• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo

Cancer


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#31 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 21 December 2002 - 09:58 PM

Re: Cancer/Pets Wheatgrass is a great healer. I have a wheat Grass Juicer (manual) and i give a drop or drops of this powerful Juice to he animals that dont eat grass on their own. thank you for the info. on brushing the Cats . there seems to be invisible energies in Hands that help the healing and strengthening of the immune system when we lovingly care for the sick. I also use gentle music for my animals. .......I also had many vaccinations as a child and therefore grew up very sick and depressed. So many lifes are lost because of the Frankenstein Industry. I'm reminded of what i read in the BI--BLE ( THE BOOK OF GOOD AND EVIL)............" My people( animals too) perish because of the lack of knowledge" BTW there are companies that ship raw pet food! thank you for keeping posted.

#32 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 04:59 AM

Fruitimmortal,

Thanks so much for your feedback.

Being raised in a vehement atheistic family setting, the first time I read the Scriptures was when I was at Notre Dame.

A Frankenstein Industry driven by money, power, and social acceptance? But has this Frankenstein Industry really found a cure for Cancer or AIDS?

The instruction is also to "be in the world but not of the world system (code name "Octopus").

Currently, we gave carrot juice several times to Malissa today. The research shown up above discusses the importance of beta-carotene. We even gave some carrot juice to Mike.

We will be giving Malissa pineapple tomorrow (loaded with enzymes plus vitamin C).

My wife and I have had wheat grass for the first time this weekend. I understand it is very good. We will hold off a little on Malissa until she becomes more accustomed to the other fruit and vegetable juices we are giving her.

I understand the energies of the hands, but I still don't know why the "watering down" procedure I described up above works.

My background as a lad was to learn from a Native American shaman on how to handle sick animals. They would provide a watch over for the sick animal where someone would be near them as much as possible. My wife and I are taking terms sleeping downstairs with Malissa during the night. I remember the first night we did this that she cried about 1 o'clock in the morning. I went over to her and it must have taken about 7 seconds for her to realize I was close by. That seems to have been important to her for now she seems at peace during the night.

Fruitimmortal, you might be interested in pulling up the URL shown below which provides some interesting information on cancer as well as other diseases.

bob

http://www.drday.com/

Posted Image

Dr. Lorraine Day, an internationally acclaimed orthopedic trauma surgeon and best selling author was for 15 years on the faculty of the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine as Associate Professor and Vice Chairman of the Department of Orthopedics. She was also Chief of Orthopedic Surgery at San Francisco General Hospital and is recognized world-wide as an AIDS expert.

She has been invited to lecture extensively throughout the U.S. and the world and has appeared on numerous radio and television shows including 60 minutes, Nightline, CNN Crossfire, Oprah Winfrey, Larry King Live, The 700 Club, John Ankerberg Show, USA Radio Network, Art Bell Radio Show, Three Angels Broadcasting Network and Trinity Broadcasting Network.

Virtually ALL disease is caused by a combination of three main factors:

1) Malnutrition; we eat a LOT of calories, but not much nutrition. We eat a lot of flesh food and animal (dairy) products which are too high in fat and protein with no fiber and very few vitamins and minerals. We eat EMPTY calories, processed food that is high in fat, protein and sugar but very low in vitamins, minerals and enzymes.

2) Dehydration; The body is 75% water and the brain is 85% water. We lose 10 glasses of water from our body every day just by living (from perspiration, from breathing, our breath is moist, and from our body's need to take water from our cells to transfer into the stomach to make digestive juices to digest our food). Caffeine, found in coffee and caffeinated soft drinks, is a diuretic. It takes more water out of your system than comes in with the drink. Water is a necessary architectural component of every cell. If our cells are deficient in water, they CAN'T function properly. Therefore, our body AND our brain start to break down.

3) Stress: When we are stressed or angry, the stomach contracts and cannot digest our food properly, the intestinal peristalsis stops so we can't get rid of our waste material and instead we reabsorb these toxins, and our adrenal glands pour out harmful hormones into our body that suppress our immune system. In addition, stress is very dehydrating, thus depleting the body of its much needed water.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this MEDICINES advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 22 December 2002 - 06:37 AM

what a blessing to read all these articles bobdrake12. I have never used carrot juice, since i read that carrots are manipulated to be very high in sugar. they are also a root vegetable. do they also contain enzyme inhibitors? if they do, many other nutrients would not get absorbed well. Tree and earth surface grown fruits/veggies also contain sunshine(orgone?) energies which are also needed by the body. if watermelons are hard to purchase now you can also use seeded sweet oranges. I always buy Texas oranges in the winter. I try to stay away from unseeded fruit, since they are not natural. another good cancer fighting fruit is seeded sweet grapes. have you read the book by Johanna Brandt " the grape Cure"?She healed herself of stomach cancer.

#34 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 07:03 AM

fruitimmortal,

Dr. Day recommends carrot juice. She used it in her recovery from cancer in conjunction with apple juice.

I checked out a couple of references related to carrot juice and have posted them below.

I believe the key is to get the carrot juice fresh. I know that my brother used carrot juice with his cancer and felt better, but they they stopped giving it to him. He then got worse and died.

Carrots contain the following vitamins and minerals which are shown to reduce the risk of getting cancer (see articles shown above): beta carotene and other carotenoids, B vitamins, vitamin C, the minerals calcium and potassium.

bob

http://www.aimingfor...arrotJuice.html

Just Carrots (excerpts)

Benefits of carrots

It is well established that carrots are a healthy food. They contain many important nutrients-beta carotene and other carotenoids, B vitamins, vitamin C, the minerals calcium and potassium, and much more. Of all of these, it is beta carotene that traditionally has received the most attention.

Beta carotene

Beta carotene is one of about 500 similar compounds called carotenoids, which are present in many fruits and vegetables. The body changes beta carotene into vitamin A, which is important in strengthening the immune system and promoting healthy cell growth. However, beta carotene is much more than the precursor for vitamin A. Only so much beta carotene can be changed into vitamin A, and that which is not changed contributes to boosting the immune system and is also a potent antioxidant. Antioxidants fight free radicals and help prevent them from causing membrane damage, DNA mutation, and lipid (fat) oxidation, all of which may lead to many of the diseases that we consider "degenerative."

Alpha carotene

Beta carotene is not the only carotenoid. Often overlooked, and also found in carrots, is alpha carotene. According to an article in NCI Cancer Weekly (Nov. 13, 1989), Michiaki Murakoshi, who leads a team of biochemists at Japan's Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, contends that alpha carotene may be more powerful than beta carotene in inhibiting processes that may lead to tumor growth. Murakoshi indicates that neuroblastoma (cancer) cells coated with carotenoids experience a drop in N-myc activity compared to untreated cells. N-myc is a gene that codes for cell growth-stimulating proteins and can contribute to cancer formation and growth. Alpha carotene was found to be about ten times more inhibitory toward N-myc activity than beta carotene. Murakoshi concludes that all types of carotenoids should be studied for possible health benefits.

In sum, alpha carotene and beta carotene, like all nutrients found in vegetables and fruits, have health benefits. Indeed, The 1995 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, released by the U.S. government, states that "The antioxidant nutrients found in plant foods (vitamin C, carotene, vitamin E, and the mineral selenium) are presently of great interest to scientists and the public because of their potentially beneficial role in reducing the risk of cancer and certain other chronic diseases."

Phytochemicals

Many claims about plants and health have not been tested in clinical, double-blind trials or by other traditional means. Should we believe them? The universal acceptance of the benefits of plant phytochemicals-substances found in plants that might play a role in preventive health-might at least nudge us toward the willingness to accept the possibility that plants have benefits.
Some of the research on phytochemicals is funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), which has launched a multimillion-dollar project to find, isolate, and study phytochemicals. The result of this and similar research is an ever-increasing wealth of data that points to the possible positive effects of fruits and vegetables on our health.

For example, research has shown that broccoli contains a substance, sulforaphane, that may prevent, even cure, breast cancer. Citrus fruits contain limone, which increases the activity of enzymes that eliminate carcinogens. Cabbage, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, and similar vegetables contain indoles, which might lower the risk of breast cancer. Currently in the news is genistein, a substance found in soy beans which may block tumor growth, and lycopene, a component of tomatoes which has been linked to reduced risk of prostate cancer.

One of the results of this research is that the NCI recommends that we eat five servings of vegetables and three servings of fruits per day.

JuicingHow healthy are carrots? According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, three raw carrots (216 g, or a little less than one-half pound) contain about 2 g of protein, 21 g of carbohydrates, 60 mg of calcium, 1 mg of iron, 696 mg of potassium, 60,000 International Units (IUs) of vitamin A in the form of beta carotene, 19 mg of vitamin C, 30 mcg of folate, and traces of many more vitamins and minerals.

Juicing adds to the benefits of carrots. Because juicing removes the fiber, the important nutrients and phytochemicals found in carrots and other plants are absorbed more easily by our bodies-sometimes within minutes-without too much effort on the part of the digestive system. As well, more of the nutrients are absorbed; fiber is not present to escort some of them out of the body.

