It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What causes brain cancer???

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 07:19 AM
link   
I was just watching CNN, and the anchor asked Dr. Gupta what is the cause and cure of the brain cancer that Ted Kennedy died from.

Then Gupta, lit into a big spiel about how they are treating cancer, but never once said a word about the cause of cancer.

If I have to hear another time from some rich doctor, "we have made enormous progress in this area", .....



What causes brain cancer?

Primary brain tumors arise from many types of brain tissue (for example, glial cells, astrocytes, and other brain cell types). Metastatic brain cancer is caused by the spread of cancer cells from a body organ to the brain. However, the causes for the change from normal cells to cancer cells in both metastatic and primary brain tumors are not fully understood

www.medicinenet.com...

Why don't they just say, "we don't know"?

Or maybe some know, but if they told, we'd string up the government, and the health industry wouldn't be the hot topic right now. They would be heroes, but not rich.



[edit on 26-8-2009 by Udontknowme]




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   
I was diagnosed with a malignant oligodenraglioma back in 2002 it returned in 2007 as the more agressive Glioblasta multiforme. I was told the tumour had probably started growing years before I was diagnosed. I remember having symptoms all the way back to 1998.

I don't know what caused it. I was having symptoms before the popular use of cell phones. I remember recieving a blow to the head after being beaten up. On the right side of my head where the tumour appeared. the fact that brain tumors are now the most common cancer in children is a very worrying trend and leads me to think its environmental factors causing these tumors.

toxins that have now found themselves into our homes in the form of cleaning products, pest control etc etc.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 07:49 AM
link   
I did a google news archive search from 1930-2009 of the term "brain cancer"

Brain cancer didn't hardly show up at all until 1980. It was non existent before 1930

Interesting.

Search results



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Udontknowme

Brain cancer didn't hardly show up at all until 1980. It was non existent before 1930



This is not correct:


During the 16th and 17th centuries, the practice of performing human autopsies for academic purposes eventually led to the link between brain tumors and mental symptoms. Giovanni Battista Morgagni1 (1682-1771) was the first physician to describe a patient with psychiatric symptoms and what may have been a brain tumor. Recognizing this association was a slow process, mostly because of the paucity of practical ways to diagnose and treat psychiatric illness and brain tumors until the late 1800s. The movement led by the French physician Philippe Pinel (1745-1826) influenced physicians to think of psychiatric patients as sick human beings who did not deserve to be physically restrained or mistreated.The creation of large psychiatric hospitals that performed autopsies set the ground for the solid recognition of the association of brain tumors with psychiatric symptoms.
...

Some of the early publications about physical disease causing pains or altered mental status symptoms date from the late 1600s. Thomas Willis,5 in his book De anima brutorum (1672), describes the case of
"a woman of about 50 years of age, after she had borne for about 6 months, a most grievous pain in the head, under the sagittal suture, troubling her almost continually, yielding to no medicine or regime of treatments, finally into a lethargy, with a partial alleviation of her symptoms; from which being aroused by remedies, she awoke with the headache, as distressing as before. Within 2 or 3 weeks later, she departed this life. Her skull being opened there was growing from the side of the sagittal sinus, a scirrhrous tumor three finger broad, which united for a small area the dura mater to the pia mater, and the venous tributaries, which should open here into the sinus, were occluded."


Read more here:
archneur.ama-assn.org...



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


Thanks for your reply. Interesting.

Are they not explaining some form of growth, in the nasal passages, that pressed against the outer layers of the brain?

This wouldn't be an actual growth inside the brain, it's a group of malignant cells surrounded by natural fibers, defining a "tumor" but not a growth within the brain,

point being, your post could be explained through something entering the nasal passage and getting lodged in a sinus cavity.

That would definitely cause headaches.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Udontknowme
 


If you read the whole article I linked to, there are other cases of brain tumors described too.

My point was that brain tumors were known at least as far back as the 16th century in medical litterature, so it is wrong to say that brain tumors did not excist before 1930.

Deny ignorance, right?



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggystar60
 


Actually, I was saying that it was non existent in the news, as I did a google news search.

Could you copy and paste a couple more of those articles you are referring to.

Don't you realize you have to pay to read the link you posted?



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I have a friend that had brain cancer but in her case it was diagnosed early, I guess with everything early diagnostic is very important along with the age of the person.

She recuperated and is been ten years that she is so far "cancer Free" or in other words it has not "spread", but every year she has to have all kind of test to make sure that is not growing back.

And her motor skills are intact.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Udontknowme
 


I am not referring to any more articles than than the one I linked to. But that in that one article there are several cases of brain tumors mentioned.

And I did not have to pay anything to read that article... Are you saying that you can not access it by clicking the link? I just tried it again, and it works just fine for me.




posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystar60
reply to post by Udontknowme
 


I am not referring to any more articles than than the one I linked to. But that in that one article there are several cases of brain tumors mentioned.

