I work for a cancer-related organization and we receive updates on latest research (before it even comes out) daily. Also, other cancer-related news.e-mails etc. Here's one I received this morning - thought it was interesting. In the frist paragraphs, I believe she refers to the famous very recent study that found no differences in cancer survival rates between those who ate a regular 5/a day diet and those who were loaded with fruits and veggies. Anyway...here it is:

What Causes Cancer: Probably Not You
The perennial temptation to blame disease on sin or at least some grave moral
failing just took another hit. A major new study shows that women on a
virtuous low fat diet with an extraordinary abundance of fruits and veggies
were no less likely to die of breast cancer than women who grazed more freely.
Media around the world have picked up on the finding, cautioning, prudishly,
that you can’t beat breast cancer with cheeseburgers and beer.

Another “null result” in cancer studies – i.e., one showing that a suspected
correlation isn’t there – has received a lot less attention. In the May issue
of Psychological Bulletin, James Coyne and his colleagues at the University of
Pennsylvania reported that “there is no compelling evidence linking
psychotherapy or support groups with survival among cancer patients.” This
flies in the face of the received wisdom that any sufficiently sunny-tempered
person can beat cancer simply with a “positive attitude.” For example, an e-
zine article entitled “Breast Cancer Prevention Tips” advises:

A simple positive and optimistic attitude has been shown to reduce the risk of
cancer. This will sound amazing to many people; however, it will suffice to
explain that several medical studies have demonstrated the link between a
positive attitude and an improved immune system. Laughter and humor has [sic]
been shown to enhance the body's immunity and prevents against cancer and
other diseases. You must have heard the slogan 'happy people don't fall sick'.

So far no one appears to have read Coyne’s study. On June 30, a month after
its publication, all-purpose guru Deepak Chopra assured Sanjay Gupta on CNN
that the mind can control the body: “…You know, of course, the … study where
women who supported each other in a loving environment with breast cancer the
survival doubled.” Gupta, last sighted seeking to discredit Michael
Moore’s “Sicko” with his “fact-checking,” simply nodded, although the study
Chopra was referring to was discredited years before Coyne’s research came out.

For the last decade or so, adherents of the new discipline of “positive
psychology” have been insisting that not just cancer, but almost any health
setback, can be conquered with optimism or a “positive attitude.” But as Coyne
and other critics point out, the science here is shaky at best. Even the
theoretical lynch-pin of the supposed happy-mind-healthy-body connection –
that a positive outlook strengthens the immune system – took a kick in the
teeth two years ago when Suzanne Segerstrom at the University of Kentucky
found, to her own apparent surprise, that optimism can have a negative effect
on the immune system when the stressors are intense, as in the case of serious
disease.

Even if veggies and smiles don’t cure cancer, aren’t we still entitled to
blame some people for their diseases? Lack of exercise and dietary
indiscretions play a role in the development of diabetes and coronary heart
disease, so we indulge in self-gratifying contempt for the fat lady scarfing
down Doritos. But before you rush to judgment, ask yourself: What nutritional
alternatives does she have? (And, yes, I know they have “salad” at Wendy’s
now, but they don’t offer apples on Amtrak.) As for exercise, gym memberships
easily cost $500 a year, and far too many of us are forced to spend 10 hours
or more a day sitting in a cubicle, a car or a bus.

In the case of breast cancer, one victim-blaming theory after has wilted under
scrutiny: The “cancer personality” theory, for example, which breast cancer
victim Susan Sontag took on in her 1978 book Illness as Metaphor, and now high-
fat diets and negative attitudes. Something other than genetics causes it,
though, and one leading candidate is the Hormone Replacement Therapy that
doctors pushed on menopausal women for decades as a supposed way of preventing
heart disease, Alzheimer’s and wrinkles. When, in 2002, HRT was found to be
correlated with breast cancer and millions of women stopped taking it, the
incidence of breast cancer plunged.

Which suggests that optimism, especially about the validity of the
conventional wisdom, can be hazardous. What you need is a narrow-eyed, deeply
skeptical attitude.

It's good to be skeptical - I firmly believe that - but what one person might call "victim blaming", another might call, "self-empowerment".

I don't believe a raw food vegan diet can magically heal every disease and allow us all to live forever, but I do believe that following a rational and consistent raw food vegan diet is healthier for humans than any other diet ever contrived; and when a person is healthier, there is far less risk of having cancer in the first place. And surely it helps to eat right if a person expects to regain their health after suffering from any disease, including cancer.

How many of the studies cited above included exclusively raw (organic) vegans? Until results of such studies are available, to a certain extent, we raw food vegans do need to rely on observations of our own state of health, both short-term AND long-term, when devising a dietary regimen that works best for us.

It's not that a person who chooses to eat Doritos should be "blamed". No way. There are many reasons people choose to eat as they do. I would definitely agree that the fact that some of us eat consciously (and can afford it) plus exercise does NOT entitle us to blame or feel superior in any way to those of us who don't.

But it's also true that there ARE nutritional alternatives to Doritos for anyone who has access to a supermarket, farmer's market, fruit and vegetable stand, back yard, etc. And we can certainly still exercise without going to a gym! Exercise is free to anyone who wants to do it!

