Posted on 07/18/2013 3:37:50 PM PDT by neverdem
Do you have a sweet tooth? If so, your dietary habits could be significantly adding to your risk of developing cancer. New research published in the journal Nature Medicine has confirmed that processed sugar is one of the primary driving forces behind the growth and spread of cancer tumors, so much so that the future of cancer screening could rely on scanning the body for sugar accumulation.
Scientists from University College London (UCL) in the U.K. made this discovery after experimenting with a new cancer detection method that involves utilizing a unique form of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). After sensitizing an MRI scanner to look specifically for glucose in the body, it was revealed that cancer tumors, which feed off sugar, light up brightly as they contain high amounts of sugar.
"The new technique, called 'glucose chemical exchange saturation transfer' (glucoCEST), is based on the fact that tumors consume much more glucose (a type of sugar) than normal, healthy tissues in order to sustain their growth," explains a recent UCL announcement, noting that tumors appear as "bright images" on MRI scans of mice.
Traditionally, cancer screenings have involved the use of low-dose radiation injections to identify the presence of tumors, which makes sense as radiation is another known cause of cancer. The things that trigger and promote cancer development and spread, in other words, can also be used by doctors to detect it inside the body. And now sugar can officially be added to this list.
"The method uses an injection of normal sugar and could offer a cheap, safe alternative to existing methods for detecting tumors, which require the injection of radioactive material," says Dr. Simon Walker-Samuel, lead researcher of the study from the UCL Centre for Advanced Biomedical Imaging (CABI).
Interestingly, it was also noted by the study's senior author that the amount of sugar in "half a standard sized chocolate bar" is all it takes to effectively identify the presence of tumors using the glucoCEST method. This is astounding, as it suggests that even relatively low amounts of sugar have the potential to promote cancer proliferation.
The UCL study is hardly the only one to have identified a connection between processed sugar consumption and diseases like cancer. Other research, including that being currently being conducted by Dr. Robert H. Lustig, M.D., a Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), confirms that the bulk of chronic illnesses prevalent today are caused by sugar consumption.
You can watch a presentation from Dr. Lustig entitled Sugar: The Bitter Truth here: http://youtube.com
As far as cancer is concerned, hormones produced by the body in response to sugar consumption also feed cancer cells. This means that every time you down a soda or eat a piece of cake, your body produces certain chemicals that tell cancer cells to not only start taking up sugar, but also to grow in size and spread.
"What we're beginning to learn is that insulin can cause adverse effects in various tissues, and a particular concern is cancer," says Dr. Lewis Cantley, head of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) at Harvard University, as quoted during an interview with CBS' 60 Minutes.
"If you happen to have a tumor that has insulin receptors on it, then it will get stimulated to take up the glucose that's in the bloodstream," he adds. "So rather than going to the fat or to the muscle, the glucose now goes into the tumor, and the tumor uses it to grow."
Sources for this article include:
http://www.mdtmag.com
http://cancerdefeated.com
http://youtube.com
Republished from NaturalNews
Written by Jonathan Benson
That’s one of the products that work. Give it a try!
ROFL!
http://preventcancer.aicr.org/site/News2?id=13441
The facts: Several concerned readers have written to AICR in recent weeks confused about online claims that acidic foods may increase cancer risk. It’s time to set the record straight.
The unsubstantiated theory is based on lab studies that suggest cancer cells thrive in an acidic (low pH) environment, but cannot survive in alkaline (high pH) surroundings. While these findings are accurate, they apply only to cells in an isolated lab setting. Altering the cell environment of the human body to create a less-acidic, less-cancer-friendly environment is virtually impossible.
While proponents of this myth argue that avoiding certain foods and eating others can change the body’s pH level, these claims stand in stark contrast to everything we know about the chemistry of the human body. Acid-base balance is tightly regulated by several mechanisms, among them kidney and respiratory functions. Even slight changes to your body’s pH are life-threatening events. Patients with kidney disease and pulmonary dysfunction, for example, often rely on dialysis machines and mechanical ventilators (respectively) to avoid even small disruption of acid-base balance.