Fresh fruit and vegetable juices also are rich in enzymes. Enzymes spark the hundreds of thousands of chemical reactions that occur throughout the body; they are essential for the digestion and absorption of food, for conversion of foodstuffs into body tissue, and for the production of energy at the cellular level. In fact, enzymes are essential for most of the building and rebuilding that goes on in our bodies every day. Without enzymes, and the sparks they provide, we would be helpless: a bag of bones, unable to walk, talk, blink, or breathe. When foods are cooked, enzymes can be destroyed; that is why raw foods and juices are so important to us. They provide us with an excellent source of all-important enzymes.

#35 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 07:12 AM

This article displays the author's favorite anti-cancer juices. Note: This is for humans so I would be guessing how this would directly relate to cat cancers.

Carrots reportedly alkalizing the blood system is very interesting.

bob


http://www.kronon-of...Diet/cancer.htm

According to both traditional Chinese medicine as well as more enlightened studies in the West, cancer occurs when a mass of cells in various tissues become so toxic and starved of organic nourishment that they can no longer breathe properly, i.e. they can no longer eliminate wastes and absorb nutrients. Hence, they literally "ferment" in their own toxic wastes, mutate, and become cancerous tumors. This condition can be caused by a number of factors: primary cause is chronic poor diet, heavy in cooked emats, eggs, and refined starches and sugars and poor in raw food, enzymes, organic nutrients. Insufficient circulation of essence and energy due to lack of exercise and shallow breathing are contributing causes. Chronic stress and depression also play a role by poisoning the bloodstream with toxic by-products of adrenaline and other "fight or flight" reactions. First and foremost therapy is detoxification with a series of 7- 10 day fasts with daily colonic irrigations. Thereafter a diet of raw fruit and vegetable juices is indicated. Breathing exercises are extremely beneficial to cancer patients, in conjunction with detoxification and proper organic nutrition, because they circulate the nutrients to the cells, and suffuse all tissues with abundant supplies of chee.

Carrot juice: this is perhaps the best vegetable juice for detoxifying tissues. It also helps alkalize the bloodstream, which in cases of toxemia is always highly acidic. Raw carrot juice delivers abundant supplies of readily assimilable vitamins, minerals, and enzymes to diseased cells, giving them the fuel they require to sluff off wastes and rebuild cells. 75-year-old Jay Kordish, who today promotes raw juice diets in America, was cured of bladder cancer at age 25 with a blend of raw carrot and apple juice, taken a glass at a time every hour 13 times a day under the supervision of the great raw juice therapist Dr. Max Gersen. Drink at least 1 1/2 quarts freshly extracted raw carrot juice daily, in conjunction with breathing and other exercises, for as long as therapy is required.

Grapes: raw grapes, especially the dark variety, are renowned as excellent cancer therapy when taken as an exclusive diet for prolonged periods. Entire sanatoriums in Russia are devoted to this cure. Grapes detoxify all tissues and organs and restore organic integrity to starved cells In 1925, South African Johanna Brandt cured herself of cancer with an exclusive grape diet and wrote a book about it called The Grape Cure. She recommends 2-4 pounds of dark grapes per day, for a week to a month or more, chewing the skins and seeds as well.
Cabbage juice: fresh raw cabbage juice has been proven to cure sever ulcers in the stomach, duodenum, and intestines. As such, it is also an effective therapy for cancers of the stomach and intestinal tract, where cancerous tissues often form. It is generally recommended to take cabbage juice in combination with raw carrot juice, due to its strength 4oz cabbage juice/8oz carrot juice, 3 times daily.

Raw beet juice: beet juice is highly beneficial as a liver detoxifier and blood cleanser In cases of cancer, therefore, it purifies the bloodstream so that the blood can do its work of detoxifying the body and delivering nutrients to starved cells. By detoxifying the liver, it further promotes clean blood, which is filtered by the liver.

Also indicated in cases of liver cancer: 8oz of pure beet juice, twice daily, or 6oz beet/6oz carrot, 3 times daily.

Tablets and dry crystals of pure beet juice extract are also very good.

Foods to avoid: all animal products, especially proteins and fats, i.e. no cooked meat, fat, eggs, milk, etc.; all refined sugars and starches; carbohydrates; oils; eat only fresh raw fruit and vegetables, juices and extracts.

#36 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 22 December 2002 - 07:13 AM

Re: [quote]Frankenstein Industry: bobdrake12 it is hard for me to conceive any permanent cures in a Death Culture. Death energies are everywhere. The world back in Bible times was not as toxic as our world and therefor safe to live in without being part of it. I know physical immortality could be a reality if the entire planet is healed. The reward of obeying all laws of nature once balance is established would be life unending...... P.s I was eating some homemade veggie soup and some of my cats insisted on sharing.

#37 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 07:27 AM

fruitimmortal,

It looks like it is best to mix carrot juice with some other juice because of the high sugar content in carrots. Although the sugar is not refined, this concept makes sense to me. Probably tomatoes or some green vegetable (like cabbage) might make a good mix with carrots.

Quoting Dr. Day on the sugar issue in carrots:

If you are a diabetic you should concentrate on the green leafy vegetable juices more than the carrot at first because of the natural sugar in the carrot juice. But you can also start with one carrot juice per day, diluted 50/50 with water, carefully monitoring your sugar levels. As you change your diet and begin exercising, your diabetes will improve and you will be able to slowly increase your amount of carrot juice.


Tonight we will use the carrot juice of Malissa (because that is all we have) but tomorrow we will make a 50/50 mix.

bob

http://orpheus.membr...lbert/note.html


Posted Image


News From the Office - Spring 2002

FEATURE ARTICLE - Phytochemicals and Cancer Prevention

MEDICAL NEWS ALERT - Dietary Supplements containing KAVA, linked to liver toxicity


As many of you already know, we are have expanded to a second larger office space at the Medical Healing Arts Center in Doylestown. PMG will occupy about 2000 sq.ft of this beautifully renovated historic building in the heart of Doylestown. This office allows for collaborative therapy as the center has a full range of alternative practitioners.

Recently we have implemented a novel office-based testing system called METABOLIC TYPING designed to detect any one of five metabolic imbalances. This inexpensive test can be done easily in the office in 10 minutes by testing urine, saliva and noting several aspects of the physical examination. The results determine which diet and dietary supplements are correct for your unique body chemistry. The results of this testing have been impressive in improving fatigue, mood swings, hypoglycemic symptoms, and assisting in weight loss.

I have recently received funding to conduct a small double blind study of the effects of chelation therapy, an alternative therapy for heart disease. This pilot trial will hopefully lead to NIH funding for the first long-term, large study of chelation therapy. This study will be conducted at Jefferson Center for Integrative Medicine. If you know anyone who has suffered a heart attack and is interested in participating have him or her call me in the office.

FEATURE ARTICLE - Phytochemicals and Cancer Prevention

It is unreasonable and impractical to perform large-scale double blind studies on diet and its relationship to cancer. Therefore, much of our knowledge about what constitutes the optimal cancer prevention diet comes from population (epidemiological) studies or animal studies. That is if you look at a culture with a high intake of fruits and vegetables and they have a low incidence of cancer and this continues to be the case among different cultures as well, then a statement can be made about that trend. Cohort studies take a group of individuals (the cohort) and follow their food intake over time and see if there is an association between aspects of the diet and cancer. Other studies look at individuals with a particular cancer and then go back over their diets to see what features they had in common that might have resulted in cancer. Examining data from numerous epidemiological studies, the World Cancer Research Fund concluded that the evidence that fruits and vegetables may reduce the risk of oral, esophageal, lung, stomach, and colon cancer was convincing and that the evidence for an association between intake of fruits and vegetables with breast, pancreatic, and bladder cancer was probable. It is unclear whether any single substance in a plant based diet accounts for this relationship. Most current research, however, has focused on the protective role of individual phytochemicals (plant-based chemicals). The National Cancer Institute recommends eating 5 serving of fruits and vegetables a day. However more recent studies suggest that more is in fact better. Although 5-a-day is recommended by the National Cancer Institute, higher levels of vegetable intake may be more beneficial for reducing cancer risk. Furthermore, current evidence suggests that vegetables are more effective than fruits in reducing cancer.

Vegetables, fruits, and whole grains contain a wide variety of phytochemicals that have the potential to interfere with the development of cancer. Let’s look at some of these classes of phytochemicals and what important foods contain them.

Cruciferous vegetables

Cruciferous vegetables (i.e., broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower, and cabbage) contain isothiocyanates, which may provide protection against environmental carcinogen exposure by inducing detoxification pathways thereby neutralizing potential carcinogens. Additionally, these vegetables contain indole-3-carbinol (I3C). I3C has been shown to reduce the risk of breast cancer by decreasing estrogen activity.

Carotenoid containing vegetables

Population studies show an association between high dietary intake of carotenoid-containing fruits and vegetables and reduced risk of prostate, breast, and head and neck cancers. A high dietary intake of fruits and vegetables provides a spectrum of carotenoids including alpha-carotene, gamma-carotene, beta-cryptoxanthin, zeaxanthin, lutein, and lycopene. Vegetable juices (carrot, tomato, spinach, and other greens) represent a particularly potent form of carotenoids. Scientists have demonstrated that drinking carrot juice significantly reduces free radical damage to genes. Tomato juice also reduces the oxidation of the "bad" LDL cholesterol in healthy men which can lead to atherosclerosis. Carotenoid-rich extracts of carrots and tomatoes have been shown to substantially inhibit the early stages of liver cancer in animals.

