esundheit utrition enter mammogram mania · ribbon blues: how breast cancer culture undermines...

This article attempts to growawareness but may not providethe real answers. When brows-

ing the Internet and reading researcharticles in profession specific maga-zines, we realize information overload.This can often lead to saying, “Ah, theheck with it—I’ll go with what I know.”But today’s topic is one that needs a second look, because we took the wrongexit on a scenic drive and need to get backon track.

October just finished and mammograms were in the news every day to remind us of theimportance of early cancer-cell detection. While it is an everyday battle for many who have been positively diagnosed, every October we rememberbreast-cancer victims and celebrate its survivors. Breastcancer seems to have become the “poster-child” for allcancers, and saying anything negative about its cam-paigns or fundraisers is almost considered sacrilegious.Let’s face it, we all know somebody with breast cancer,and so it hits home with us. But it should also allowus to be angry, upset and disappointed with the lack ofresearch progress that is presented to us through theallopathic medical channels.

For more than twenty years now, since 1991, I’dalways heard that more than 400 million dollars hasbeen fundraised annually to find a cure for all cancers.That’s over eight billion dollars in this country alone!According to Gayle Sulik, PhD, in her book, PinkRibbon Blues: How Breast Cancer Culture UnderminesWomen’s Health, that number is about $6 billion annu-ally. Exact numbers may never be known, but it hasbeen said that finding a cure may not be the preroga-tive. The sad truth is that there are more people mak-ing a living from cancer than there are people who suf-fer and die from it.

Dr. Carlos Arteaga, Vice Chancellor’s Chair inBreast Cancer Research at Vanderbilt UniversityDepartment of Medicine, recently said, “I think whatkeeps us going is the realization that we are about tocure many types of breast cancer.” This was duringSeptember’s annual one-hour telethon, “Stand-Up 2Cancer.” In 2008, this broadcast, which plays simulta-neously on all the major networks, raised more than a

$100 million for cancer research. Dr. Arteaga receivedmore than $600K out of this to help fund his work.

If you step away from this emotionally, severalthings have to come to mind. 1) This is a very lucra-tive business; and 2) there is an innate desire in most people to cure diseases, and most people who do the research have the best intentions to come to aspeedy resolution; but, 3) how is this money dividedbetween different research efforts and approaches—and where are the results?

Preventive medicine is a noble concept, but notwhen the outside blinds are closed and only the peopleinside the room set the policy. In the case of earlybreast-cancer detection, this is still done through afifty-year-old technology—Digital Mammography—even though it has been thoroughly determined thatscreening mammography does not save lives. SarahCimperman, ND, points to the results of a 13-year,randomized, controlled research study of half-a-millionwomen, from the US, the UK, Canada and Sweden,who received regular mammograms compared to thosewho did not, showed no statistically significant reduc-tion in the risk of death.1 The well-respected CochraneCollaboration, an international, independent, not-for-profit research organization, conducted this study thatwas completed in 2001.

Then there are the false-positive and false-negative readings that have truly messed things

32 w w w. n a t u r a l l i fe n ew s . c o m • Natural Life News & D i re c t o ry

NLND HEALTH PEARL #14

Mammogram Mania Whose Interest Is at Stake ?

Jacobus HollewijnGESUNDHEIT! NUTRITION CENTER

up in the world of DigitalMammography. False-positive testsmistakenly identify normal tissueas cancerous. False-negative read-ings don’t show active cancer cells,and/or the pathologists erroneous-ly call them benign tumors, thusthe results do not stimulate strin-gent preventive measures or thenecessary therapies. In the April2003 New England Journal ofMedicine, it was stated that only3% of abnormal mammographieswere valid—a 97% failure rate!This was followed-up in March2005, when the Journal of theAmerican Medical Association(JAMA) published research trialsshowing that 95% of positivemammography results were false!

Technology has developed tothe point that we can look deeperinto the body and detect cancercells at a very early stage. But doesdetecting these cells automaticallymean that they will become activecancer cells? And will this translateinto a future cancer diagnosis? A2009 study published in the BritishMedical Journal concluded that oneout of every three breast cancersidentified on screening mammo-grams was overdiagnosed andwould not cause symptoms ofdeath.

Just keep in mind what emo-tional reactions a positive diagno-sis creates in a doctor’s office, and

then how many families’ lives areturned upside-down because of the treatments that are to follow:biopsies, lumpectomies, mastec-tomies (many women even have a double mastectomy by choice),chemotherapy, radiation, scarring,pain, infections (includingMRSA/Staph), fatigue, toxic drugs,hormonal imbalances, loweredself-esteem, increased insurancepremiums, financial stress, lostwork, hardship in marriage andrelationships—and in so manycases, only to find-out that thediagnosing was wrong.

Another major issue is thatwomen who return annually for amammogram may be unnecessarilyexposing themselves to ionizingradiation (or gamma rays) that candamage genetic material and causecancerous mutations. ShaneEllison, M.Sc., in the 2010November/December Well BeingJournal, states that, “Unlike theenergy emitted from the sun,gamma rays penetrate the cellmembrane, [what Bruce Lipton,PhD calls the actual brain of the cell—jh] and cause a slurry of freeradicals that accelerate aging bydestroying our internal how-tobook, the DNA. This can result incancer in previously healthy cells.The official statement from theACS is that ionizing radiation hasbeen shown to cause cancer in

many different species of animalsand in almost all parts of the body.It is one of the few scientificallyproven carcinogens in humanbeings.”2

There is a direct relationshipbetween cumulative exposure toradiation of all kinds (includingmammograms, CT scans and den-tal X-rays) and developing cancer.Also, mammograms tightly com-press the breasts, which is not onlyuncomfortable but could lead tospreading or metastasizing ofactive cancer cells.

