Ok, so I know there are gobs and gobs of conflicting information swirling around the issues of breast cancer, radiation, mammograms, cancer prevention and alternative cancer treatments.
I feel it is really important to be connected with viable sources and studies you might not find in the mainstream media.
I don't have a history of breast cancer in my family, so this is an "outsiders" view-- but one I hold very dear simply because of its vital importance to women's health. AND because of a growing body of evidence which supports prevention strategies and alternate treatments to traditional medical cures.
I'll tell you right up front: I am very selective in which cancer causes I support, especially given the compromised standards of some really big cancer research organizations which have recently come to pass.
(Prime example: The Komen Foundation's partnership with KFC in "Buckets for the Cure." For more info read http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/kfc-fights-breast-cancer-fried-chicken/story?id=10458830 and http://www.naturalnews.com/028669_KFC_brst_cancer.html.
Sorry, but I just cannot get behind promoting buckets of deep fried chicken as a way to find a cure for cancer! )
This following an enlightening article supported by medical research by prestigious institutions, and I highly recommend taking a minute to read through it and maybe learn something new.
Read on:
(NaturalNews) It's well-established that exposure to ionizing radiation can trigger mutations and other genetic damage and cause normal cells to become malignant. So it seems amazing how mainstream medicine frequently dismisses the idea that medical imaging tests from mammograms to CT scans could play much of a role in causing breast cancer. Take this example from the web site for Cornell University's Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors:
In answer to the question "Is ionizing radiation a cause of breast cancer?", the Cornell experts say "Yes" and note ".. female breast tissue is highly susceptible to radiation effects." But then they pooh-pooh the possible hazard from mammography x-rays saying the risk …"should not be a factor in individual decisions to undergo this procedure. The same is true for most diagnostic x-ray procedures."
If that's not confusing enough, they turn around and state: "Nonetheless, unnecessary radiation exposures should be avoided and continued vigilance is required to ensure that the benefits associated with specific procedures outweigh the future risks."
Why radiation causes breast cancer
Common sense suggests there is
plenty of reason to be worried about radiation causing breast cancer. And now there's a new reason to be concerned. Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have discovered that radiation exposure can alter cells' microenvironment (the environment surrounding cells). And that greatly raises the odds future cells will become cancerous.
The reason is that signals from a cell's microenvironment, altered by radiation exposure, can cause a cell's phenotype (made up of all its biochemical and physical characteristics) to change by regulating or de-regulating the way a cell uses its genes. The result can be a cell that not only becomes pre-cancerous but that passes this pre-malignant condition on to future cells.
"Our work shows that radiation can change the microenvironment of breast cells, and this in turn can allow the growth of abnormal cells with a long-lived phenotype that have a much greater potential to be cancerous," Paul Yaswen, a cell biologist and breast cancer research specialist with Berkeley Lab's Life Sciences Division, said in a statement to the press.
"Many in the cancer research community, especially radiobiologists, have been slow to acknowledge and incorporate in their work the idea that cells in human tissues are not independent entities, but are highly communicative with each other and with their microenvironment," he added.
For their study, Yaswen and his research teams used human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs), the cells that line breast ducts, where most breast cancers start. When placed in a culture dish, the vast majority of HMECs display a phenotype that allows them to divide between five and 20 times until they become what is known as senescent, or unable to divide. However, there are also some variants of these cells which have a phenotype that allows them to continue dividing for many weeks in culture. Known as a vHMEC phenotype, this type of breast cell arises spontaneously and is more susceptible to malignancy because it lacks a tumor-suppressing protein dubbed p16.
To find out what radiation exposure does to the cellular environment and how it could impact the future of cell behavior, the Berkeley Lab scientists grew sets of HMECs from normal breast tissue in culture dishes for about a week. Then they zapped each set with a single treatment of a low-to-moderate dose of radiation and compared the irradiated cells to sets of breast cells that had not been irradiated.
The results, just published in the on-line journal
Breast Cancer Research, showed that four to six weeks after the radiation exposure, the normal breast cancer cells had stopped dividing far earlier than they would have normally -- and this premature cell senescence had accelerated the outgrowth of vHMECS.
"However, by getting normal cells to prematurely age and stop dividing, the radiation exposure created space for epigenetically altered cells that would otherwise have been filled by normal cells. In other words, the radiation promoted the growth of pre-cancerous cells by making the environment that surrounded the cells more hospitable to their continued growth," Yaswen explained in the press statement.
The researchers pointed out that the levels of radiation used in their experiments were not as much as a woman would be exposed to during a single routine mammogram but were comparable to those a woman could receive during a CT scans or radiotherapy "and could represent sources of concern."
Of course, women are often pushed to get annual mammograms, raising their overall radiation exposure through the years. And, as NaturalNews has reported, previous research has already provided compelling evidence linking mammography to breast cancer.
For example, a report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association's
Archives of Internal Medicine found that the start of screening mammography programs throughout Europe has been associated with increased incidence of breast cancer (
http://www.naturalnews.com/024901.html). And a Johns Hopkins study published in the
Journal of the National Cancer Institute concluded radiation exposure from mammograms could trigger malignancies in women at risk for genetic breast cancer (
http://www.naturalnews.com/025560_c...).
For more information:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...
http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/fac...
Also please see:
http://www.gerson.org/
The Gerson Institute is a non-profit organization located in San Diego, California, dedicated to the alternative, non-toxic treatment of cancer and other disease, using the Gerson Therapy.
http://www.wish4life.com/about-dr-sandy.html
We understand that your body is unique. If you find that the cookie-cutter approach to health has not worked for you, let Dr. Bevacqua and her team help you explore the alternatives and discover the excitement of regaining good health and vitality.
http://cancertutor.com/
The Cancer Tutor website is a pro-natural cancer treatment website which has more than 130 articles and 3 free e-books which are designed to help advanced cancer patients. Natural cancer treatments are also commonly called: alternative cancer treatments.
The word "organic" is not properly regulated on personal care products (example: toothpaste, shampoo, lotion, etc.) as it is on food products, unless the product is certified by the USDA National Organic Program. 
Bear with me here.
After all, I had an awful (and I do mean AWFUL) first birthing experience: 27 hours of labor, induction, medication-- even with an epidural it was the worst pain of my life. And not a smidgen of maternal bliss did I feel when my baby was placed in my arms. I felt only relief, and I believe I actually uttered the words, "I will never, ever do that again as long as I live, so help me God."
There's really no magic or voo-doo in hypnotherapy, contrary to what you might have seen on reality TV. My hypnotherapist and I talked about a visualization that I felt was very relaxing. I laid down on a {very comfy} couch and closed my eyes. I practiced deep, calm breathing and Sonya began to speak the visualization we'd created, starting with a countdown. After about 20 minutes she calmly brought me out of the state of relaxation with a simple count. Over the course of time, my brain learned to go into an almost instant state of deep relaxation as soon as I heard Sonya's voice.