Lastly, home “test kits,” which measure the pH of urine, do not relay information about the body’s pH level. True, foods, drinks and supplements will affect the acidity or alkalinity of urine, but it is the only fluid that is affected. In fact, excess acid or base is excreted in the urine to help maintain proper pH balance in the body.
The take-away: What you eat can have a profound affect on your cancer risk, but the acidity or alkalinity of foods is not important. Instead, focus on making dietary choices that can truly affect your risk: Eat a wide variety of vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans; Limit consumption of red and processed meats; Enjoy alcohol in moderation, if at all.
Cancer is also highly Ph sensitive, just like fungus and in addition both disrupt genes.
No it is not and Tullio Simoncini is a dangerous quack.
http://www.cancertreatmentwatch.org/reports/simoncini.shtml
I think the fungus spread to his brain.
American in Israel will be along shortly to accuse you of treating him with disdain, and denying god by adhering to the church of western medicine.
That was a very nice find, though.
Anyone pointing out the fact that you don't know what you're talking about is a troll, and you don't like it when people take issue with the misinformation you post. Does that about sum it up?
I don't know AiI, if you posted more thoughtful statements, rather than the nonsense you do, others wouldn't be taking issue with you, or making fun of you.
Please don't be offended if we continue calling you on your hokum.
Go for it. Have fun. Your wrong but don’t let that stop you.
Try google, it can be your friend. Study micotoxicosis. Look for the link between hybridized fungal and human dna strands. Study the actual comparison between fungal and cancer cells. Why does cancer and fungus both screw up dna, respond to sugar and ph levels in their culture media exactly the same way. Try to find the differences between the two and compare your notes. Be astounded!
And one day, you too can leave the flat earth society.
Bye for now. You have your work cut out for you now.
Organic chemistry deals with fuel oils and catalystic reformation more than food silly boy. At lest the part that I care about. Oh, I am part indian, laugh at that. Oh, and my hair is grey... Yuk yuk...
Knucklehead.
That’s it, you get the plonk too.
I hate trolls.
Got Friends?
I understand your feelings, and you know a lot of Naturopaths would disagree with you. It was a good opinion piece with no studies to back it up. Shall I post another opinion piece from the Naturopatic side to disagree and say we are even?
No, that would be disingenuous wouldn’t it.
Sorry I am so results oriented, that I cannot see the trees for the forest.
Interesting, idea, that the body could have excess acid or alkaline levels to the point of excreting the excess, yet not be affected by acid or alkaline at the same time.
And if I was excreting excess Acid yet read the same Ph in my mouth at the same time, how is excess expressed in my mouth? Why is my urine not more acid or more base to reflect the excesses? Seems to indicate to me that I am excreting what my current Ph is, more than the biological function of excess control or balance. There is not a magic balance point that we gravitate to in the middle. In order to balance to a set point of say 7 you would need to excrete the difference between your set point and your current point in a multiple.
You can not reach a set point of 7, while drinking a 5 by excreting a 7. You would need to excrete a 4 or a 3.
But, other than that a nice opinion piece.
PS. Please don’t feed the trolls.
Clearly, Google serves as your substitute for education and experience. That you revel in your ignorance is truly remarkable.
I'll be sure to remember that anyone calling attention to your intentional ignorance is a troll.
Stop being an idiot!!
I see you as a rude asshole, and only good for slander, not discussion. That is why I will not bother trying to re re re explain what I said. Its plain text, any reasonable person could figure it out.
To an unreasonable person who looks only for fault, it may be limited in its usefulness.
I will agree to disagree, you will just be disagreeable.
Bye troll.
Good bye
You first.
I believe he is still alive.
Thank you for all the good information you post for us. I appreciate it!
Ah, at least I now know of one good man who has not succumb to the vagaries of evil spewing across the land. Thanks for the good news!
Actually I would be very interested in reading the “opinion” pieces on the “cancer is a fungus” and “sugar feeds cancer” and the “you can adjust your body’s Ph level” written by Naturopaths - please provide them as it would be well, “interesting” reading. It would also be interesting if they have any scientific studies to back them up and not just anecdotal claims and “testimonials” from happy “customers”. BTW, my posts had links to studies. All your posts are nothing more than your opinion.