33November–December 2010

Jacobus is not a doctor and does not intend

to diagnose, treat or cure any disorder.The

information is based on self-study, interview-

ing experts on his weekly 3-hour Saturday

morning Radio Program “Gesundheit! With

Jacobus,” which runs from 8–11 am, on AM

1450-KMMS and AM 1340 KPRK, and on

feedback received from retail customers

visiting his dietary supplements retail store

Gesundheit! Nutrition Center at 2855

N. 19th Avenue, Suite N, in Bozeman

(585-4668). If in doubt, please visit a profes-

sional of your own choice and/or educate

yourself with available published materials.

EVERY SATURDAY MORNING 8–11 AMon AM-1450 KMMS, Bozeman

& AM-1340 KPRK, Livingston L I V E, with Health Experts

in Traditional Medicine and Natural, Alternative Therapies

O N L INE at w w w . G W J R A D I O . c o m

CALL IN Q U E S T I O N S! 5 2 2 - TALK (8255)











EXPERT ADVICEMON–SAT 9–62855 No. 19th Ave., Ste. NBozeman, MT 59718

(406) [email protected]• VITAMINS & MINERALS• HERBS & HOMEOPATHICS• ATHLETIC SUPPLEMENTS• ESSENTIAL OILS





Joseph Mercola, MD, in hisregular e-mail newsletter to sub-scribers [Mercola.com], quotes arecent study in the New EnglandJournal of Medicine, which suggeststhat, “Mammograms, combinedwith modern treatment, reducedthe death rate by only 10%, but thecurrative effects of mammogramsalone could be as low as 2% oreven zero!”3 Dr. Mercola then com-ments that mammograms will notprevent you from getting breastcancer, and that the latest studiesshow they offer very little benefitin improving your chances of survival if you do have it.

Dr. Cimperman points out thatthere may be benefits to mammo-grams, especially for women withan increased risk of developingbreast cancer because of a geneticpredisposition, or because of earlylife exposure to radiation, or incases where a mammogram is usedfor diagnosing questionable breast

issues. But there is an alternative!Look into the much safer breastthermography option for earlydetection. This technology meas-ures the radiation of infrared heatemanating from your body andtranslates this information intoanatomical images. I highly recom-mend that you visit the website,ThermographyOfMontana.com andlearn how this technique can seeactive breast cancer cells after onlytwo years, whereas it takes mam-mography at least eight(!) years to detect these active cells. Thiswill make it much harder to treatthrough natural methods that haveless traumatic effects on the bodyand mind.

So, is cancer the symptom orthe disease? Are doctors able tocure the symptom of what we callbreast cancer? Will they be able to cure cancer altogether? If Dr.Arteaga and his colleagues findtheir expensive cures, can he

guarantee that no cancer of anykind will return at some point(considering the 10–12-year window for returning cancer)?

Experimental and successfulwork is now being done in the natural-alternative fields with oxy-gen, H202 (hydrogen peroxide),bloodroot, yew, Essiac, stem cells,medicinal mushrooms, InositolPhosphate 6, Vitamin C, VitaminD3, natural progesterone, and oth-ers. Mammograms are mostly inef-fective and potentially dangerous.They have become obsolete andstand in the way of the new waveof technologies and treatments.Promotional fundraisers shouldencourage integrative cancerresearch and should spreadresearch dollars evenly among alltherapies. With our own health at stake, we need to send our hard-earned dollars to the oneswho can truly win this race to beat cancer.

NOTES:

1. Well Being Journal, Vol. 19, No. 2

(March/April 2010):

“Mammograms Misunderstood.”

2. Well Being Journal, Vol. 19, No. 6

(November/December 2010):

“Prevent Cancer Now.”

3. Mercola.com (Archive), October

15, 2010:“The Breast Cancer

Screening Mistake Millions

Make…”

34

Donna Rae [email protected]

What’s your purpose? What’s your path?CHANNELING SPECIAL:1st Question Free, $1/minute• Reiki Master Teacher/Healer • Advanced Psychotherapy Pranic Healer• Teachings of Abraham Workshops/Groups

More info, visit MO N TA N AHE A L I N GCO N N E C T I O N S.C O M

C a l l 406-293-6797

A l l - N a t u ral HEALING CANDLES in 8 Beautiful Colors

Combining specific colors with natural, aromatherapy fragrances to balance your chakras

for easy, fast energy! Every candle is blessed with Reiki to enhance healing.

HANDMADE IN LIBBY, MT • 100% SOY & COTTON WICKS

Holiday Healing Candle Sale! $50 Ord e r G e t 25% off • $100 or More, Get %40 Off (Retail only )

w w w. n a t u r a l l i fe n ew s . c o m • Natural Life News & D i re c t o ry

DAWN EMERGING

Intuitive Guidance for Divine Awakening

Open yourself to the Divine within...

Allow it to express in your healing and creations!

SUE STODOLA, Holistic Energy Therapy Practitioner,

Certified BodyTalk™ Practitioner, Reiki Practitioner

Bozeman • 580-4280 • In-Person and Phone Sessions

Call for a FREE 15-Minute Consultation

DAWN EMERGING








DAWN EMERGING








esundheit utrition enter mammogram mania · ribbon blues: how breast cancer culture undermines...

Documents