The major sources of lycopene are tomatoes and tomato products. Studies show that populations with the highest tomato intake or blood lycopene levels have the lowest risk of cancer. This association is highest for prostate, lung and stomach cancers. Lycopene may account for or contribute to these benefits, but this possibility is not yet proven. The availability of lycopene from different food items varies considerably. Lycopene concentrations are highest in cooked tomatoes.

Polyphenol containing fruits

Fruits contain various key phytochemicals. Resveratrol, present in grapes and wines, has been reported to exert a variety of anticancer effects. Studies have demonstrated resveratrol causes growth inhibition of human colon cancer cells. Other studies suggest resveratrol may have an inhibitory effect on breast cancer cell growth. Ellagic acid found in strawberries and grapes, blueberries, raspberries and blackberries, is another polyphenol that has demonstrated anticarcinogenic potential in animal studies. Other sources of phytochemicals

Garlic contains two substances, glutathione-S-transferase and diallyl sulphide, which appear to increase the elimination of environmental carcinogens by the liver. Other substances in garlic act to improve immune function. A number of studies have suggested that the regular consumption of tea, particularly non-fermented green tea, moderately decreases the risk of cancer, especially cancers of the upper digestive tract. However a recent a cohort study conducted in Japan, reported no association between the consumption of green tea and the risk of gastric cancer. With respect to anticarcinogenic activity, the substance in green tea that has generated the most interest is a potent, naturally occurring antioxidant, epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG). The mechanism of action of EGCG and other similar substances is uncertain, but they may function in several ways: by acting as an antioxidant, and by inhibiting enzymes involved in cell division. From a practical standpoint, the research suggests that to derive any cancer preventive effect from green tea intake would require drinking 10-12 cups per day. Note that milk added to green tea will reduce its antioxidant activity.

Here then is my summary of recommendations for vegetable and fruit consumption as part of a cancer prevention diet:

Vegetables

o Vegetables should comprise a large part of your diet (7 servings/day). One serving is ½ cup of cooked vegetable. Cooked vegetables should be steamed lightly, lightly sautéed, or baked so they are tender, but still crisp.
Sprouts are an excellent concentrated source of phytochemicals. Try mung, radish, alfalfa and broccoli sprouts. Broccoli sprouts contain many times the antioxidant value of broccoli.

o Include large amounts of green, leafy vegetables (spinach, romaine lettuce, kale, collards, chard) and choices from the cabbage family (cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, brussel sprouts).

o Include orange, yellow and red vegetables (Red and yellow pepper, carrots, beets, squash, yams, yellow corn).

o Vegetable juicing that balances carrots with greens, (kale, collards, etc.) and other low carbohydrate vegetables (broccoli, celery, etc.) is encouraged. These should be organic vegetables and juicing only carrots is not recommended due to the high natural sugar content of carrots.

o Conventionally grown peppers, celery, green beans, and cucumbers are the most highly contaminated with pesticides. Rinse vegetables and fruits thoroughly before eating to remove pesticide residues. Find organic sources, which are always preferable to reduce pesticide exposure.

Fruits

o Eat fruit raw.

o Fruit should be preferably eaten alone as a snack or a small meal in itself. This will minimize indigestion.

o Eat only one or two small servings per day, as fruit is rich in simple sugars.

o Eat fruit which has a high ORAC (oxygen radical absorptive capacity). These have the greatest antioxidant effect: blueberries, strawberries, raspberries, plums, red grapes, cherries, and oranges.

o Conventionally grown Mexican cantaloupe, Chilean grapes, apples, apricots, cherries, strawberries, peaches are the most highly contaminated with pesticides. Find organic sources.

Medical News Alert

Dietary supplements containing kava (also known as kava kava or Piper methysticum) are promoted for a variety of uses, including relaxation (e.g., to relieve stress, anxiety, and tension) and insomnia. Products containing herbal extracts of kava have been implicated in cases of serious liver toxicity in Germany and Switzerland. Approximately 25 reports of liver toxicity associated with the use of products containing kava extracts have been reported in these countries. Serious adverse effects include hepatitis, cirrhosis, and liver failure. At least one patient required a liver transplant. Based on their assessment of the adverse events reported to them, the regulatory authority in Switzerland has prohibited the sale of products containing the kava extract associated with the adverse effects. Last month, the German authorities issued a proposal to remove all kava extract-containing products from the market. The French Agency for the Safety of Health Products suspended the sale of products and preparations containing kava in France. The FDA is investigating whether the use of kava-containing dietary supplements in the United States poses similar public health concerns.

It must be emphasized that these cases involved relatively high doses of kava taken for several months. In my practice, I have prescribed kava extracts for many years for anxiety and insomnia and have never seen evidence of liver toxicity. The apparent toxicity may be an issue of product contamination or individual variation in the ability to metabolize the herb. If you have found kava helpful, I see no reason to discontinue use as long as it is occasional and not continuous and the product is from a reputable manufacturer. The suggested dose of kava is 75-100 mg three times daily of a standardized extract containing 30-50% kavalactones. I will keep you updated on this issue.

#38 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 08:08 AM

http://www.lef.org/f...ancer-risk.html

Cancer Risk from Chlorinated Water

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- A substance created by a chemical reaction in chlorinated drinking water caused several types of tumors in rats, a new study shows.

The rats were given the substance, known as MX (officially called 3-chloro-4-(dichloromethyl)-5-hydroxy-2(5H)-furanone), in their drinking water for up to 104 weeks. The researchers from the National Public Health Institute in Finland then killed the animals to study their bodies. They found large amounts of lesions on the rats' livers, thyroid glands and adrenal glands, as well as high levels of lymphomas, leukemias, and mammary gland tumors.

Dr. Hannu Komulainen and colleagues, who reported their findings in the June 18 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, caution that the reaction of the rats to MX is not necessarily how humans react to the substance. But they say "MX should be studied as a candidate risk factor in the possible association between consumption of chlorinated drinking water and cancer in humans."

Chlorine has been added to drinking water since the turn of the century in the U.S., as a way of preventing water-borne diseases. Chlorine prevents bacterial growth in water and helps prevent transmission of diseases such as typhoid fever, cholera, and dysentery.

In a related editorial in the same journal, Ronald L. Melnick of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, and colleagues there and at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C., say the study raises important concerns, but they caution against making rash decisions.

"Stopping water chlorination in the absence of an equally effective disinfection program is not a sensible choice," they write. "The potential risk from MX in drinking water... must be weighed against the benefits of chlorination as a proven disease prevention strategy."

Melnick and colleagues note that other substances added to drinking water for disease prevention have also been shown to cause cancer, but that the Environmental Protection Agency regulates the allowable levels of those substances. They say further studies about the effects of MX are needed.

SOURCE: Journal of the National Cancer Institute (1997;89:832-833, 848-856)

#39 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 22 December 2002 - 08:14 AM

bobdrake12, i never used cabbage juice on cats. it has a very strong taste and my 95% raw vegan pig Arnie will not eat it. I think romain lettuce juice is milder in taste and physical actions. my cats also love Mangoes. I'm still wondering about any enzyme inhibitors in carrots. I read that the greens on top of carrots are useful and that garlic and onions are toxic to cats.

#40 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 05:07 PM

Fruitimmortal,

Thanks again for your valuable information.

I will heed your advice on cabbage juice.

Have you ever given young green barley juice to your cats?

Malissa has shown a higher energy level since having the carrot juice. She romped around last night and took a little wheat grass. Both of my cats throw up the grass after they eat it. I suspect they retain some of the juice. In the wild, my cats used to do this a lot. I sense it is a natural way of cleaning themselves out.

I never had any of my cats in the wild get cancer but at that time I didn't have them vaccinated either.

Onions are toxic to cats. Garlic is questionable for cats and probably toxic beyond a given amount. Our vet stated a very minute amount of garlic is OK. The cat vitamins I use has a minute amount of garlic among its many ingredients. That is all I plan to give.

From my preliminary research, carrots do not contain a significant amount of enzyme inhibitors. I have included an article below which discusses them in regards to the ECLECTUS DIET (relating to birds although the specifics on various foods should be generic.)

The article does discuss tannins which you may be referring to:

She further explains that tannins, compounds found in most plants, are associated with an astringent taste and cause normal browning on fruits and vegetables when they are cut or bruised. Tannins can bind protein, inhibit digestive enzymes and reduce the bioavailability of iron and Vitamin B12. They are found in high levels in carrots, grape seeds, milo, grapes, raisins, lettuce, spinach, rhubarb and onions.


There are a lot of good foods on the tannins listing but probably should be discontinued unless an overall improvement is observed.

I sense that selecting a number of juices would be good rather than just two or three but so far carrot juice looks like it should make the list specifically due to Malissa's improvement.

We might note that watermellon is not on the tannins or any negative listing that I have found. Neither is papaya (rich in ensymes) nor cantaloupe on any negative listining.

bob

http://www.birdsnway...cles/efsep4.htm


ECLECTUS DIET (excerpts) by Constance Bacon

Reprinted with permission from the Eclectus Forum Newsletter - September/October 1997 edition



Certain uncooked dried beans contain enzyme inhibitors, are undigestible, and may tend to cause visceral gout in birds. These enzyme inhibitors may prevent or decrease the utilization in the body of substances such as trypsin and chymotrypsin to produce nutritional deficiencies. Beans that can interfere with proteolytic enzymes are lima, kidney and soybeans. Cooking of the beans for at least 2 hours destroys these enzyme inhibitors. Other dried beans do not appear to contain these enzyme inhibitors, or if present, are in low concentrations. To be on the safe side, we cook ALL varieties of beans.

