Cancer Cure – An Increasingly Hard Cell
With all the cash that’s been poured into cancer cures, you’d have thought the end of the road would be in sight by now – that the number of people dying of cancer would be falling. On almost every measure that isn’t the case. A century ago, cancer as a primary cause of death, would see off around 1% of us while nowadays the press constantly reminds us that cancer will see off one in three, or some even claim, one in two of us. Tragic. Should we stop and ask what’s really driving this, is it time to look closer for the root cause, not branch off into ever more ‘cures’.
Maybe we should look into our essential bodily composition, the fat composition of each cell, as a healer and a builder. If only healing fats weren’t confused with excess fat, those cumulative sugars and endocrine disrupting chemicals – the body’s way of saying hold on “where’s the nutrients, I’ll store this junk as ‘fat’ until something healthier for me shows up”. But fat has had a bad rap, those essential and vital for life, amino acid building blocks.
Reflections from a rear view mirror
If we go back in time we uncover Dr Otto Warburg, whose Nobel Prize was granted for identification of cancer as being caused by fermentation. That was in 1931 and we’ve gone backwards ever since, but not in the ‘let’s cure cancer’ spending department – great sentiments, but maybe mis-focused? Dr Warburg identified that glucose was the fuel for cancer cell growth, the necessary angiogenesis and renewal of blood vessels to feed tumour growth. So cancer is a metabolic disease. Yet, what has the modern Western diet adopted? well: grains and carbs and sugars – all major fermentation promoters. How did fat become demonised way back in 1967? Well, bribed Harvard scientists that’s how fat became the bogey man – things were cheaper in the 60’s. Pity that, with fats being those essential building blocks for healthy cells, along with muscle building proteins. That the body creates fats and proteins (but not carbs) should give us a clue as the body generally doesn’t try to kill us. Nature is a bit like that, supplying us also with a free immune system at birth and cancer fighting macrophages and T cells to watch over us.
So, what happens when you starve the cells of glucose? they die, that’s what – while glucose also drives cancer toxicity. What if dis-ease was broken down to its most basic of parts, we’d see it was only: 1) a toxin and 2) a lack. What if cancer causes have not just a physical component but an emotional one too, those not so visible, triggers? Yet an enormous research wedge is spent on genomics, looking to understanding in ever more detail the human gene – seems when Sherlock The Scientist de-coded us that we have 23,000 genes. We sound impressive until you realise we nestle well below the water flea with 31,000 genes – likely their extra ones being needed for swimming? What if the size of our jeans and not the number of genes was more relevant and a tad cheaper to look into after all?
Finding what not’s there
What if fats and ketosis held the key, what if the physiology was wrong and we were looking too far downstream. We know that can happen: in 2014 Switzerland stopped mass breast screening programmes as the over-diagnosis lessons from Canada and Denmark identified unacceptably high ‘false positives’. In Denmark those women who were unscreened, lived longer. When we change our rigid beliefs we often change the nature of a dis-ease? What if eliminating more of the cause of cancers helped many of us to live a lot longer and not provide a new ‘cure’ which gave us and our loved ones a few extra, but terminally painful, months. What if immune system boosting and bodily health was a better target while rapid tumour shrinkage growth was, after all, a false target?
Peter, you’re a Starr
Most cancers take decades to grow yet 70% of prostate cancer patients elect for surgery within 48 hours of getting a diagnosis – while those treated, versus those untreated, have the same life expectancy. Peter Starr, was not one of those ‘quick to the surgery’ prostate patients types. Instead he consulted over 50 prostate experts around the world and more than a decade on he is spreading his healing message via a DVD series. Fellow investigator Dr Thomas Seyfried, has also researched cancer and believes like many of us, that ketosis holds the key while ‘chemo’ drugs block our most powerful cancer repair cells, our innate macrophages.
Away from powerful drugs hyperbaric oxygen is increasingly called in to aid immune system support, a natural way to boost our mitochondrial batteries of ‘life’ energy. Our biggest need is a return to true health balance – to upregulate our enzymes to burn fats as fuel as part of diet driven, decades long, homeostasis.
These valiant researchers may have also discovered there is little money in this approach. Just saying.