There Won't Be a Single Cure for Cancer

Curing cancer: a reality check | Stronger Than Cancer

A great article, with the right perspective, and of course - it's from Canada. I don't know why organizations here can't publish thoughtful, realistic perspectives on the War on Cancer; it seems as though every article is just a promotion for drug companies, or fund raising for organizations looking for the "Cure".

There isn't going to be a single "Cure". There isn't going to be a cancer vaccine. There will be many ways to attack cancer - there already are many ways to attack cancer, many cancers respond to this, and many don't. We just need to move toward identifying the paths that will help us fight more and more cancers. Getting rid of cancer is going to be a long and slow process - but hopefully, with the right emphasis, it will be steady progress in the right direction.

But most important, for any of us who live outside the lab, and who aren't actively researching the 'cure' for each of these cancers, the point that was made - that we could cut cancer in HALF through prevention - is better than any treatments that are discovered for any particular type of cancer.

The article continues to list several lifestyle changes that can help prevent cancer - we also need to consider environmental causes and try to minimize that as well.

Begin with yourself, and your family, and your immediate environment to cut cancer rates. Then let's expand to our communities - reduce toxins from local industry, provide healthier foods in schools. And as a country we could do more - proper labeling or banning of GM foods, reduce (or eliminate) BPA packaging.

To me, this sounds more like a 'War on Cancer' than all the hundreds of targeted therapies we have yet to discover.

Oh no, Avastin is back...

Avastin for ovarian cancer slows tumors but fails to prolong life | Stronger Than Cancer

This is the most discouraging news I've seen today.

I celebrated the FDA removing it's approval of Avastin for Breast Cancer. It is too toxic, reduced quality of life, and did not have any benefit or improved survival. I was amazed at how many people were angry with the FDA for this decision, in a desperate attempt to do something, they'd rather take the physical punishment of a drug with serious side effects, that did not have any benefit. I don't know who these brainwashed masses are, but they are clearly only listening to propaganda from Genentech.

Well, it didn't take long before they decided to find another cancer to market their drug to. Now it's Ovarian Cancer.

What is insane, is that mixed in this story, that shows the results of two studies indicate that it DOES NOT prolong life for Ovarian Cancer, that some people are ... excited??? .. about this. Calling it a 'gift'??

Who on earth did they pay to make that statement???

For all of you cancer survivors who read this blog, PLEASE do not take your doctor's word for anything. Research EVERY drug they recommend. What are the real benefits. What are the risks.

It's your body. Only take a drug if YOU believe there is a real benefit that outweighs the risk, and miserable side-effects of treatment.

Idaho teen loses cancer fight after delivering son | Stronger Than Cancer

Idaho teen loses cancer fight after delivering son | Stronger Than Cancer

Wow, this is such a powerful story of sacrifice.

After going through cancer, and facing all the decisions you face about treatment, and your place in the world, I can completely understand her decision.

When I was diagnosed with cancer, the sleepless nights were not about my fears of dying, or concern for my life - all of my worries were about my children and how they were coping with my diagnosis, and how they would cope if I didn't survive. At 2am I was mapping out what I might leave for them, what message could I give them that would show them that I loved them even after I was gone... so many thoughts in so many directions - not about my cancer, but about my children.

Five years later, I am happy that I survived and our family is whole again.

My thoughts and prayers and blessings go out to Jenni Lake's little boy.

Breast Implant Scare is a Reminder: Buyer Beware

France to pay for implant removals, even as cancer fears subside | Stronger Than Cancer

From the article: "According to a news release from the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, PIP is now defunct. It says the company "used non-medical grade silicone believed by the manufacturers to be made for mattresses.""

So, we don't think this poses a cancer risk, but what were they thinking using a silicone made for mattresses in a body - was ANY testing done on humans???

This fall under the category of 'buyer beware' - just because a 'doctor' is in charge of an implant, it doesn't mean it is safe, or healthy!!!

This is just a reminder that we are responsible for our own health - we can't assume something approved by our doctor is right or even safe for us.

Breast implants have no cancer link, but ALL Implants Should Be Monitored

Breast implants have no cancer link says UK watchdog | Stronger Than Cancer

This may not be linked to cancer (although I'm not convinced), but anything you put in your body that doesn't belong there, can pose a health risk. Watch it closely.

Obviously, there are times doctors need to implant things - many people get rods and other devices implanted for back or knee injuries etc. But this is still relatively new medicine, and we don't necessarily know what the long term risks are.

At the time of surgery, the benefits outweigh the risk - so, it is unrealistic to say NEVER surgically implant anything into the body.

The message is to keep an eye on it. Implants can deteriorate, or shift, or affect surrounding tissue.

Best to set up a routine to check all implants on a regular basis.

USDA Dietary Guidelines and Cancer Prevention | Stronger Than Cancer

Internal Documents Reveal USDA Dietary Guidelines Panel Dominated by ADA | Stronger Than Cancer

What a sad article, but it goes without saying that much of the regulations and standards support the corporations.

In general, the FDA guidelines fall short of optimum health. They are the bare MINIMUM required, not a goal we should reach for.

A perfect example of this is their standard for Vitamin C. The USDA guideline for vitamin C is the minimum amount to prevent scurvy (a disease that sailors used to get when they didn't have access to fresh foods for long periods). Even lab monkeys are given more Vitamin C than the USDA for humans, because they don't want insufficient nutrition to skew results of their research.

Clearly, relying on the FDA, or USDA guidelines are NOT going to lead to health, but surviving cancer means we need to make sure our body always has what it needs to support the immune system...

As Cancer Survivors, we are going to have to take it upon ourselves to create our own dietary guidelines.

If it helps, you can start with a Cancer Prevention Cookbook - they generally contain excellent sections on the nutritional needs that support the immune system - a good example is The Strang Cancer Prevention Center Cookbook:

Or you can start with a Cancer Fighting diet (like the Mediterranean Diet), then adjust and modify to suit your needs. The important part is to eat plenty of nutrient-dense veggies and other cancer fighting foods.

As you go, your guidelines make more sense. As you survive, the USDA requirements make less sense.

I think this is something all cancer survivors come to at some point of their journey.

Keeping Tumor Cells Alive Can Lead to Individualized Treatment

Scientists are Able to Keep Tumor Cells Alive in the Lab | Stronger Than Cancer

This is such a wonderful breakthrough!

Instead of freezing a patient's biopsied tumor samples, live samples can be preserved and tested in the lab to evaluate treatments and potential risk to healthy cells.

This is SO much better that guessing about treatments, based on statistics and reports from the companies that make the drugs.

It will ABSOLUTELY lead to fewer deaths caused by the treatment itself, will help determine better treatments for older patients, and hopefully check normal cells for toxicity, thereby reducing side effects.

While I am usually the person who says, let's wait and do lots of testing before we make this a standard - in this case, I would love to see this procedure implemented as soon as possible. It is not a new treatment that is untested in humans, it is a new procedure that occurs outside the body, is completely harmless to the patient, will improve their treatment options and outcomes... there are NO down-sides to moving forward with this.

And since it was developed at a University, and not a private drug company, the information is publicly available.

Wow.

Seems like advances in cancer are moving forward exponentially - we may find a cure in our lifetime :)