Written by fatih al-farahat in


Cancer Cause





The take home is that it is nevera good idea to breath toxins on a regular basis, and until pretty recently wewere pretty relaxed about all that.

This piece of work tells us that inwhich breathing wood smoke was pretty well unavoidable (pre 17th century),that cancer was rare.  Alternativeexplanations are pretty well eliminated.

We are now entering a globalsystem in which such casual toxin exposure will disappear.  The big one caused by the use of cigaretteshas already been hugely reduced.  Thenext one will be the transition away from fuel based automobiles.  After that a few simple tweaks and it will bealmost impossible to be exposed.

Of course, food additives aredrummed as a concern as well they should be. Yet little compelling evidence for risk actually exists.

As Dr Al Sears points out, our bodiesare quite able to handle minor insults and we help it along by properly toppingup with ten grams or so of vitamin C, two grams or so of vitamin D and bit ofCoQ10 (or a steak).

Plenty of literature has alreadymade this protocol stand out.  Now weknow clearly what causes cancer and know that a strong cellular system protectsoneself.


Cancer. Just the word evokes fear.
February 21, 2011

The medical journals and newsletters I get are often filledwith articles about cancer. It’s the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Oncesomeone mentions it, it’s all you can think about.

And if you’re a regular reader, you probably won’t be surprised thatmost of the cancer-related articles in medical publications are only about drugtreatments.

I’ve even read research on whether or not aspirin prevents cancer. Iwonder who’s sponsoring those studies … Are they really trying to tell us thatpeople are getting cancer because of a deficiency of aspirin?

The truth is, cancer rates are not rising because we’re deficient inman-made painkillers. Cancer is increasing because of our man-made toxicenvironment.

Here’s something positive about cancer that most people don’t know…

Cancer was almost unknown in ancient times.

Why is this good news? Because it means you don’t need any scaryscience to prevent it.
In a study completed just recently and published in the journal Nature,researchers looked at tissue samples from hundreds of Egyptian mummies.There should have been evidence of cancer in all of them, according to moderncancer statistics. And mummification would have preserved any sign of tumors.

But instead of finding cancer in nearly every mummy … they found only asingle case. The hundreds of other mummies showed no sign of cancer at all.

These results would be impossible if cancer were not an entirely modernplague. Statistically, it could not happen.

And it wasn’t because Egyptians didn’t live long enough to get cancer.The mummies had evidence of age-related problems like brittle bones and hardenedarteries.

What we should be doing today is trying to mimic the environment we hadback then. That’s what we should be paying attention to.

Researchers from some of the largest institutions in Texas are trying to help. They recentlyrevealed how cancer begins. It starts with weakened cells.

Strands of DNA sometimes get broken through your body’s naturalprocesses. Your cells then send signals to your body to repair your DNA. If theresponse is deficient, or no help comes at all, those cells become vulnerableto cancer.2

What happens today that did not happen in out native environment isthat those breaks occur a lot more often. They’re caused by things like environmentalpollutants and chemical ingredients in food. Our bodies haven’t adapted tothe huge increase in these man-made toxins over a very short period.

So let me be as clear as I can: Cancer isn’t a “normal” part of life.Toxins and chemicals are interfering with your natural ability to defendyourself.

The most important thing you can do is to strengthen your cells, sothey’re more disease-resistant. And that means making sure your body has theenergy and the nutrients to repair and maintain those cells.

The three most important nutrients you need to keep your cellsstrong are also the ones chronically deficient in today’s world. They arevitamin C, vitamin D and CoQ10. 

1. Vitamin C is an antioxidant that disarms damaging freeradicals before they can attack healthy cells and stimulate tumor growth.

We also now know that the protective caps on the ends of your DNA,called telomeres, are very sensitive to this kind of damage. The shorter yourtelomeres, the older your cells act and the more susceptible they are tobecoming cancerous. The new, exciting discovery about vitamin C is that it’svery effective at defending you against this process and protecting your DNA. 

We get some vitamin C from our food, but not nearly enough. The foodswith the most vitamin C include dark green, leafy vegetables, and “superfruits”like the acerola cherry. Also, you probably don’t think of them this way,but peppers are the kings of vegetable vitamin C. Watercress is alsoa little-known but rich source of vitamin C. If you choose to supplement, tryto get 1,500 mg twice a day if you’re healthy. If you’re under a lot of stress,or if you are sick, you can take as much as 20,000 mg per day. 