There remains a question as to which varieties of avocados are toxic to our birds, but to be on the safe side, no variety of avocados are fed to our birds. Apparently, also, different parts of the avocado are considered safe, while other parts are considered toxic.

Dr. Margaret Wissman explains in Birds USA, that some foods, although not toxic to birds, contain nutrient antagonists, also called anti-nutritional factors. Most of these are natural compounds within the foods, and some can be tolerated in small amounts. For example, there are enzyme inhibitors present to some degree in all plants. Significant levels are found in all of the legumes, beets, barley, buckwheat, lettuce, corn, oats, peas, peanuts, potatoes, rice, rye, sweet potatoes, turnips and wheat. Cooking quickly inactivates these enzyme inhibitors.

She further explains that tannins, compounds found in most plants, are associated with an astringent taste and cause normal browning on fruits and vegetables when they are cut or bruised. Tannins can bind protein, inhibit digestive enzymes and reduce the bioavailability of iron and Vitamin B12. They are found in high levels in carrots, grape seeds, milo, grapes, raisins, lettuce, spinach, rhubarb and onions.

Dr. Wissman offers the following explanation regarding oxalic acid: High levels of oxalate levels are found in spinach, with lower levels in peas, beets, beet greens, lettuce, turnips, carrots and berries. Oxalic acid is an organic acid that efficiently binds calcium and other trace minerals, making them unavailable for the bird. Diets high in spinach can result in decreased growth, poor bone mineralization and kidney stones.

Some foods that our birds enjoy, such as beets, brussels sprouts, red cabbage, and berries contain a naturally occurring enzyme called thiaminase, which destroys the vitamin, thiamine. Several foods interfere with normal thyroid functioning or block iodine uptake. Those containing those properties are soybeans, peanuts, pine nuts, turnip, rutabaga, broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, kale, kohlrabi and mustard. These foods may be fed occasionally.

Mycotoxins are byproducts of molds that can grow in and on food, and are cancer causing compounds. One potent mycotoxin, aflatoxin, is found on corn and peanuts. If you subscribed to the former Eclectus World Newsletter, you may remember reading the publisher's (Katie Rosenberg) very informative article about Mycotoxins. She told us that the major brands of peanut butter have the lowest levels of aflatoxins. Higher levels are found in store brands and the highest levels are found in peanut butter from health food stores.

#41 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 05:11 PM

http://www.geocities.com/wicstuff/

NUTRITION TIP

Eat fruits and vegetables that are brightly colored (all the way through, not just the skin) for more nutrition.

o Orange - carrots, peaches, apricots, cantaloupe, winter squash, pumpkin

o Red - watermellon, tomatoes, beets, cherries, purple grapes

o Green - Romaine or Leaf lettuce, spinach, broccoli

These foods are rich in vitamins A & C as well as phytochemicals and antioxidants which may protect against Cancer and Heart Disease.

#42 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 22 December 2002 - 05:49 PM

bobdrake12, what wonderful news about Malissa's improvement ! praise to the positive power of the Universe * you are lucky to have a bright vet. most vets i encounter are very unreseptive to natural nutriton and fasting. Have you tried minute amounts of wheatgrass juice on the Cats ? I recommend treating both cats via life food for a while. what are you planning to feed after the treatment is completed Raw meat or fish in small amounts would be better than dead petfood. there are some people on strict raw food diets that consume animal products only uncooked [unsure]

#43 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 05:58 PM

http://www.freedompr...articles/01.htm

CANCER NOW STRIKES GREATER THAN ONE IN THREE AMERICANS

A Consumer's Guide to Herbs & Essential Nutrients for Cancer Prevention & Treatment



Posted Image


However, if you have cancer or know someone who does, it is important to recognize that there are more options today than ever before, and more reasons to have true hope.

One area of critical knowledge is nutrients and herbs with experimental or clinical evidence to support their use in cancer prevention and treatment. "Informing yourself about conventional, alternative, and complementary treatments is your best strategy for success," says Ralph Moss, Ph.D., one of the nation's leading experts on alternative, complementary and mainstream cancer treatments.

BREAST CANCER

Treatment with 600 mg of bromelain (e.g., Bromelain Plus from Enzymatic Therapy) for six months to several years resulted in disappearance of cancers of the breast. LaPacho (Tabebuia avellande) has shown clinical evidence of causing breast tumors to regress when given in a daily dose of 20-30 milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg of body weight). Unpublished data indicate systemic oral enzymes (e.g., Wobenzym N - recommended reading about Wobenzym N: The Aspirin Alternative have been shown to prolong life among women with breast cancer.

Supplementation with vitamin A may be critical for women undergoing chemotherapy to obtain optimal benefits.

Vitamin C is a critical nutrient to protect women against breast cancer. If all North American women were to eat more fruits and vegetables, rich in vitamin C, averaging at least 400 mg per day (more than six times the RDA), the "risk . . . in the population of postmenopausal women in North America would be reduced by 16%." In 1994, lower breast cancer mortality was reported among women with the highest intake of vitamin C.

There is limited evidence that vitamin E, the major tocopherol, and other tocopherols, protect against breast cancer. One study found that women with low vitamin E blood levels had five times the breast cancer rate of women with the highest levels. The natural form of vitamin E is most potent. (Natural-source vitamin E begins with "d" on product labels Synthetically derived begins with "dl.")

Omega 3 fatty acids found in flax (e.g., Barlean's Lignan-Rich Flax Oil) and fish oil capsules may inhibit breast cancer as well as minimize its spread.

Consuming green tea as a drink or supplement (e.g., Green Tea Phytosome™ from Enzymatic Therapy) has been shown experimentally and in human studies to help protect against breast cancer. The Phytosome-bound form of green tea is superior for absorption.

Laminaria (also known as brown kelp or kombu) is protective as shown in human studies. "Based on epidemiological and biological data, Laminaria, a brown kelp seaweed, is proposed as an important factor contributing to the relatively low breast cancer rates reported in Japan."

Seaweed, whether nori, wakame or Laminaria, can be used with every meal-to garnish, for soup, vegetables, sweet cakes, jellies, sauces, tea, salads, sushi. Seaweed is used to make flour for noodles. Buy seaweed noodles at some health food stores and natural product supermarkets. Nori makes a crispy snack food and is also used to wrap sushi. To impart a slightly briny taste to chicken soup, add dried kombu, nori or wakame. Use a strip of kombu when cooking beans to soften them. Laminaria is the most protective of the seaweeds.

COLORECTAL CANCER

Metastatic colorectal cancer patients have been helped by the fresh juice extract of Echinacea purpurea used as part of a comprehensive cancer treatment protocol. The entire program consisted of low-dose cyclophosphamide, thymostimulin and echinacea. Tumors did not enlarge while immune activity was greatly enhanced. Although injected, it is thought that oral echinacea will provide similar benefit. EchinaFresh® (capsules or liquid) from Enzymatic Therapy and Echinaforce® from Bioforce conform closely to the preparations used in the clinical study. Both formulas are available at health food stores and natural product supermarkets nationwide.

Phytosterols such as beta-sitosterol and stigmasterol (which are cholesterol analogs found in plants) may protect against colon cancer. Cultures of viable Lactobacillus acidophilus may help to prevent colon cancer.

ENDOMETRIAL CANCER

Women with low levels of iodine exhibit symptoms of severe hyperplasia of the endometrium that have been corrected with iodine replacement. Therefore, dietary kelp either as food or supplement may be beneficial. Soy-based foods and supplements may also decrease risk.

LEUKEMIA

Bromelain has been shown to induce differentiation of leukemic cell lines in vitro. Lapachol may be effective in cases of leukemia, according to experimental evidence. Inositol hexaphosphate with inositol (e.g., Cell Forté with IP6 and Inositol from Enzymatic Therapy) has demonstrated experimental evidence of inhibition of leukemia cell lines. Recommended reading: "Nature's Ultimate Anti-Cancer Pill: The IP6 With Inositol Question and Answer Book"

SKIN CANCER

Bromelain (e.g., Bromelain Plus from Enzymatic Therapy) has been shown experimentally to inhibit skin cancer. Garlic and onion oils at dosages of 1 mg/kg and 10 mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram body weight) respectively have been shown to decrease number and incidence of skin tumors. Milk thistle has been shown to inhibit skin cancer. Evening primrose oil has demonstrated experimental evidence of markedly inhibiting growth of cancerous cells.

PROSTATE CANCER

Beta-sitosterol is a minor component of prostate healthy herbs such as saw palmetto and pygeum. It may also be found in isolated form. Nutrition researchers at the University at Buffalo found a 28 percent inhibition of prostate-cancer cell growth after being exposed to beta-sitosterol for only five days in vitro (in the test tube).

(For additional protective formulas, see also our report in volume 3(9):5.)

LUNG CANCER

Bromelain has been shown experimentally to inhibit spread of lung cancer cells. In another experimental study, bromelain reduced metastatic lesions by more than 90%. When using quality bromelain formulas (e.g., Bromelain Plus from Enzymatic Therapy) with subtherapeutic doses of chemotherapeutic drugs such as 4-FU and vincristine, note that oral bromelain must be in the range of approximately 2.4 grams daily for the best benefits. It is thought that bromelain works by "deshielding" the tumor cells' fibrin coatings enabling the immune system to penetrate more easily and defuse them.

