maintenance after a cure, go back to 5 to 7 per day.

Some laetrile therapists have patients use vitamin B15 tablets and digestive enzymes such as papaya's papain and pineapple's bromalene. Too many apricot pit kernels can create nausea or dizziness. There are no recorded deaths or disabilities from the apricot seeds or laetrile, however. Although some success has been recorded with patients undergoing conventional therapy and using laetrile, it's not recommended. Eventually most of those who combine the two get off the chemo or die anyway.

There are many practitioners and writers who recommend you combine other alternative cancer therapies while taking laetrile or using the apricot pits - especially if you go for it alone at home. It should be obvious to Natural News readers that a foundation of healthy food and less stress is necessary. A fundamental lifestyle change has to be a part of any permanent cancer cure. In addition, a little eclectic mix and match with other alternative therapies seems like a good approach.

For example, Gerson's cancer cure therapy's juicing protocol with the right type of juicer and using coffee enemas to detox the liver could be added with laetrile use. It's hard to go wrong with that healthy combination.

Google Natural News article on :the Gerson Therapy" and "Apricot Seeds Kill Cancer Cells With No Side Effects" and you'll find more sources.
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied February 8th, 2012
I'm a B17 success story!
What an amazingly complete explanation of Amygdalin! I've been treated with this (also called laetrile or B17) for almost a year and receive it intravenously once a week as well as orally every day. I am steadily improving from my initial Stage III Invasive Breast Cancer, and have never had cut/burn/poison treatments. There is NO SIDE EFFECT and I am disheartened that the FDA has worked so hard to deny this product to cancer patients. It is safe, effective and inexpensive. Thank you for your comprehesive explanation!
Janice
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied February 16th, 2012
Experienced User
Which alternative cancer treatment clinic did you go to? And were you given DMSO and vitamic infusions along with laetrile?

Also were you advised to do juice fasts?
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied July 12th, 2011
Experienced User
The Budwig FOCC Diet
doctor Dr. Budwig researched the damaging effects of hydrogenated and other denatured fats upon human health and discovered the powerfully healing nature of cold-pressed, liquid flax seed oil on various degenerative diseases, including cancer. She showed that the highly unsaturated flax seed oil contained electrons and essential fatty acids that can revitalize the cells, heal the cell membrane and improve oxygen absorption.

1. AM--sauerkraut juice

2. Just before breakfast-- green or herbal tea

3. Breakfast--3 Tbs. Flax Oil & 6 Tbs. Quark or Cottage Cheese, well blended, freshly ground flaxseeds, fresh fruit, raw nuts, honey + 2 Tbs. milk if needed for thinning. Afterward, if hungry, choose whole grain bread, raw vegetables, quality hard cheeses.

4. SUNLIGHT outside and EXERCISE if well enough

5. Mid-morning - Homemade Vegetable Juice (carrots, beets or greens)

See the complete diet and explanation on the Budwig Center website
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied July 30th, 2011
Probably refusing Tamoxifen, too
I am probably going to refuse tamoxifen. I would post a link to sites that shows many reasons why, but the moderators would just remove them.

I am 51 with DCIS and mucinous cancer (rare, but slow growing type) low grade, 1 cm, ER+/PR+, Her2nu -, BRCA-, Oncotype dx 12.
I was fortunate that if I had to have it it was in my right not my left breast. This made the radiation a lot less scary (not above the heart).

That being said, I was very, very scared of radiation. I had to be dragged kicking all the way almost. Well, I finally agreed to do it, and in retrospect I am glad I did. They did manage to limit my field very well and my side effects were minimal. I did not notice much of anything, slightly red skin but not much.

I would definitely do one or the other. Surgery alone would not (for me, anyway), reduce the risk sufficiently. If you have a bilateral mastectomy instead of a lumpectomy as I did, then that may be a different story. It depends on how old you are and the aggressiveness and stage of your cancer.

If you are older and it is a lower grade and you caught it early, you could probably do a less aggressive treatment.

I would read as much as I could about it (Susan Love's Breast Book and the Anti Cancer Book by Dr Servan Scrieber are good starts).
|
Did you find this post helpful?

User Profile
replied August 10th, 2011
Hi everyone,

regarding the radiation question, lumpectomy + radiation was developed as an alternative to mastectomy (which is what most breast cancer patients used to undergo). There is ample evidence that lumpectomy without radiation has less favorable outcomes for many women, including those with DCIS and small tumors. Having radiation treatment at a respected breast cancer center will help reduce risk of serious side effects and minimize the less serious ones. Cancer is tough and we have to be tough with it. Obviously, this is just my opinion and everyone has to do what's right for her. But I think the decision should be made while taking account the available scientific evidence. Below are some studies that specifically address survival with and without radiation:

"Locoregional Recurrence in Patients With Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Preliminary Results of a Single Institution Study"

"The influence of margin width and volume of disease near margin on benefit of radiation therapy for women with DCIS treated with breast-conserving therapy"

"Impact of interval from breast conserving surgery to radiotherapy on local recurrence in older women with breast cancer: retrospective cohort analysis"

"Comparative effectiveness of ductal carcinoma in situ management and the roles of margins and surgeons"

Hope this helps a bit,

Sarah
|
Did you find this post helpful?

replied September 9th, 2011
Radition for slow growing papillary carcinoma left breast.
I had a lumpectomy May 25 for slow growing papillary carcinoma, clean margins and 6 nodes removed all clear. Went to oncologist and he said I did not need radiation but take an aromasin pill everyday for 5 yrs. Now, almost 4 months after my surgery my surgeon says he thought I was getting radiation. I told him no the oncologist said I did not need it. Its my left breast and I am 57yrs old in good health. I am going to refuse radiation and take my chances. I believe the damage radiation can do to my body is more high risk than the cancer reoccurring. Besides, radiation is known to cause secondary cancer called angiocarcinoma one of the fastest growing cancers. so, i say not me. I will take my chances and really fine tune what I eat. I would rather my slow growing cancer comes back that any worse secondary problem happen because of the radiation.
|
Did you find this post helpful?
12
Must Read
Millions of Americans are diagnosed with cancer. But what exactly is cancer and how does it affect the body?...
What puts you at risk for developing cancer? Learn how you can avoid or reduce exposure to risk factors for cancer here....
Cancer can occur anywhere in the body. But what are the signs and symptoms of cancer? Learn about general symptoms of cancer here....