2. Low Vitamin D levels are strongly linked to cancer. Areport out of a university in Nebraskashowed that vitamin D has the potential to lower the risk of all cancersin women by 77 percent.3

Researchers at the University of California San Diego foundyou can lower your risk of breast cancer by 50 percent, and colon cancer bymore than 65 percent, simply by boosting your vitamin D levels throughsunlight, diet or supplements.4,5

A Harvard-sponsored report published in the Journal of the NationalCancer Institute revealed that when men raise their vitamin D intake, theycan lower their overall risk of cancer death by 29 percent, drop rates of “digestivetract” cancers by 43 percent (throat, stomach and colon), and reduce deathrates from these cancers by 45 percent.6
The best source of vitamin D is sunshine. Your skin produces vitamin Dwhen the sun’s rays shine on you. Ten to 20 minutes of sun get’s you a fullday’s supply of it. To supplement with vitamin D, make sure you take thenatural form, D3. I recommend at least 2,000 IU per day.

3. CoQ10 is one of the most overlooked nutrients. The governmentdoesn’t even have a recommended daily intake for it. But it’s thefuel your cells use to make energy. That means it’s the primary source ofenergy for the immune cells that get suppressed by cancer. CoQ10 restores theirability to fight back and attack cancer cells. Like vitamin C, it’s also apowerful antioxidant that blocks free radicals from damaging yourDNA.

Besides helping to prevent cancer, there are many clinical trials inwhich CoQ10 helps heal people who already have cancer. In one, researchers in Denmark studieda group of breast cancer patients. They gave them CoQ10, plus a combination ofother antioxidants and essential fatty acids. 

The entire group had a partial remission of the cancer. Two of thepatients received larger doses of CoQ10 (390 mg) and their tumorsdisappeared.7 In no way am I saying stop your cancer treatment and onlytake CoQ10. What I am showing you is the power of this important nutrient againstcancer.

The best way to get CoQ10 is by eating red meat fromgrass-fed animals. Grain-fed meat is not a good source of CoQ10. If you want tosupplement, the form you get is very important. I recommend 50 mg of theubiquinone form, which is 8 times stronger and is better absorbed than the oldform.

To Your Good Health,

Al Sears, MD




1 David, A. Rosalie, Zimmerman, Michael R.,"Cancer: an old disease, a new disease or something in between?" Nature ReviewsCancer Oct. 2010;728-733
2 Nicolette, Matthew L., et al, "Mre11–Rad50–Xrs2 and Sae2 promote 5′strand resection of DNA double-strand breaks," Nature Structural & Molecular Biology Oct. 2010; 17: 1478–1485
3 Lappe, et al, “Vitamin D Status in a Rural Postmenopausal Female Population,” Journal of the AmericanCollege of Nutrition 2006; 25(5):395-402
4 Garland, et al, “Vitamin D and prevention of breast cancer:Pooled analysis,” Journal of SteroidBiochemistry and Molecular Biology 2005; 97(1-2):179-94
5 Gorham, et al, “Optimal Vitamin D Status for Colorectal Cancer Prevention: AQuantitative Meta-Analysis,” AmericanJournal of Preventive Medicine,32(3):210-216
6 Giovanucci, et al, “Prospective Study of Predictors of Vitamin D Status and Cancer Incidence and Mortality inMen,” Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2006; 98(7):451-459
7 Lockwood, K., Moesgaard, S., Folkers, K., “Partial and complete regression ofbreast cancer in patients in relation to dosage of coenzyme Q10,” Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. March30, 1994;199 (3):1504-8


CancerIs Probably Man Made Caused By Pollution And Diet

Terry on Oct 15th 2010
Medical News Today

http://clusteralliance.org/2010/10/15/cancer-is-probably-man-made-caused-by-pollution-and-diet/

Why was cancer detected in only one in a few hundred Egyptianmummies? Why is there such scarce reference to cancer in ancient Greek orEgyptian texts? A study carried out by researchers from the University ofManchester, England and published in Nature suggests that cancer, especiallycancer among children and young adults is not simply due to our living longerthese days – it must be a man-made disease. The scientists say theirs is “thefirst histological diagnosis of cancer in an Egyptian mummy”.