And I did not have to pay anything to read that article... Are you saying that you can not access it by clicking the link? I just tried it again, and it works just fine for me.



I just tried it again, and it requires a log in name and password.

If brain tumors which you are calling cancerous, existed back in the 1600's, why are we suggesting it's from pollution, food additive, and all the other things not existent in the 1600's?



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   
MSG and NutraSweet. Check the figures for brain cancer before and after NutraSweet was brought onto the market. Thanks Donald Rumsfeld!

[edit on 26-8-2009 by VitalOverdose]



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Udontknowme

If brain tumors which you are calling cancerous, existed back in the 1600's, why are we suggesting it's from pollution, food additive, and all the other things not existent in the 1600's?


I am sorry about the link, it works just fine for me and gives me access right away.

And as you are saying, some people are suggesting it is caused by pollution, food additive and other things that did not affect people in earlier times. But it is still just a suggestion.

My own father died of a brain tumor almost 20 years ago. He lived a very healthy life, never used alcohol, never smoked, never used a cell phone... Still he got the brain tumor. Nobody knows why.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:14 AM
link   
From my understanding, cancer is when one cell grows abnormally, like a mutation, doesn't work properly and multiplies, spreading throughout the body. Brain cancer obviously occurs within the brain. What causes it? I'd guess environmental factors play a huge role. Not to mention how unnatural the food is we eat today. Everything is processed. That and genetics probably cause brain cancer.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
What cancer is NOT is some type of disease floating around in the air which inflicts whoever is unfortunate enough to come into contact with it. They want us to believe that it's a situation of many unknown variables and one to be very frightful of so that we can be scared into quick action with whatever "therapy" they recommend as soon as they can get it into us.

However the real cause of cancer (they don't want you to know about), including brain cancer is a result of the body living in a state of prolonged deficiency for long periods of time. When this is the case, we become easily susceptible to foreign toxins that our bodies could otherwise deal with and prevent us from the harm they can cause.

An example in a moment but first we need to appreciate that deficiencies can occur many ways and cause a wide variety of aliments and diseases including cancer. There are only about 2 dozen nutrients that the body requires yet there are hundreds of thousands of chemical reactions that take place in the body which depend on those nutrients. The same goes for minerals.


Cancer is so prevalent in our society (higher rates now more than ever) because of the level and types of deficiencies we're facing on a daily basis.

Example - When the food consumed by a nation is of such poor quality (ingredient wise) you will see a correlation between cancer rate rises and other disease manifestations. The foods an average person consumes on a daily basis are of so low quality, it's only a matter of time before most of us reach this point of prolonged deficiency.

Here's exactly what I mean by low food quality. Take a look into your fellow shopper's carts as you roll around the grocery store. You'll notice for the most part a large mass of "food" products with little actual food within the ingredient list.

Take you wide variety of greatly priced frozen dinners. How can we resist a tasty meal for $1? Yet when we look at the ingredient list, little resembles a food source. This goes for MOST food items found in the grocery store nowadays. OUR FOODS ARE A PROBLEM. "Enriched" white bread has an ingredient list the size of Schindler's list, just jacked with chemicals. Margarine the "healthy" choice over real butter, boarders a soft plastic, ingredient wise, yet we're told it's "the way to go".


The list of foods, mostly factory prepared foods, could go on forever with the chemically enhanced fake nutrients made within. This is very important for us to realize and how these additives work against us over time.


This complacent behavior over periods of years even decades causes us to develop many forms of disease. The real kicker is that these fake, chemical, non-food ingredients not only act as substitutes for actual required nutrients, but they also act as toxins themselves as they inflict a great amount of trouble on an already deficient body.

Cancer tumors specifically occur when the body looses its sense of how to function with other parts of the body due to these deficiency and toxicity levels. Certain organs have nutrient starved cells within that start to band together and worry about their survival and not their main purpose which is proper function of the organ. They will start to funnel nutrients away from where they should go in order to feed, and grow the tumor itself. At this point the tumor will become a problem because it is competing against the rest of the body for resources.

--------

It's extremely well hidden and suppressed body of knowledge that our ability to nourish ourselves properly is at the fundamental center of our health problems. We are being led completely astray from this way of thinking. Our doctors (those indoctrinated into western medical schools) have no idea this could be the case - and they've be led that way for a very specific reason.

For a more complete view of how far off base we really are, take a look at the following video I put together addressing the our problems and how to beat them.


(click to open player in new window)



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
The last thing I personally heard about cancer in general was a study reported in Scientific American where success was being made fighting cancer with anti-growth hormones. The scientists working on the idea postulated that cancer happens when there is an imbalance between growth indicators and anti-growth indicators, allowing cells to divide rapidly and with no coordination with other nearby cells.