Modified citrus pectin has also shown experimental evidence of benefits for lung cancer patients.

IP6 with inositol has demonstrated experimental and anecdotal clinical evidence of inhibiting spread of lung cancer.

OVARIAN CANCER

Treatment with 600 mg of bromelain for six months to several years resulted in disappearance of cancers of the ovary. IP6 with inositol has demonstrated anecdotal evidence of stabilizing some cases of ovarian cancer.

LIVER CANCER

IP6 with inositol has demonstrated experimental and anecdotal clinical evidence of inhibiting spread and prolonging life in liver cancer patients. Soy supplements may prevent liver cancer via their protease inhibitors. GLA found in evening primrose oil has demonstrated experimental evidence of markedly growth of cancerous cells.

ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

Metastatic esophageal cancer patients have been helped by the fresh juice extract of Echinacea purpurea as detailed under colorectal cancer. Soy-based foods and supplements may also decrease risk.

Gamma-linolenic acid (GLA) as found in evening primrose oil has demonstrated experimental evidence of markedly inhibiting malignant esophageal cancer cells culminating in their death.

REFERENCES:

Batkin, S., et al. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 1988; 114(5): 507-508.
Batkin, S., et al. Letter. Cancer Invest, 1988; 6(2): 241-242.
Belman, S. Carcinogenesis, 1983; 4(8): 1063-1065.
Brown, R.R., et al. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res, 1981; 22: 184.
Coles, L.S. & Steinman, D.W. Nature's Ultimate Anti-Cancer Pill: The IP6 with Inositol Question and Answer Book. Topanga, CA: Freedom Press, 1999.
Dippenaar, N., et al. S Afr Med J, 1982; 62: 505, 683.
Eskin, B.A. Biol Trace Element Res, 1983; 5: 399-412.
Fujimoto, I., et al. National Cancer Institute Monographs, 1979; 53: 5-15.
Gérardm G. Agressologie, 1972; 3: 261-274.
Goldin, B.R. & Gorbach, S.L. Am J Clin Nutr, 1984; 39: 756-761.
Goldstein, N., et al. Hawaii Med J, 1975; 34: 91-94.
Goodman, M.T., et al. American Journal of Epidemiology, 1997; 146(4): 294-306.
Howe, G.R., et al. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, April 4, 1990; 82(7): 561-569.
Jain, M., et al. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, September 21, 1994; 86(21): 1390-1397.
Kagawa, T. Preventive Medicine, 1978; 7: 205-217.
Leary, W.P., et al. S Afr Med J, 1982; 62: 681.
Lersch, C., et al. Tumordiagen Ther, 1992; 13: 115-120.
Linardi, M.D.C., et al. J Med Chem, 1975; 18(11): 1159-62.
Murer, H.R., et al. Planta Med, 1988; 54(5): 377-381.
Nagasawa, H., et al. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1976; 57: 425-430.
Nair, P.P., et al. "Diet, nutrition intake, and metabolism in populations at high and low risk for colon cancer: dietary cholesterol, beta-sitosterol, and stigmasterol." Am J Clin Nutr, 1984; 40(4 suppl.): 927-930.
Nieper, H.A. Krebsgeschehen; 1976;1:9-15.
Nomura, A., et al. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1978; 31: 2020-2025.
Pauling, L., et al. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, August 1985; 82: 5185-5189.
Santana, C.F., et al. Revista de Instituto de Antibioticos, 1980/81; 20: 61-68.
Teas, J. Nutrition and Cancer, 1983; 4(3): 217-223.
Thompson, H.J. Carcinogenesis, 1991; 12(11): 2175-2179.
Vitamin E Research & Information Service. Vitamin E Fact Book. LaGrange, IL: Vitamin E Research & Information Service, 1994.
Wald, N.J., et al. British Journal of Cancer, March, 1984; 49: 321-324.
Willett, W.C. & MacMahon, B. "Diet and cancer-an overview." The New England Journal of Medicine, March 8, 1984; 310(10): 633-638.Hirayama, T. Preventive Medicine, 1978; 7: 173-195.
Wynder, E.L. Cancer, supplement, 1979; 43(5): 1955-1961.

#44 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 06:32 PM

Fruitimmortal,

Thanks so much for your feedback!

Yes, I am very happy with Malissa, but that is with caution. Today, we are going to be giving both her and Mike watermellon juice.

Mike has fully recovered and I do owe a certain amount of that recovery to the prayers from my Notre Dame friends as well as my personal friends have offered.

I am very lucky to be able to use Don Hamilton who is an outstanding vet. He wrote the book, Homeopathic Care for Cats and Dogs, which I would definitely recommend. He also suggested the book, All You Ever Wanted to Know About Herbs for Pets by Mary L. Wulff-Tilford & Gregory L. Tilford. I use both books for references.

The local vet I use just graduated and already is getting a full practice. He is open to homeopathic and other forms of medicine beyond the conventional medicine he was taught in school. He was instrumental in Mike's recovery because he stressed the importance of Mike getting plenty of water and steered us away from the dry food for Mike. One point was to ensure the food was at least room temperature. I never thought of this because humans tend to like cold food. Cat's, unlike humans, also do not like food much above their own body temperature either.

Now that both Mike and Malissa are eating the wheatgrass plant itself, I will hold off on using it as a juice for this time. If Malissa stops doing this, I will give her some of the juice.

My plan is to keep Malissa on the uncooked/unfrozen juices supplementing the balance of her canned cat food. My mistake was to take the advice of an earlier vet who recommended dry food rather than providing raw food.

Our other vet, Hamilton, is recommending for us to transfer over (at least to some degree) to the raw (meat) food. Hopefully, at least to some extent, this can be done. My cats can be very picky and will walk away from food that is not up to their expectations even when they are hungry.

What I do plan to do is to give uncooked/unfrozen juices to both cats even if Malissa fully recovers.

This will be done to ensure they get enzymes. Some vets believe that enzymes are a fad. That shows what they are not teaching in school.

Up above is an article which relates to human cancer. IP6 with Inositol is one of the measures we are providing for Malissa.

bob

#45 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 December 2002 - 09:50 PM

Frankenstein Industry: bobdrake12 it is hard for me to conceive any permanent cures in a Death Culture. Death energies are everywhere. The world back in Bible times was not as toxic as our world and therefor safe to live in without being part of it. I know physical immortality could be a reality if the entire planet is healed.



Fruitimmortal,

Does this current world system promote a Frankenstein Industry based upon money, power and social acceptance? If this premised could possibly be true, can you blindly trust the course of action the specialists tell you to follow or should you perform your own research? How careful should you be in selecting your doctor? Should you get secondary opinions from sources not connected to the first source?

Bruce included a great article that perhaps provides some evidence to this premise.

As an aside, we need to accept the fact that some people (perhaps the majority of people) do not want immortiality and think it is absurd for those that wish to accomplish it.

I have included some excerpts below including how Kass thinks death is both good and necessary as well as Kass' four key benefits for death.

My comment regarding Mr. Kass and the tribe that he follows: Mr. Kass has his wolf to feed and I have my wolf to feed:

http://harges.net/main.html

A Native American grandfather was talking to his grandson about how he felt. He said,
"I feel as if I have two wolves fighting in my heart. One wolf is the vengeful, angry, violent one. The other wolf is the loving, compassionate one."
The grandson asked him, "Which wolf will win the fight in your heart?"
The grandfather answered, "The one I feed."



bob

http://www.imminst.o...&t=505&view=old

Immortality Institute's director, Bruce Klein, was quoted recently by Betterhumans writer Simon Smith in a rebuttal to Leon Kass's stringent stance against immortality

Posted Image

Killing Immortality
Bush bioethicist Leon Kass wants an end to life extension efforts. But he has yet to offer a good reason.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted Image

Simon Smith

[Tuesday, December 03, 2002] Leon Kass wants me to die. And you too. In fact, he thinks it's good for us.

If you don't know who Kass is, you should. Born in Chicago, Illinois in February 1939, this conservative thinker chairs the US President's Council on Bioethics -- an organization that advises on biomedical science and technology issues, and ultimately steers related US legislation and policy.

Click on the URL below for the complete article:

http://www.betterhum...ID=2002-12-03-4

(excerpts)

Social consequences

Kass believes that life extension will have bad social consequences and impair distributive justice. Extending everyone's lifespan, he suggests, could be a Tragedy of Commons in which, say, demographic changes lead to massive environmental degradation. Alternatively, radical life extension -- or even immortality -- will be unfairly granted only to the wealthy, he believes.

On both counts, says Bruce Klein, director of a membership-based longevity-promoting organization called the Immortality Institute, Kass is misguided. "Alarmists have been warning for decades that the world's population is growing too large. Yet, as populations have increased, so have the technologies that improve crop yield and increase efficiency. And as technological advancements spill over into developing countries, people's lives are improved," says Klein. "Kass yearns for a politically correct future while at the same time advocating death."