People CAN make choices in their lives. Cheers for those who do! And compassion (not blame) for those who don't.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/20/2007 04:41PM by suncloud.

Despite the "lack of compelling evidence", we are always told that people who have good personal support systems, who are married, etc weather disease better than those without social support. Stats show this, I imagine.

I've been fascinated with these questions for a long time, due to my strong interest in spiritual and metaphysical healing, meditation and raw food diet.

It seems to me-- and this is just my own personal extrapolation from about 35 years of reading probably thousands of people's testimonies of healing, reading books on healing, reading research articles on health and healing, and just observing everyone I know and seeing who's thriving, or not, (and why) and then putting everything together in my mental 'blender' and analyzing the results-- that spiritual healing of the type that recognizes and helps the individual identify with the Realm of Reality and their eternal, deathless, sinless, diseaseless, peerless being, (and not psychic healing that uses the human mind over physical matter or positive words and thoughts alone to change 'bad' things into 'good' things), can be profoundly successful in healing all kinds of 'disease,' including cancer.

Of course it seems pretty clear to me also that a raw food diet is a huge advantage in the quest for optimal health, but just how far raw diet alone goes, I'm not sure. It's fantastic, but clearly not 100% infallible. That said, I'm totally sold on it; I just don't think it's the 'whole enchalada.' (Pun intended.)

Concerning whether our unpleasant or negative thoughts and personality traits cause cancer, I remember reading Susan Sontag's (sp?) book, "Illness as Metaphor." In it she gives powerful arguments to dismantle the logical fallacy that cancer is self-caused due to sin or human failing. One of my favorite spiritual teachers, Joel Goldsmith, taught that we are all conditioned, and a healer should never assign any blame or try to change an individual, however misguided they may appear. He further went on to say that in his expererience (which was considerable; he healed hundreds of thousands of people over a span of probably 40 years or more) disease is impersonal in nature, and fastening character flaws to disease states is incorrect.

I wouldn't put too much importance on nutritional cancer research articles such as this one, however, because it's based on standard American low fat diet, including, no doubt, starchy carbs and meat and lots of cooked food, all thrown together in a badly combined mess, and probably with sugar and toxic additives, etc., etc.

Sharrhan:


[www.facebook.com]

i believe that negative thoughts cause disease
i kno that while i was depressed i could physically feel my negative thoughts become physical, i was tired, ageing, my body was breaking itself down
anytime you go into anything you do in your life with a negative mindset.. if its a project, or watever you get a negative outcome
at least thats the way it works for me.... if i think ill fail the test... i usually do..
its the same with your body and spirit ,, you can break yorself down with demeaning and negative thoughts just as easily as if it were someone else doing it

This is an excellent article to help people feel good for not accepting responsibility for their own health. It says: what you do does not affect whether you get cancer or not. Look at all these people eating fruits and vegetables and their spirituality, and they still get cancer.

The perspective of the raw vegan is so far out of box that contains most people's world view that the idea of living on only raw fruits and vegetables is considered insane by most.

In any case, my healing started for me when I took responsibility for my own health. I have my experience, and am I going to take the the author of the article's point of view over my own personal experience? Not.

It is funny that the author seems to be saying that people's personal habits are not responsible for cancer and then goes on to say a major cause of breast cancer was women deciding (with the help of doctors and pharmaceutical companies) to take pills made from the urine of pregnant horses. Now I think blame is a stupid concept, but even the author has to agree that if those women made different choices about what to put in their bodies then they may have never got breast cancer. The title of the article should read "What causes cancer? Probably not you.... unless you listen to the lies that medical industry tells you."

I hate logical inconsistency!

Bad nutrition cannot cause cancer, but good nutrition, especially raw food can prevent cancer. So the question should be “What prevents cancer?”
The question “What causes cancer” had been answered for more than twenty years. There is no illness without concrete reason. If there is a reason, there is the chance to identify and eliminate this reason and allow healing. The principle is described in the so called GNM (German New Medicine). The GNM is a highly scientific system describing reason, course and healing of more than 500 diseases. The system is deemed to be scientifically proof because there was no scientific falsification till now and the principle can be verified at any case of illness.

Unfortunately most of the literature is in German language, but you can find the basics of GNM on [germannewmedicine.ca] in English language.
According to GNM the reason of cancer and other illnesses is a conflict shock under the criteria: highly acute, dramatic and isolating, which occurs simultaneously in the psyche, the brain and the corresponding organ. In the very moment a meaningful special biological program will start to try troubleshooting on the biological level.

Raw food nutrition means taking over responsibility. This in turn will reduce your susceptibility for conflict shocks and your improved body condition will increase your chance of healing by reducing the sometimes dangerous symptoms of healing.
And time is another very important aspect. Trying any alternative method instead of hysterectomy, radiation and chemo will provide you time to deal with your particular problem to solve it and allow healing.

And why don’t physicians use this knowledge for healing everybody? Because the medical and pharmaceutical complex cannot exist by healing patients. Access to healing according to GNM is restricted to very privileged people or to people like you which ask study and understand.