I’d also be interested in reading anything you have on other things that Naturopaths promote like homeopathy (completely debunked as being of any use BTW), “energy healing modalities”, biofeedback, high doses of intravenous vitamin C, massage therapy, chelation therapy, colon cleansing, color therapy, black salve and other such nonsense. In other words the opinions of Naturopaths while entertaining, it means as much to me as Madame Cleo and the Psychic Readers Network.
But while Madame Cleo might separate the fools from their money, totally eschewing modern science based medicine in favor of so called “natural” medicine alone and many of the quacks who practice it can be deadly.
What's the harm in naturopathy?
It has nothing to do with my “feelings” but rather your “feelings” which run quite high; perhaps there is homeopathic tincture for that. Give me the facts, the science based evidence, scientifically reviewed and replicated in multiple clinical trials performed in accordance with how such trials are conducted in “real” medicine and with a large enough sampling to make any results meaningful and I might change my opinion. In the meantime what you are promoting here is quackery that at the least; will not help anyone even if it does no lasting harm but at worst; could end up killing someone who foolishly follows your advice.
FWIW, my SIL is a 20 year breast cancer survivor – she had a double mastectomy followed by radiation and chemo – cancer free after 20 years. I also was good friends with a woman whose toddler was diagnosed with leukemia and she was treated at John’s Hopkins with conventional medical treatments and last I heard, she had graduated from college and was engaged to be married and was completely cancer free.
Of course I’ve known people who died from cancer too; my husband’s niece died at 36 from aggressive breast cancer for instance, but in her case, the doctor she saw after she detected a suspicious lump, told her not to worry about it, that she was too young for breast cancer and to come back in a year to see if the lump changed but by the time she did, it was too late (bad doctor, very bad doctor). But due to aggressive treatments, although she eventually lost her battle, she lived much longer than expected. My husband’s nephew’s wife was diagnosed with leukemia and she lived less than a year after being diagnosed, it was sad and tragic but homeopathy wasn’t going to save her either. But then of course this is all anecdotal unless you look at the actual cancer survival rates among the total population who receive conventional medical treatment vs. those who chose not to have any and go for “all natural” remedies – their survival rate is not good - (See the link above – “What's the harm in naturopathy”) and look up cancer survival rates. Also look up how cancer is on the decline.
Now if I had someone very close to me who had cancer and they sought out some “alternative” treatments in compliment to and along with traditional medicine, say getting acupuncture or massage therapy to help them deal with the pain, took up Yoga or Tai Chi or Art Therapy classes, started going to church every day, joined a prayer group, sought counseling from a priest or pastor or rabbi etc. to help deal them with the stress and their spiritual well being, or even consulting with a Naturopath on diet, far be it for me to tell them they were wasting their time. But on the other hand, if their Naturopath told them that modern medicine was akin to “witch doctoring”, that they should stop all conventional treatments only take “natural” and “alternative” medicines and treatments, drastically modify their diets and in terms of taking dangerous amounts of supplements, attempt to change their Ph by ingesting lots of vinegar and or baking soda, submit to colon cleanses, telling them that these things would cure them, – I’d be all over that like white on rice, just as I would if some charlatan from the Psychic Readers Network was trying to scam them, but as I said before; Madame Cleo will drain ones wallet but scam medical practioners can actually kill you.
Sorry I am so results oriented, that I cannot see the trees for the forest.
Interesting turn of phrase but it makes no sense. In actually you are not at all interested in seeing the forest but rather in only the very few trees standing alone that for you proves your preconceived correlation = causation, you refuse to look at all the other trees and the forest as a whole nor do you follow those few trees that seem to support your hypothesis over any length of time to determine objectively if the “results” were sustained nor do you see any reason to try to replicate those results in other trees – in other words – it’s not science but rather your “feelings”.