Kass is unabashedly calling for stricter state ownership over its citizens' bodies. The reality is that everyone is entitled to make their own informed choices. As Klein states, "People will rebel against any government attempting to dictate maximal levels of happiness, intelligence and lifespan. Parents will continue to want the best for their children. Individuals will continue to improve and extend their lives. The 'tragedy' would be in trying to deny people this opportunity."

And even if left only to market forces, notes Klein, radical life extension would become widely available. "In the short term, Kass is right. Wealthier people will live longer. But can the rich really bottle up immortality? It's likely they'd not succeed, nor would they even try. Quite the opposite, wealthy individuals will invest their money to promote anti-aging products in the hopes of making even more money. And because of well understood market forces and economies of scale, people will benefit accordingly."

And if not, Kass shouldn't fight life extension to increase equality. He should advocate for public health care.

No death, no meaning

But, of course, countering Kass's opinions isn't that easy: He is dead-set against life extension. "This is a question in which our very humanity is at stake, not only in the consequences but also in the very meaning of the choice," he says. "For to argue that human life would be better without death is, I submit, to argue that human life would be better being something other than human." (A pile of rotting flesh is also something other than human, I believe, but we'll put that aside for now.)

Kass thinks death is both good and necessary. He offers four key benefits:


Interest and engagement: The pleasures of life wouldn't increase proportionately to years, Kass believes. "Would professional tennis players really enjoy playing 25% more games of tennis?" he asks

Seriousness and aspiration: We can't aspire or be serious without (ahem) a deadline, he says

Beauty and love: Like a sunset, Kass suggests, life is beautiful because it has an ending

Virtue and moral excellence: Mortality means that we can give our lives to higher causes, says Kass

#46 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 23 December 2002 - 02:58 AM

lol Bobdrake12, the fact that Mallisa already shows improvement is indeed good news. healing is a complex mystery, but the power of our thoughts in prayer is just as important as nutrition and loving care . i need to warn you about most commercial petfoods. they are loaded with flesh of sick animals and perservatives. no one would belief that roadkill and euthanised cats/dogs from shelters are also added. there are several website's confirming this. i dont have much time to do research ( my critters have most of my time) but if i can i will post them. you may want to feed organic chicken etc.) or find an organic canfood at your local health food store. there are also many suppliers on the web.

#47 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 23 December 2002 - 06:22 AM

healing is a complex mystery, but the power of our thoughts in prayer is just as important as nutrition and loving care .


i need to warn you about most commercial petfoods. they are loaded with flesh of sick animals and perservatives. no one would belief that roadkill and euthanised cats/dogs from shelters are also added. there are several website's confirming this.


Fruitimmortal,

Thanks so much for giving your attention to my cat, Malissa.

You are absolutely correct on thoughts and prayers. In fact, Mike has a sympathy patch of fur that is very thin along the same line where Malissa's incision was made.

The prognosis will make it a miracle for Malissa to pull through. At Notre Dame, they taught us about the "odds being great or small". I believe in miracles due to past experience. Many times, it takes the right kind of prayer that comes from the heart to get a shot at a miracle. It also takes a little help from my friends. I would greatly appreciate it if you and others could help by sending your prayers or whatever you might believe in to help out this sweet cat. Just sending kind thoughts would help.

Again, you are correct regarding most pet foods (and perhaps some meat sold to humans). In addition, many of these cat foods are also loaded with additives to extend shelf life but unfortunately these additives also increase cancer risk. We use catfood made by Precise and PetGuard which is human grade food. In fact, it is probably more healthy than the vast majority of canned foods human eat.

We are still in the process of testing which fruits and vegetable juices work with our cats. Pure pinneapple juice works but not the whole pinneapple juice. Carrot and watermellon juice also works fine. So far, I think the carrot juice is working the best. We will need an offset juice to mix with it. We will try spinach or lettuce juice.

Fruitimmortal, thanks again for your help and kind thoughts,

bob

#48 fruitimmortal

  • Guest
  • 109 posts
  • 0
  • Location:the sunny South West

Posted 23 December 2002 - 06:30 PM

Bobdrake12, i forgot to advise you to have some fasting treatment done under your vet's super vision after the Bowels are clean, can you find a vet that can perform a Kitty Enema?that would be very helpful.

#49 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 December 2002 - 05:28 AM

Fruitimmortal,

Thanks so much for your prayers and help.

We will be getting cantaloupe, papaya and mango juice next for Malissa.

I will be talking to the vets about what we are doing regarding the juices within the week. Since Malissa is taking them and seems better, I will proceed on the overall juicing plan.

Do you give your cats a colon cleanse tonic?

I have included some information on the vaccine induced cancer that Malissa has below. According to the cancer specialist that I have talked with, my recollection is that the cancer is induced by an aluminum compound used to preserve the vaccine. A different explanation is shown below. Both reasons could be correct depending on the case. The bottom line is any time toxins are injected into the body there probably is risk.

bob

http://www.marvistav...ibrosarcom.html

Posted Image

CANCER FROM VACCINATION? (excerpts)

(WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT VACCINE-ASSOCIATED FIBROSARCOMA)
(Also called Vaxosarcomas)

WHAT IS A FIBROSARCOMA &
WHY DO WE THINK VACCINATION MIGHT CAUSE IT?


Fibrosarcomas have been recognized as difficult, deeply rooted tumors of the cat for a very long time. The fibrosarcoma is a tumor which does not usually spread throughout the body in the way we usually think of cancer; instead, it digs in deeply and widely in a localized area. After surgical removal it is notorious for recurring even more aggressively than before.

These tumors can result spontaneously, as can any cancer, or they can be virally induced via the Feline Sarcoma Virus. What has only recently (in the last 10 years) been recognized is the potential for vaccination to lead to the formation of these tumors. There are still many unanswered questions about how this is actually happening, the role of vaccination, which vaccinations have been implicated, and how serious the risks actually are.

HOW MIGHT VACCINATION CAUSE CANCER?

Killed virus does not stimulate the immune system as well as modified live virus but there are exceptions to this rule. With rabies it is simply too dangerous to risk any problems with the virus modification process and most rabies vaccines use killed virus for this reason. With more complex immunosuppressive viruses such as the feline leukemia virus, live virus serves to decrease the immune response, not increase it. For feline leukemia virus vaccination, killed virus is used.

To facilitate immune stimulation with a killed virus, a substance called an "adjuvant" is used. This material holds the virus in the area of the vaccination for a couple of weeks so it can be released slowly, allowing immune stimulation to take place over a longer time period. This kind of stimulation can lead to some local inflammation in the area of the vaccination and one theory is that this inflammation is what leads to precancerous changes in the local cells. Indeed, some fibrosarcomas have been found to have vaccine adjuvant embedded within them.

Still, adjuvants are different between manufacturers and a particular brand of vaccine has not been singled out as the culprit. The critical aspects of tumor development appear to be a chronic, low grade inflammatory process (as might be caused by an adjuvanated vaccine) and a generic predisposition to form tumors in response to such inflammation.

It can take as short a time as two months and as long as ten years to develop a vaccine site tumor.

Be aware of lumps forming after vaccination

Lumps commonly form in the weeks following vaccination due to the immune stimulation and inflammation centered on this area. These lumps are usually normal and do not represent fibrosarcomas (which generally take years to develop, not weeks). If your cat develops one of these lumps under the skin (they are usually noticed by owners 3-4 weeks after vaccination), the lump may be left alone to resolve naturally. If the lump is still present 3 months from the time of vaccination, it should be removed and biopsied. Any lumps greater than 2 cm in diameter (approximately one inch) should be removed no matter how long a time has past since vaccination. Also, any lump should be removed if it is felt to be getting larger rather than smaller one month after its discovery.

Sometimes one such lump will break open. This usually means an infection is present and must be treated rather than that a fibrosarcoma has developed. Your veterinarian should be informed of this occurrence and the pet should return for therapy.

TREATMENT FOR VACCINE ASSOCIATED FIBROSARCOMAS

Fibrosarcomas associated with vaccinations are felt to be even more resistant to treatment than spontaniously forming fibrosarcomas. Surgery is the chief method of treatment and generally involves very broad excision in an attempt to remove the entire tumor. Radiation and/or chemotherapy are often used as supplemental treatments. A web site reviewing recent treatment protocols and research has been set up at:

www.geocities.com/~kremersark/protocol.html

This site was designed by the owners of “Sylvia,” a cat who succumbed to a vaccine associated fibrosarcoma. The home page of this educational site can be reached at:


http://www.geocities...rk/newhope.html

To visit the home page for the Vaccine Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force, visit:


Posted Image

#50 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 December 2002 - 05:48 AM

Posted Image


http://www.geocities...rsark/aafp.html

Posted Image

This cancer has been associated with "all" vaccines, Rabies, FeLV and Upper Respiratory.

The Incidence rate is believed to fall somewhere between 3 in 10,000 and 13 in 10,000.

"Clean Margins" are a MUST if surgery is attempted to battle this cancer.

This Cancer has been documented to occur anywhere between 3 weeks and 5 years "Post Vaccination".

The cancer often recurs between 60-80 % of the time following surgery.

"Knowledge is Empowering", consult with a specialist before deciding what, if any, treatment paths to follow.

When battling this cancer, always ask about the success rate ( length of survival / quality of life ) for any given treatment protocol.

Do not attempt to surgically remove this cancer by performing a "lumpectomy".

