The conventional approach to cancer has long been one of “zero tolerance.” The medical establishment has sold the public on the necessity of “early detection and treatment” to prevent what is generally regarded as a horrible death. But this article from the Associated Press suggests that “catching cancer early isn’t always as important as we thought.” Does this mean that “peaceful co-existence” may be a viable option?
Many tests produce a high percentage of false positives that lead to additional (often invasive) testing and unnecessary treatments. On the basis of PSA levels in the blood, doctors have been telling me for 10 years that I should submit to biopsy of my prostate. In the absence of symptoms or further evidence, I’ve been unwilling to do that. On the other hand, I have friends who have died from prostate cancer. Here’s what the article has to say about that:
PSA tests for prostate cancer are a much tougher call. Last month, a government panel recommended an end to routine PSA screenings, a step further than other major medical groups that urge men to weigh the pros and cons and decide for themselves. But the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force found limited, if any, evidence that screening average men improves survival. That’s largely because so many men are diagnosed with slow-growing tumors that never would have killed them; still, they have treatments that can cause incontinence, impotence or even lead to death.
Each of us must weigh all the factors in deciding the appropriate course for them. I am no expert on medical and health matters but I have come to some conclusions that I live by. Doctors admit that our bodies quite commonly produce errant cells but the immune system is normally able to deal with them. When immune function is weakened or breaks down, then cancer can spread rapidly and cause great harm. To me this suggests that keeping my immune system healthy is the key to vitality, longevity and the avoidance of invasive diagnostics and treatments. My approach is to maintain a healthy diet, get plenty of exercise and rest, to avoid stress as much as possible and keep a positive attitude. Researchers have found a strong correlation between the incidence of aggressive cancers and what they call the “helpless, hopeless syndrome.”
Here’s an article that appeared in a Thai journal. It reports the results of a survey and gives recommendations for minimizing the risks of cell phone use.–t.h.g.
Overusing cellphones may cause cancer
By The Nation, 2011-08-04
After the World Health Organisation (WHO) issued a warning that people who used mobile phones too much could face the risk of brain tumour, the Telecommunications Consumer Protection Institute (TCPI) said yesterday that Thais faced an even bigger risk because they slept with their cellphone placed near the headboard.
TCPI director Prawit Leesathapornwongsa said the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer study that cellphones had a “2B” classification, or that they could cause cancer. He said the study also found that people using their mobile phones for more than 1,640 hours faced a greater risk of developing glioma brain cancer. Those using a bluetooth hands-free device were 100 times less exposed to electromagnetic waves, while those using headphones faced 10 per cent less risk, he said. He also warned that these devices should not stuck in the ear while not being used. In addition, 3G phones are said to release 100 times less radioactive energy than the GSM phones, he added.
Prawit said a poll conducted in February found that Thai users were more exposed to radiation from cellphones because 64.5 per cent placed them at the top of their bed while sleeping, and 41.6 per cent carried their phone in their pocket. He urged people to keep their mobile phones away from them when they are not in use.
“Cancer is a modern, man-made disease caused by environmental factors such as pollution and diet, a study by University of Manchester scientists has strongly suggested.” This article reports the findings of a study conducted by scientists from Manchester University (UK) and published in Nature under the title, Cancer: an old disease, a new disease or something in between?
An article that appeared in the 20 January 2007 issue of New Scientist describes “a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their “immortality”. The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe. It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.” Research on this is ongoing at the University of Alberta (Canada).