And if I was excreting excess Acid yet read the same Ph in my mouth at the same time, how is excess expressed in my mouth? Why is my urine not more acid or more base to reflect the excesses? Seems to indicate to me that I am excreting what my current Ph is, more than the biological function of excess control or balance. There is not a magic balance point that we gravitate to in the middle. In order to balance to a set point of say 7 you would need to excrete the difference between your set point and your current point in a multiple.
You have no idea how the human body and body chemistry works.
Your Urine is Not a Window to Your Body: pH Balancing – A Failed Hypothesis
Key takeaway:
What does this mean to my urine, and the urine test strips?
Your urine’s pH varies, as it’s a waste facility for the metabolic waste. Excess acidity is eliminated in the kidneys. And this can be manipulated by your diet. Your urine’s pH will reflect a number of metabolic, digestive, and other processes. But measuring the urinary pH to estimate of the blood’s pH is nonsensical, because your blood pH does not change unless you’re seriously, seriously, ill. There remains no convincing evidence to demonstrate that measuring (and manipulating) your urine’s pH has any correlation with your risk of medical conditions like osteoporosis or cancer, or any of the other medical conditions that advocate claim are the result of “excess acidity.”
There are links in this piece to actual studies if you are interested in reading them. The bottom line is that while you can manipulate the Ph level of your urine through what you eat, that has nothing to do with your over all body Ph and of your blood Ph levels. In drinking vinegar or ingesting foods high in acid or high in alkaline, your digestive system will in much the same as it does with other toxins or excess chemicals or vitamins (which are also toxic in high levels), divert them to your liver and or then to your urine system, processing those excess toxins including the alcohol in your gut and liver and trying as best as it can to not allow those toxins into your blood stream. Of course a very high consumption of alcohol or of any other toxins can over load your system but with disastrous and sometimes fatal results. For instance it is known that people who ingest high levels of baking soda (the sodium and bicarbonate) risk lowering their potassium levels to very dangerous levels and to the point it could and may very well lead to cardiac arrest.
Please read: Simoncini Cancer Therapy, baking soda
Further reading (again with links to studies and not merely opinion pieces):
And: Alkaline Diets and Cancer: Fact or Fiction?
The takeaway:
Are Urine and Saliva pH Test Strips a Good Way To Measure the Body's pH?
The only way to directly measure the body's pH is by testing your blood. Testing your urine only tells you the pH of your urine. Urine is naturally more acidic and has a lower pH (~ 6.0). Similarly, saliva test strips only measure the pH of your saliva, not the pH of your blood.
You do know of course I’m sure being that you are being that you are an “expert” in such matters, that cancer cells and tumors are feed by blood vessels and not by saliva or urine. Your body constantly adjusts your Ph level to keep it within a normal range unless you are gravely ill in which case you may very well die, and your body excretes the excess acids and alkalines through urine and to some extent another bodily “waste” products – saliva and excretions of the mucus membranes. Again it is true that consuming foods, drinks and supplements will affect the acidity or alkalinity of urine, but it is the only fluid that is affected. In fact, excess acid or base is excreted in the urine to help maintain proper pH balance in the body - the excretions of excess acids and bases means that they are not getting into your blood stream or into your body on a cellular level. But you know that, right?
As far as Ph readings in your mouth, yes drinking soda and vinegar, brushing your teeth with baking soda, will affect the Ph level in your mouth as does with eating sugar. But merely waiting 10 or 20 minutes before testing the Ph level in your mouth after consuming such proves nothing as your mouth, your gums, tongue, spaces between your teeth are full of crevices that hold those compounds with either an acidic or alkaline Ph. This is why dentists tell us to brush our teeth thoroughly after each and every meal and in the morning and before going to bed as eating foods or beverages especially those high in acids contribute to tooth decay and enamel erosion.’
You do, I presume brush your teeth on a regular basis, no? Or perhaps being that being you proscribe to Naturopathics; you take a homeopathic tincture of highly diluted and often shaken water that once may have been within a few miles of some fluoride toothpaste.
American in Israel; I think your heart is in the right place, that you believe passionately and sincerely in what you believe but that you are seriously misguided. Please educate yourself and while you do so, please stop promoting ideas that could result in someone dying an unnecessary death.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.