#51 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 December 2002 - 06:06 AM

http://www.laleva.cc...nes_whyNOT.html

Rogue virus in the vaccine Early polio vaccine harbored virus now feared to cause cancer in humans

William Carlsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Sunday


A growing number of medical researchers fear that a monkey virus that contaminated polio vaccine given to tens of millions of Americans in the 1950s and '60s may be causing rare human cancers.

For four decades, government officials have insisted that there is no evidence the simian virus called SV40 is harmful to humans. But in recent years, dozens of scientific studies have found the virus in a steadily increasing number of rare brain, bone and lung-related tumors - the same malignant cancer SV40 causes in lab animals.

Even more troubling, the virus has been detected in tumors removed from people never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, leading some to worry that those infected by the vaccine might be spreading SV40.

The discovery of SV40 in human tumors has generated intense debate within the scientific community, pitting a handful of government health officials, who believe that the virus is harmless, against researchers from Boston to China who now suspect SV40 may be a human carcinogen. At stake are millions of research dollars and potential medical treatments for those afflicted with the cancers SV40 may be causing.

In April, more than 60 scientists met in Chicago to discuss the controversial virus and how it works to defeat certain cells' natural defenses against cancer.

"I believe that SV40 is carcinogenic (in humans)," said Dr. Michele Carbone of Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood, Ill. "We need to be creating therapies for people who have these cancers, and now we may be able to because we have a target - SV40."

But scientists at the National Cancer Institute say their studies show almost no SV40 in human tumors and no cancer increase in people who received the contaminated vaccine.

"No one would dispute there's been a widespread, very scary exposure to the population of potentially cancer-causing virus," said Dr. Howard Strickler, NCI's chief investigator. "But none of our studies and other major analyses have shown an inkling of an effect on the population."

Critics charge, however, that the few studies done by the government are scientifically flawed and that health officials have downplayed the potential risks posed by SV40 ever since they learned in 1961 that the virus contaminated the polio vaccine and caused tumors in rodents.

"How long can the government ignore this?" asked Dr. Adi Gazdar, a University of Texas Southwestern Medical

Center cancer researcher. "The government has not sponsored any real research. Here's something possibly affecting millions of Americans, and they're indifferent.

"Maybe they don't want to find out." The recent SV40 discoveries come at a time of growing concern over the dangers posed by a range of animal viruses that have crossed the species barrier to humans, including HIV, which scientists now believe came from chimpanzees and ultimately caused the AIDS epidemic.

Based on dozens of interviews and a review of the medical research, this is the story of how the campaign to eradicate polio may have inadvertently permitted another potentially deadly monkey virus to infect millions of people - and why the government for years discounted the accumulating evidence suggesting that SV40 may be a health risk for humans.

Polio epidemic, 1955

During the first half of the 20th century, polio struck down hundreds of thousands of people, leaving many paralyzed - some in iron lung machines - and killing others. The worst year was 1952, when more than 57,000 polio cases were reported in the United States. Three thousand died.

Then on April 12, 1955, Dr. Jonas Salk, a slightly built, soft-spoken researcher from Pittsburgh, mounted the podium at the University of Michigan and announced that he had developed a vaccine. That afternoon, the government licensed the vaccine for distribution.

Salk's vaccine was made by growing live polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys. The virus was then killed with formaldehyde. When the vaccine was injected in humans, the dead virus generated antibodies capable of fending off live polio.

Dr. Dwight Murray, then chairman of the American Medical Association, called Salk's announcement "one of the greatest events in the history of medicine."

Within weeks, the stockpiled vaccine was being injected into the arms of millions of people worldwide.

Virus and the tumors, 1959

Four years later, Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, noticed something strange while looking through her microscope. Monkey kidney cells - the same kind used to make the vaccine - were dying without apparent cause.

So she tried an experiment. She prepared kidney extracts from eight to 10 rhesus monkeys and injected tiny amounts under the skin of 23 newborn hamsters. Within nine months, "large, malignant, subcutaneous tumors" appeared on 20 of the animals.

On July 6, 1960, concerned that a monkey virus might be contaminating the polio vaccine, Eddy took her findings to Dr. Joseph Smadel, chief of the NIH's biologics division. Smadel dismissed the tumors as harmless "lumps."

The same year, however, at a Merck laboratory in Pennsylvania, Dr. Maurice Hilleman and Dr. Ben Sweet isolated the virus. They called it simian virus
40, or SV40, because it was the 40th virus found in rhesus kidney tissue. Immunization campaign, 1961 By then, the nation was winning the war against polio. Nearly 98 million Americans - more than 60 percent of the population - had received at least one injection of the Salk vaccine, and the number of cases was plummeting. At the same time, an oral polio vaccine developed by virologist Albert Sabin was in final trials in Russia and Eastern

Europe, where tens of millions had been inoculated, and it was about to be licensed in the United States. Unlike the Salk vaccine, the oral version contained a live but weakened form of polio virus and promised lifelong immunity.

But U.S. Public Health Service officials were worried. Tests had found SV40 in both the Sabin and Salk vaccines - it was later estimated that as much as a third of the Salk vaccine was tainted - and that SV40 was causing cancer in lab animals.

In early 1961, they quietly met with the agency's top vaccine advisers. The agency found no evidence that the virus had been harmful to humans, but in March, the officials ordered manufacturers to eliminate SV40 from all future vaccine.

New procedures were adopted to neutralize the tainted polio virus seed stock and SV40-free African green monkeys were used to produce the bulk vaccine instead of rhesus monkeys.

But officials did not recall contaminated Salk vaccine - more than a year's supply - still in the hands of the nation's doctors.

And they did not notify the public of the contamination and SV40's carcinogenic effect on newborn hamsters.

Hilleman would later explain that government officials were worried that any potentially negative information could ignite a panic and jeopardize the vaccination campaign.

The first public disclosure that the Salk vaccine was contaminated came in the New York Times on July 26, 1961. A story on Page 33 reported that Merck and other manufacturers had halted production until they could get a "monkey virus" out of the vaccine.

When asked to comment, the U.S. Public Health Service stressed there was no evidence the virus was dangerous. No cause for alarm, 1962

The next year, a young Harvard-trained epidemiologist named Dr. Joseph Fraumeni joined the National Cancer Institute and was assigned one of the agency's most important projects: to determine if there was any cancer increase among those injected with the Salk vaccine.

His research would form the basis of the government's position for decades. Working with two colleagues, Fraumeni tested stored vaccine samples from May and June of 1955, the first months of the national immunization campaign, then ranked the samples according to how much SV40 they contained - no, low or high amounts.

It would be the only time U.S. health officials measured the level of SV40 in the 1955-1962 vaccine. Stored samples from that period were later discarded.

Fraumeni identified the states where the SV40-contaminated vaccines had been distributed during those two months. California, for example, received vaccine with a low level of the virus. The study looked at cancer mortality rates for 6- to 8-year-old children vaccinated during that narrow time frame, tracking the group for four years.

The findings, which were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed no significant difference in cancer deaths in states with high or low levels of SV40 in the vaccine when compared with cancer deaths in states with no SV40 in the vaccine. Cleveland children, 1976

Fourteen years later, after isolated reports linking the virus and human cancers, Fraumeni decided to look at another group that had received contaminated vaccine.

The group had been the subject of experiments conducted in the early 1960s at Cleveland Metropolitan General Hospital. To determine the effect of different amounts of the vaccines, researchers at the hospital inoculated newborns from mostly lower-income black families with doses ranging up to more than 100 times the dose recommended for adults.

The experiments took place over three years and involved 1,073 infants. Most were given Sabin oral vaccine later determined to contain SV40.

From 1976 to 1979, Fraumeni and his associates sent letters to the children - now age 17 to 19 - but fewer than half responded. The researchers found no SV40-related health problems from exposure to contaminated vaccine.

However, their 1982 report published in the New England Journal of Medicine acknowledged the study's limitations: A majority of the children had not responded; SV40-related cancers might take longer than 17 to 19 years to develop, and SV40 appears less likely to infect humans through the oral vaccine.

Nevertheless, they called their findings "reassuring and consistent with the prevailing view that SV40 is not carcinogenic in human beings."

Then they decided to end the study, citing "the mounting complexities and obstacles in tracing this particular group and the negative results to date."

The study's closure appeared to end the government's research into the virus. But a few years later there would be a tectonic shift in SV40 research.

First discovery, 1988

In Boston, two researchers stumbled onto something disturbing.

Dr. Robert Garcea and his assistant, Dr. John Bergsagel, were using a powerful new tool called polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, to look for a pair of common human viruses in children's brain tumors.

But a different DNA footprint kept popping up in more than half the tumors. They finally realized they were seeing SV40.

For more than a decade, scientists had reported sporadic findings of SV40- like proteins in human tumors. But the earlier tests were primitive and the results suspect. PCR, however, is capable of amplifying infinitesimal fragments of DNA, which makes detections far more credible.


The findings were troubling. The researchers noted in their published report that the children were too young to have received the contaminated vaccine. But somehow the virus had infected them and embedded itself in their tumors.

Mesothelioma, 1988 That same year, Dr. Michele Carbone was surprised to find a milky, rindlike tumor in a laboratory hamster at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md.

The animal was one of a group given an SV40 injection directly into their hearts. Sixty percent of those hamsters developed the fatal cancer called mesothelioma.