Fascinating stuff Trumper, thanks.

I've read a bit from the GNM site and have it bookmarked for deeper study at another time. The stages of healing are particularly interesting and surprising.

khale

In Norman Walker's juicing book he says long term "resentments" can cause cancer...

The PH theory makes a lot of sense to me because even raw people can have a low PH. I'm always having trouble with mine regardless of what I eat. But then look at all the SAD people who you know must have low PH and they're not diagnosed with cancer.

Then there's 12yrolds that get cancer and I doubt they have years of "resentment" built up and their parents with the same crappy diets don't have cancer.


Cancer is..weird.

Seven of my friends have been diagnosed with breast cancer in a five year period. Two have died, one is very close to the end of her life, and the rest are apparently healthy at this time.

The first two of my friends were women I knew at the gym I used to belong to - both fitness instructors and personal trainers. One was a vegetarian, although I don't know if she was vegan, and I am sure she wasn't raw. The other one eats what she wants and is grateful that since she works out so much she feels that it isn't a problem for her. The next person was a mom I know whose kids went to school with my kids. This woman was 41, happily married and very involved in her kids life - a very happy person. She died at 43, just days after her oldest child graduated. The other woman who died had a very bad time with her chemotherapy - a lot of complications, and I wondered if she was going to be ok - she wasnt. Some of my friends were happy and outgoing, others were sad, some were fit, some not so much, some with healthy diets, others not really.

I am sure that all the good stuff helps - diet, exercise, social happiness, emotional well being, all of it, but none of the above is going to end up being the one and only, single most important cause of this horrible disease.

I once read a medical article about lung cancer, written before the connection was made between smoking and this disease. The article talked about how it often seemed to mysteriously run in families (genetics), how some people just seemed to have a "cancer" personality, how diet seemed to be important, age and/or exercises seemed to be a factor, how a positive attitude made a big difference in survival rates, etc.,etc......

Notice anything odd about that? It's pretty much verbatim what I was told when they informed me that I had breast cancer at the age of 40. I had never heard of raw, but was trying to stick to cooked vegan back in those days - way too much soy, I suspect, and managing to eat my share of junky stuff, but compared to most of the people I knew, I thought my diet was pretty good.

Looking back, knowing what we know now, those theories were pretty lame. Sure hope one day we will scoff equally when we look back at all the women like me who have had to listen to the same spiel.

PS: Of the eight of us, only one was over the age of 50 at the time she was diagnosed - she is the one in hospice right now. Won't be long, it's in her spine and her brain - not very nice at all.

fuzzysox Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i believe that negative thoughts cause disease
> i kno that while i was depressed i could
> physically feel my negative thoughts become
> physical, i was tired, ageing, my body was
> breaking itself down
> anytime you go into anything you do in your life
> with a negative mindset.. if its a project, or
> watever you get a negative outcome
> at least thats the way it works for me.... if i
> think ill fail the test... i usually do..
> its the same with your body and spirit ,, you can
> break yorself down with demeaning and negative
> thoughts just as easily as if it were someone else
> doing it

Bryan,

Did you have cancer?
I have not experienced this illness directly (Thank God) - it is not in my family - but I feel so nice when I hear about people whose cancer just went away as a result of conscious behavior. Of course, it's about the nice feeling that you have some control over it as opposed to waiting for a lottery NOT TO happen to you.

It is so reassuring and comfortable to be able to blame the victim of every disease, and the biggest blamers are the people who have been diagnosed - anyone who has been through this knows exactly what I mean - you examine everything you have ever done to question what could have caused this - was it what you were eating, were there too much plastics in your environment, were you nutritionally imbalanced, is the water in your town really ok, the list goes on forever.

Statistics are deceiving also. I read recently that breast cancer survivors who exercise regularly have a lower rate of recurrence. It would appear from this statement that getting more exercise would be a good way to increase your odds of staying well, and perhaps that is true. On the other hand, we all know and appreciate the importance of exercise, especially after a diagnosis. Don't they realize that the ones who aren't exercising are most likely the ones who just don't have the energy left to do so? Not that exercise is a bad thing, but maybe the point is that it isn't the exercise that improves your chances, but rather being one of the lucky ones who actually has enough energy to be able to do so.

One of the first things you learn in chemotherapy is energy management. Before I was diagnosed, I used to run 7 km every morning. Once I got my first chemo, I discovered that if I went for my morning run, I had absolutely no energy left to do anything at all for the rest of the day, so I had to give it up. Looking after myself and my family was a greater priority.

I still wake up each morning, four and a half years later, completely exhausted. By the time I put breakfast out for the family, shower and tidy my room, I need a good long rest. I'd give anything for a full night of sleep - haven't had that in over four years either, which doesn't help, but there doesn't seem to be any solution. I remember how wonderful it felt to be fit and energetic. I'd go back there if I could.

I don't think the article above absolves anyone of being responsible for anything. I think it merely points out that maybe we aren't focussed on the right things, maybe there is more that should be examined. Until we get beyond these limitations, we aren't going to learn anything new.

Sapphire