Welcome To The Cancer Environment
When you listen to what the medical ‘experts’ say about cancer, you might come away with the impression that there has been complete agreement – in the vast amounts of scientific literature on the subject – regarding the nature of the disease and as such, the kinds of treatments worthy of consideration.
Even though that impression is not an accurate one, few people are aware of the fact that there is a long history of research and experimentation questioning the validity of the standard paradigm – which views cancer as a genetically driven disease of the cell – opening up the possibility for alternative forms of treatment.
“The somatic mutation theory of carcinogenesis has been the dominant force driving cancer research during the 20th century. In brief, it proposes that successive DNA mutations in a single cell cause cancer…”
“…its…continuous invocation of ‘programs’ and ‘mechanisms’ is a reflection of inadequate metaphors borrowed respectively from computer sciences and outdated physics; organisms are neither computers nor machines.”
The idea however that cancer is not some kind of random genetic event, but is rather a systemic disease which can be the result of the effects of a wide variety of metabolic stressors, has faced great resistance in both the scientific and medical communities, regardless of the quality of evidence.
“…the tissue organization field theory…incorporates the premise that proliferation and motility are the default state of all cells, and that carcinogenesis is due to alterations on the reciprocal interactions among cells and between cells and their extracellular matrix…There are multiple examples of normalization of cells that once belonged to a cancer…”
The biggest problem with this kind of explanation is that it creates a situation in which prevention and treatment of cancer no longer needs to be focused upon discovering ‘responsible’ genes and finding and destroying ‘guilty’ cells. A biologically rational approach such as this in fact implies that current methodologies more likely have a predominantly harmful impact.
“In the important realm of experimental cancer research, the proposed change would mean a switch from a subcellular, gene-centric approach to a tissue-based organicist one, in which a combined top-down and bottom-up strategy would include systems biology components.”
Attempts to destroy or remove so called cancer cells in the customary ways – surgery, chemotherapy and radiation – have dangerous repercussions, and are predictable in their ability to increase the cancer promoting potential of tissue environments.
“Put another way, cancer results from a breakdown of tissue organization that disrupts the normal inhibitions of proliferation that are inherent in the tissue architecture of a multicellular society of cells.”
The significance of this way of understanding is heightened by the knowledge that the worsening of tissue microenvironments influence the likelihood that tumors will spread or metastasize, a circumstance which is overwhelmingly responsible for cancer mortality.
“Metastases are defined as secondary tumors that develop at a distance from their primary originators; they are the cause of death for 90% of cancer patients…the prevailing consensus is that metastases are not explained accurately, and, more importantly, they are far from being successfully managed.”
“…behavior of normal cells is ordered by their topological relations in tissues and other homeostatic influences of the organism. Weakening of these ordering relations may contribute to malignant transformation…”
Continuous exposure to stress exceeding or interfering with the provision of sufficient amounts of metabolic energy – required by a particular organism in order to cope with such stressors – can be one general way of talking about the factors which can change the tissue, damage the cells (as well as DNA) and encourage cancer potential.
The substances of stress – including cortisol, serotonin, endotoxin, nitric oxide, estrogen, lactate and various other inflammatory and fibrotic things – which often increase side by side with aging, directly and indirectly impact upon the ability of tissue environments to be able to function in a manner which protects against or even reverses cancer behaviour of the cell.
“One of the predictions of the tissue organization field theory is that carcinogenesis can potentially be reversed… Experimentally, the reversal of neoplastic behavior has been accomplished repeatedly when neoplastic cells were placed within the normal tissues from which they originated.”
Exposure to chronic or acute levels of stress of many different kinds wastes blood sugar reserves and leads to the release of the stress substances (including bacterial toxins such as endotoxin) as well as greater amounts of free fatty acids – which these days are increasingly polyunsaturated in composition – and the combination of these ingredients is a major determinant of the conditions which promote tissue damage, genetic changes and the irregular cell activity of cancer and a variety of related types of metabolic illness.
“Our findings provide a hitherto-undescribed direct role of increased aerobic glycolysis in inducing the cancer phenotype, in which increased glycolytic activity regulates the canonical oncogenic pathways…additional evidence for how hyperglycemia in diseases such as obesity and diabetes could provide a microenvironment that results in higher risk of some cancers.”
Avoiding consumption of the polyunsaturated fats and eating enough high quality protein – from milk, cheese and gelatinous cuts of meat – as well as plenty of simple and easy to digest sugars – from sweet ripe fruit, fruit juice, white sugar and honey – is one potentially powerful approach to suppressing stress, regulating blood sugar and lowering exposure to dangerous fats (both ingested and stored in tissue) and is a logical means to improving tissue organization and redirecting cellular behaviour away from the progression of cancer.
“…these observations may lead to a new paradigm for control and treatment of cancer in situ…it may be possible to redirect tumorigenic cells to normal cell function by exposure to substances present within normal tissues.”
“This provides a mechanism through which interaction with the normal mammary microenvironment may suppress tumorigenesis…the normal microenvironment redirects…tumorigenic cells to participate in the regeneration of a normal, functional mammary gland.”
Some other things which have been demonstrated to protect in this same manner include any means of increasing carbon dioxide levels in the body (such as regular bag breathing or living at higher altitudes), exposure to sufficient amounts of daylight as well as the therapeutic use of red light devices, progesterone supplementation, aspirin and numerous anti-estrogen or anti-serotonin substances including the long-existing, extremely safe and effective antihistamine cyproheptadine.
Alternatively, anything that lowers stress – including therapeutic use of white sugar – and allows thyroid metabolism to function more effectively, has been shown to be very helpful.
“…if a cancer cell exists as a discrete entity distinguishable from a normal cell, it has certainly been very uncooperative in revealing what it has ‘invented’ to deserve the fame it has acquired. More to the point, cells isolated from cancers revert to normalcy when placed in a normal microenvironment.”
See More Here