They showed several examples of the blood vessel structure associated with malignant tumor growth, both before and after treatment. The results certainly looked impressive. probably more studies have been undertaken since, the medical field being the science I am probably least familiar with.

Brain cancer differs from lung cancer, stomach cancer, melanoma (skin cancer), or any other type of cancer only by the location of the tumor. Any cellular structure in the body has the capability to grow a tumor, and any such tumor can become malignant. The major complication with brain cancer is not that the cancer is different, but that it is difficult to reach it and treatments that are (deemed) safe for other areas of the body can be detrimental to the brain tissues.

I tend to believe based on the little I know of the disease that it is a body-wide imbalance that tends to present itself in areas that undergo the most stress in the body. For example, lung cancer tends to affect smokers more than non-smokers because of the additional stress smoking places on the lungs. Under this hypothesis, however, it would follow that if a person was subject to cancer through an imbalance, it would only be the location affected by something such as smoking, and not whether or not cancer appeared somewhere in the body. In other words, if a smoker got lung cancer, they would have probably gotten cancer if they had never smoked; the cancer might have shown up in a different area is all.

The incidence of cancer has indeed risen during the last few decades; I have witnessed this first-hand in my lifetime. That tells me that there is something in our environment that is causing cancer rates to skyrocket. Based on the experiments and research I mentioned at the start of this post, I tend to think it would have something to do with hormonal therapy used on our food sources. Growth hormones are typically given to livestock in massive unregulated quantities in order to produce more food faster at a lower cost.

But yeah, we still do not know what causes cancer of any kind. It's all educated guesswork at this point. But if you really want to take the red pill, really want your eyes open, check out a substance called Potassium Dichloroacetate or Sodium Dichloroacetate (two salts commonly referred to as DCA):

A study published in January 2007 by researchers at the University of Alberta, testing DCA on in vitro cancer cell lines and a rat model, found that DCA restored mitochondrial function, thus restoring apoptosis, killing cancer cells in vitro, and shrinking the tumors in the rats.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

(Yeah, it's Wiki, but it makes a decent starting spot to research. Check out the footnotes.)

An experimentally proven cure for cancer in general, that has years of medical use behind it for treatment of other conditions with a minimum of side effects. And it's not being prescribed. Hmmmm... As Artie Johnson used to say, "Vewwwwy intewesting..."

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I actually think cancer is nature's way of killing people off, it's natural in that sense. Not saying there aren't outside factors causing it, but mostly these are triggers. But I do believe it's more frequent now because of how we live and who we live by.



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
I have a friend that had brain cancer but in her case it was diagnosed early, I guess with everything early diagnostic is very important along with the age of the person.

She recuperated and is been ten years that she is so far "cancer Free" or in other words it has not "spread", but every year she has to have all kind of test to make sure that is not growing back.

And her motor skills are intact.


I'm in a similar position to your friend. unfortunately at present they can't be cured, but can be controlled.My motor skills have been slightly impared, my left hand side is very slightly weaker and I suffer from fatigue,which isn't bad considering what others have gone through. Being young definitely helps

Brain Tumors very rarely spread to other parts of the body like other tumors due to the blood brain barrier I think. i'm managing to live a relativelyhappyand normal life. It's just knowing you have ticking time bomb in your head that can get you down



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Udontknowme
 


Here is a link to a recent similar discussion on this topic:

www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=4981933#pid4981933

See especially my reply (Uphill, look for bright green color), which gives a source (written by a medical doctor) that discusses an almost immediate and profound improvement in a person previously expected to die imminently from brain cancer.

Let's face it, food and drink are the most powerful chemicals we take into our bodies on a daily basis. We might as well be making our dietary choices among meals that are actually good for us.

[edit on 8/26/2009 by Uphill]



posted on Aug, 26 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Uphill

Let's face it, food and drink are the most powerful chemicals we take into our bodies on a daily basis. We might as well be making our dietary choices among meals that are actually good for us.

It would help with that suggestion if we actually understood what was 'good for us'.

The human body is a marvelous mechanism capable of handling about every contaminant that nature can throw our way. Our immunity system is especially intricate and robust. Yet, we are bombarded daily with admonitions to not eat eggs, drink whole milk, and to fill our bellies with chemical concoctions that any sane person form 100 years ago would puke at the thought of.

If it grows naturally, it's good food. Period. If it's made in a factory, it probably isn't. Period. If it requires chemicals made in a factory to grow, it definitely isn't. Period. That means in our society, it is almost impossible to eat good natural foods, as commercialism and the search for profit means anything not grown using accelerants like growth hormones, artificially-produced fertilizers, and toxic pesticides and herbicides is typically so slow and therefore expensive to produce it isn't financially feasible to market them.

The only real solution is to go back to nature and back to growing your own food. That is a long journey, though, and one I am still undertaking. Sadly, for much of the population, it is an impossible quest.


TheRedneck




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join