Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Could a virus be responsible for breast cancer?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-14-04 11:52 PM
Original message
Could a virus be responsible for breast cancer?
http://www.healthtalk.ca/virus_breast_cancer_07132004_0922.php
Researchers say a virus may play a role in causing breast cancer. In a study published in the online edition of the journal Cancer, American researchers found a virus similar to one that causes breast cancer in mice, in almost three quarters of Tunisian breast cancer patients.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Sweetpea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-14-04 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. I am a breast cancer survivor and I chose not to do chemo and
radiation. In my quest for alternative therapy, I have run across the concept of viruses being a cancer cause often. It makes sense to me but I don't think anyone has nailed the science. It is my understanding there is a correlation with Epstein Barr virus with breast cancer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-14-04 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Your status
Are you trying alternative treatment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweetpea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-14-04 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I have been clear for 2 years
I did an alternative treatment called escharotics.

It is not for everyone. Very painful and organic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Thanks for the info N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Thanks for the info N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cosmicaug Donating Member (676 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. First hit.
Sweetpea wrote:
I did an alternative treatment called escharotics.
<www.cancerx.com >
It is not for everyone. Very painful and organic.


First hit on a Google search is http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/eschar.html .

I see no reason why it wouldn't work on superficial lesions that are well contained (why should it matter how one cuts it out?). However, I'd much rather get such a lesion surgically excised and the borders properly biopsied to ensure it's all been removed. Less painful, less organic and somewhat more reasuring.

I hope you stay well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweetpea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. I have been clear for 2 years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Philostopher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-14-04 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Wow -- seems like they keep finding this stuff out.
Edited on Wed Jul-14-04 11:58 PM by nownow
My father died of a stomach cancer that the doctors all thought was ultimately started by a mutation off the bacterium that causes bacterial peptic ulcers. He'd had an ulcer decades earlier, before they started treating them with antibiotics; later, he was treated, but it was apparently too late. I've read somewhere they're looking for a pathogen of some kind or other (sorry -- I don't remember where I read it, or whether it was virus or bacterium) that may have something to do with MS. Curiouser and curiouser...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. From what
I understand, the virus itself may not actually be responsible for cancer, however, it may contribute to actually making the cancer very agressive.

And the scary part, as you may have indicated, is the fact that it could be triggered be an illness suffered in the past.

I find the field of health and discovery very interesting, and addictive at times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweetpea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Being a cancer survivor , i definitely find it interesting
Many have found solace in the use of Cantron along with a protocol that Dr. Maras prescribes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chuckup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. I was also
reading another article from the same source:
http://www.healthtalk.ca/child_cancer_risk_07152004_9233.php

Concerning childhood cancer, and the fact that child survivors face a much higher risk of developing other health problems as they age. The risk rate is much higher when compared to adults with the same cancer.

The therapy used to treat the cancer is the culprit in this case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gumby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Forgive me for this comparison
But my beloved dog was given a couple of months to live. It pained me that I chose not to do the very expensive prescribed chemo. I found Cantron and my dog lived more than a happy, active year after her supposed demise.

I am responding because I felt that I was "silly" for doing my own "treatment" which included Cantron and some other things.

The information that I learn on this board just amazes me.

Happy Health to you.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sweetpea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
9. the link doesn't seem to be workin
The right one is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seventhson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-04 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
11. The group I have worked with in the past RPHP has found
that there is a correlation between breast cancer and nuke plants and exposure from regular emissions (which are absorbed and spread to the soft tissues and organs) Not only does it mutate cells but it also mutates bacteria and viruses as predicted by Sakarov (refusenik father of the Soviet H-Bomb) in the 1950's.

genes are damaged, immune systems are damaged, and the viruses we are used to are mutating into forms we have no or little reistance to (the viruses are evolving due to the mutations to resist our natural AND antibiotic resistance to them)

there is more at

www.radiation.org

I urge you to read dr. Sherman's materials and Dr. Sternglass.

while they are looking at the epidemiological materials mostly and measuring exposure nationwide, there is some material on prevention and healing and ways to protect our children.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Apr 20th 2024, 12:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC