|OK, I’m lost. Are we winning the war on cancer, or aren’t we? It was President Richard Nixon who declared “war on cancer” in 1971, the year I returned home from Vietnam. I believe that 43 years later it is time for cancer organizations to come clean on the results of this “war”.
Because many of these organizations provide little more than fundraiser opportunities, who in the world is going to be truthful with we, the people when we ask if we are winning or losing this war?
Aren’t their paychecks at stake? In my opinion, if the war is being lost, most all need to lock their doors and go home. I was offended when I saw one of my favorite male vocalists, Josh Groban, seeking donations (begging for money) for The American Cancer Society (ACS) on TV recently. However, he is like most Americans who feel that we are duty bound to assist large fundraising organizations like ACS to find a cure. To overcome dismal statistics, they seek well-known celebrities who are asked to raise yet more money, and I know that they believe they are helping. To me, however, this is a fairly transparent tactic, and apparently, it is working.
Tucked into the magazine holder on an airplane I flew on a few years ago was an Indian Readers Digest Magazine that was apparently left by an earlier traveler. In it, a startling article entitled Winning The War on Breast Cancer was published. The statistics were compelling and seemed to indicate that soon, breast cancer would be a thing of the past. There have been quite a few “We’re winning the war on breast cancer” articles published in the past few years. Of course, with billions of raised dollars to invest, hyperbole exists in the halls of breast cancer research. Are we really winning the war on breast cancer? I don’t think you’ll ever convince the 100 grandmothers, mothers, aunts, daughters or sisters that are either diagnosed or die every day in America from breast cancer that we are winning this war. Just like the paid celebrities, our robotic press just keeps telling us that everything is going to be fine if we just have a few more dollars to “invest” in the war against breast cancer. Of course, this is nonsense.
Since declaring war on cancer, money and new drugs haven’t gotten us anywhere, but even young grocery store clerks have been taught how to make us feel guilty if we aren’t giving money for the fight against cancer.
Welcome to 2013, the year that will deal, I believe, with the subject of breast cancer more openly and honestly. We haven’t won the war and we know that. Despite this failure, fundraising organizations that purport to be concerned about “the cure” continue in business. One day, I suspect, we will wise up and know that these organizations exist, to a large extent, to raise funds for the powerful pharmaceutical industry, as though they needed more money. Recently, researchers in Bend, OR and Seattle, WA., have discovered that the incidence of metastatic breast cancer is actually on the rise in younger women. Winning the war? Advanced stage breast cancer is now afflicting women aged 25 to 39. Amazingly, a short time ago, studies showed that this age group might forego annual mammograms because their risk of breast cancer is significantly less than older women. This abysmal breast cancer news is simply the tip of the iceberg, and I predict that the cancer industry will soon begin seeking help from the lay public rather than continuing to use statisticians to make it appear like the war on cancer is being won. In lieu of begging for cash, I believe begging for help may soon begin. And women aren’t the only one’s statisticians and researchers are keeping in the dark. To put it mildly, our PSA “man test” doesn’t work. Unfortunately, I feel like the right hand of medicine has no idea what the left hand is doing… especially when it is gloved.
I recently spoke at a health symposium here in Texas. One of my slides dealt with stated facts, rather than the hype that we so often see in medical reporting today.
More than 1,000,000 women may have been unnecessarily treated and diagnosed using mammography.
“More than 1,000,000 men have been overdiagnosed and treated for prostate cancer.”
Until we “Know The Cause” of cancer, the war will never be won, and you and I know that. We know that knowledge will ultimately prevail. Until such time as knowledge begins to surface, the promise of new drugs, better cancer imaging, and earlier detection continues to instill hope and make headlines. Please learn to see that for what it is. Why, do you suppose, these young women are getting advanced stages of breast cancer? Let’s separate the facts from the marketing hype and see if perhaps we can figure this out without one dime of donator or pharmaceutical company money.
1. In 2010, Harvard Medical School researchers published that alcohol of any kind increased a woman’s chance of getting breast cancer, but didn’t tell us why.
2. In 2004, The Journal of The American Medical Association (JAMA) taught us that antibiotics increased the risk and incidence of fatal breast cancer, but failed to tell us why.
3. In 2009, The International Journal of Cancer published that a diet high in carbohydrates increased the risk of breast cancer, but why?
I’ve always said that if you don’t know mycology (the study of fungus), you don’t know cancer. I believe that. Worse, you’ll never understand the role of proper diet in cancer without a general understanding of the diet that parasitic fungi must eat. When most researchers see the word carbohydrate, they see grains like corn, wheat, and sugar, and for the most part, I agree with that, because grains probably make up most of the carbohydrates in the average younger woman’s diet. Many young women take many antibiotics. Young men and women of all generations still consider alcohol one of the major food groups. For this reason, I can see why each of these three papers was accurate… but how does this information help young women prevent breast cancer? It doesn’t until it is properly interpreted within a fungal context. Once armed with this interpreted information, she might wish to commit to change.
The astute mycology student immediately sees the commonality in all three of these research papers. Many fungi make poisonous substances called mycotoxins and each of these three papers expounds upon mycotoxin-producing fungi, unbeknownst to cancer researchers. Even though the American Cancer Society (ASC) refers to mycotoxins as “genotoxic carcinogens”, they continue to hire celebrities to beg for money. If they’d use their own internal information and existing scientists, they wouldn’t have to beg any more, because they’d begin understanding this fungal disease we call cancer. Their war tactics would immediately change. You see, genotoxic carcinogens are capable of causing DNA damage and cancer, so it makes sense to me that breast cancer would logically ensue following exposure to mycotoxins. And chronic exposure like daily grains, daily alcohol or many rounds of antibiotics, would increase the risk of breast (or any) cancer. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding; let’s close with some factual breast cancer science that links mycotoxins with breast cancer.
1. “Alcohol is the mycotoxin of the Saccharomyces brewer’s yeast. Producers often use grains that are too contaminated with fungi and mycotoxins to be used for table foods.”
2. Do antibiotics cause cancer? “Certainly physicians would not believe such a risk exists for penicillin, an antibiotic given to billions of humans. However, it is, by definition a mycotoxin, and mycotoxins do cause cancer.”
3. The American grain supply is “commonly contaminated” with mycotoxins.