Investigators at Manchester University’s KNH Centrefor Biomedical Egyptology say their study proves that during the Egyptianmummies’ time, cancer was extremely rare. After investigating hundreds ofmummies, they came across just one case of cancer – worldwide only two caseshave ever been detected. Incidence of cancer, especially childhood cancerexploded after the Industrial Revolution.

Professor Rosalie David, at Manchester University’s Faculty ofLife Sciences, said:

In industrialized societies, cancer is second only to cardiovasculardisease as a cause of death. But in ancient times, it was extremely rare. Thereis nothing in the natural environment that can cause cancer. So it has to be aman-made disease, down to pollution and changes to our diet and lifestyle.

The important thing about our study is that it gives a historicalperspective to this disease. We can make very clear statements on the cancerrates in societies because we have a full overview. We have looked atmillennia, not one hundred years, and have masses of data.

Professor Michael Zimmerman, a visiting professor at the KNH Centre,made the first ever histological diagnosis of cancer in an Egyptian mummy. Themummy was said to be an ordinary person, from the Ptolemaic period.

Zimmerman said:

In an ancient society lacking surgical intervention, evidence of cancershould remain in all cases. The virtual absence of malignancies in mummies mustbe interpreted as indicating their rarity in antiquity, indicating that cancercausing factors are limited to societies affected by modern industrialization.

The investigators examined literary evidence from ancient Greece and Egypt,as well as mummified remains from ancient Egypt. They also carried outmedical examinations of animal and human remains further back in history, asfar back as the period of the dinosaurs.

They found that:

* According to animal, non-human primates, and early human remains and fossilevidence, cancer was extremely uncommon. One Edmontosaurus fossil of unknownprimary origin had evidence of metastatic cancer.

* Virtually all evidence of tumors, which were extremely uncommonanyway, were benign.

* The few malignancies were found were in non-human primates, but noneof them are cancers found in modern adult humans.

Atherosclerosis, Paget’s disease of bone, and osteoporosis did exist in ancientGreece and Egypt –diseases that affect humans when they are older; old enough to develop commonmodern cancers. If humans at that time lived long enough to develop thosediseases, the extreme rarity of cancer cannot be put down to very short lifespans. People in those days lived long enough to develop the cancer adultsdevelop today. Also, there is no evidence of any childhood cancers in ancient Greece or Egypt. Cancer among children isdefinitely much more common today than it was in ancient Greece/Egypt.

Some people have suggested that tumors do not preserve well, soevidence of them disappears over time. However, Zimmerman says mummificationpreservers malignancy features; in fact, it preserves tumors much better thannormal tissue.

Of all the hundreds of mummies examined all over the world, just twohave microscopic evidence of cancer. Radiologists have examined all the mummiesat museums in Cairo and Europeand found no evidence of cancer at all.

Evidence of cancer and medical procedures, such as operations forcancers does not appear until the 17th century, the researchers reveal.Scientific literature depicting distinctive tumors have only been about for thelast 200 years, when data started to be documented about chimney sweeps withscrotal cancer in 1775, nasal cancer in snuff users in 1761, and Hodgkin’sdisease in 1832.

Professor David said:

Where there are cases of cancer in ancient Egyptian remains, we are notsure what caused them. They did heat their homes with fires, which gave offsmoke, and temples burned incense, but sometimes illnesses are just thrown up.

The ancient Egyptian data offers both physical and literary evidence,giving a unique opportunity to look at the diseases they had and the treatmentsthey tried. They were the fathers of pharmacology so some treatments did work.

They were very inventive and some treatments thought of as magical weregenuine therapeutic remedies. For example, celery was used to treat rheumatismback then and is being investigated today. Their surgery and the binding offractures were excellent because they knew their anatomy: there was no taboo onworking with human bodies because of mummification. They were very hands on andit gave them a different mindset to working with bodies than the Greeks, whohad to come to Alexandriato study medicine.

(Conclusion) Yet again extensive ancient Egyptian data, along withother data from across the millennia, has given modern society a clear message– cancer is man-made and something that we can and should address.

“Cancer: an old disease, a new disease or something in between?”
A. Rosalie David & Michael R. Zimmerman

Nature Reviews Cancer 10, 728-733 (October 2010) | doi:10.1038/nrc2914