Carbone, a postdoctoral fellow at the institute, knew that SV40 caused tumors in hamsters but only in specific locations where large doses of virus were injected. Here the mesothelial membrane lining the lungs apparently became cancerous from minuscule amounts of SV40 shed by the tip of the needle on the way to the hamsters' hearts.

So he tried another experiment, this time injecting SV40 directly into the thin mesothelial walls of another group of hamsters. Within six months, every animal developed mesothelioma.

Carbone was puzzled. Mesothelioma is a rare cancer. Few human cases were reported before the 1950s, but its incidence had been increasing steadily, reaching several thousand cases a year in the United States by 1988. Studies had linked mesothelioma to asbestos exposure - with tumors usually appearing many decades later. Yet 20 percent of victims had no asbestos exposure.

Carbone decided to use PCR to test 48 human mesotheliomas stored at the NIH. He was stunned: 28 of them contained SV40.

More cancers, 1996 PCR unleashed a wave of SV40 discoveries.

By the end of 1996, dozens of scientists reported finding SV40 in a variety of bone cancers and a wide range of brain cancers, which had risen 30 percent over the previous 20 years.

Then, Italian researchers reported finding SV40 in 45 percent of the seminal fluid samples and 23 percent of the blood samples they had taken from healthy donors.

That meant SV40 could have been spreading through sexual activity, from mother to child, or by other means, which could explain how those never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, such as the Boston children, were being infected.

Government assurances, 1996 At the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, officials were growing increasingly concerned about the SV40 discoveries.

The findings were of particular interest to Fraumeni, who had been promoted to director of NCI's Division on Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics. His earlier studies concluding that SV40 posed little or no health risk were now under challenge.

But the scientific community was skeptical of the recent SV40 discoveries. As a potent carcinogen in lab animals, SV40 had been used for years as a tool to study cancer. Therefore, the powerful PCR test was suspected of finding stray SV40 fragments that might have contaminated laboratories.

So Dr. Howard Strickler, one of Fraumeni's epidemiologists, led a study using PCR on 50 mesotheliomas from Armed Forces hospitals across the country. And he found no SV40.

Although the findings bolstered the government's long-standing position that SV40 did not appear to be a health risk, federal officials decided to convene a conference on the virus.

In January 1997, 30 scientists gathered at the National Institutes of Health in Maryland. Garcea, Carbone and others presented their evidence showing SV40 in tumors and pleaded for research funding. Strickler presented his mesothelioma study, as well as new research he had just completed, this time working with Fraumeni.

Their new study compared 20 years of cancer rates of people born between
1947 and 1963, and therefore likely to have been exposed to the contaminated polio vaccine, with people born after 1963, who they believed weren't exposed.

Their study found no significant difference between the two groups. Letter of protest, 1998

But when Susan Fisher read Strickler and Fraumeni's study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, she fired off a letter of protest to the publication.

An epidemiologist at Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood, Ill., Fisher challenged the study's methodology, calling it "an error in judgment" and misleading.

Using the same 20-year national cancer database for the two groups, Fisher compared people of the same age - "because these cancers are highly correlated with age" - and she came up with very different results.

Studying 18- to 26-year-olds who probably had been exposed to the contaminated vaccine, Fisher found a 19.6 percent greater incidence of the two major brain cancers linked to SV40 when compared with the incidence in people the same age who were not exposed. She also found 16.6 percent more bone cancers and 178 percent more mesotheliomas among those exposed to the vaccine.

But Fisher cautioned against comparing the two groups. She argued that if SV40 is being transmitted and circulating in the population, then many people in the "unexposed" group would also be carrying the virus and that would undermine the comparison.

Two types of SV40, 1999 For years, researchers had believed that all SV40-contaminated Salk vaccine made between 1955 and 1963 had been used or discarded.

Then in 1999, Carbone was contacted by a former public health director in Oak Park, Ill., who said he had seven sealed vials of vaccine dated October
1955 in a refrigerator in his basement. Carbone, who had left the NIH and joined the faculty at Loyola University Medical Center, ran tests on the vaccine and made a startling discovery: Not only was the vaccine contaminated, it contained a second form of the virus - an "archetypal" SV40 strain.

Although manufacturers switched from rhesus monkeys to SV40-free green African monkeys to grow the bulk vaccine in 1961, they have continued to use potentially contaminated polio seed strains originally grown on the rhesus monkey tissue to start the bulk vaccine process. Manufacturers check the purity of their vaccine with a series of 14-day tests to detect whether any SV40 slipped through.

But when Carbone replicated the tests, he found that the second, slower- growing "archetypal" strain took 19 days to emerge.

It was possible, Carbone noted in a published report, that this second strain of SV40 had been evading manufacturers' screening procedures for years - and infecting vaccine recipients after 1962. Controversial study, 2000

Meanwhile, a new study led by Strickler had bogged down in bitter internal conflict. After the NIH's 1997 conference, nine laboratories were recruited to participate in a government-sponsored study to determine if tests were really finding SV40 in tumors or whether earlier detections were the result of laboratory contamination.

Carbone and other researchers considered the study unnecessary. A similar multilab study led by Dr. Joseph Testa of Philadelphia had just been completed, and it virtually eliminated the contamination theory. The prestigious journal Cancer Research published Testa's findings in 1998. But Strickler pressed on.

An independent laboratory in Maryland prepared mesothelioma samples for the nine labs. When tests revealed almost no SV40 in the tumor samples, some participants questioned the preparation methods used by the Maryland lab. They also challenged Strickler's written conclusion implying that contamination had caused the earlier findings of SV40 in tumors.

If Strickler was right, the earlier SV40 detections were probably the result of stray SV40 in the labs. But critics argued that the study was scientifically flawed and should be scrapped. The dispute became so contentious that FDA officials were forced to intervene and a neutral arbitrator assigned to mediate.

Finally, in early 2000, more than two years after the study was initiated, a carefully rewritten report emerged for publication.

It concluded that contamination was an unlikely explanation for earlier SV40 findings. Then it struggled to explain the discrepancy between earlier detections of SV40 in about half of all mesotheliomas tested and the fact that the nine labs found the virus in only slightly more than 1 percent of the study's tumor specimens.

The report noted that discrepancy might be because of the inefficiency of the method used by the Maryland lab to recover DNA - like the genetic sequences of SV40 - from the mesothelial tissue to create the test samples. The Maryland lab also had inadvertently contaminated some of the laboratory controls and "theoretically" could have contaminated others.

The report concluded by calling for further research. Despite the study's ambivalent conclusions and technical problems, the NCI submitted it to Cancer Research, the journal that had published Testa's study.

It was rejected.
Further discoveries, 2000 In laboratories around the world, researchers continued to find SV40 in a widening range of tumors that now included pituitary and thyroid cancers and some lymphomas.

Meanwhile, an NCI investigator named Dr. David Schrump was able to gut a common respiratory virus and use it to deliver genetic material called "antisense" into SV40-infected mesothelial cells and stop the cells' malignant growth.

His discovery, which was patented by the government, strongly suggested that SV40 contributed to mesothelioma and that a treatment might be possible.

Then in August, Carbone and several colleagues published a major study providing a "mechanistic" explanation of how SV40 contributes to the uncontrolled growth of mesothelial cells. The key, they found, was the large number of "tumor suppressor" proteins found in the mesothelial cells that makes them unusually susceptible to SV40. In most human cells, they said, the virus reproduces itself and kills the infected cell in the process. But in mesothelial cells, SV40 is especially attracted to the "tumor suppressor" proteins and binds to them, knocking them out of action. The virus then lives on in the cell.

The result, they said, is a rate of malignant cell transformation in tissue cultures 1,000 times higher than has ever been observed.

In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Carbone further explained that asbestos fibers appear to act as a co- carcinogen in mesothelioma by somehow suppressing the immune system's response, which is designed to kill the infected cells.

Chicago conference, 2001 Carbone and others believed that the time had come for another conference on the virus he calls "a perfect little war machine."

In April, more than 60 scientists gathered on a warm weekend at the University of Chicago's downtown conference center. Despite numerous faxes and certified letters inviting him, Strickler declined to attend. Carbone opened the conference by confronting the question of whether SV40 is present in humans. "Sixty-two papers from 30 laboratories from around the world have reported SV40 in human tissues and tumors," he said. "It is very difficult to believe that all of these papers, all of the techniques used and all of the people around the world are wrong."

For two days, scientists from as far away as China and New Zealand presented the results of their studies, with almost every speaker concluding that SV40 was present in the tissues they examined.

One of the newest discoveries came from Dr. Jeffrey Kopp, an NIH scientist who reported finding SV40 in a high percentage of patients with kidney disease. The virus was also present, he said, in 60 percent of a new "collapsing" type of renal disease that was unknown before 1980 but has since increased rapidly in incidence.

There were also reports on efforts to develop a vaccine, recently funded by the NCI, that would allow the immune system to target and eliminate SV40.

At times, the meeting took on almost revivalist overtones as scientist after scientist said he or she was initially very skeptical of SV40's presence in human tumors but was now a believer.

"I was a hard sell," said Testa, the Philadelphia geneticist who conducted the first multilaboratory tests, noting that the study had convinced him.

Gazdar, the cancer researcher from Texas, showed a slide describing his transformation: "Nonbeliever -- Believer - Zealot."

The conference concluded with a consensus among the leading scientists that SV40's presence in human tumors was no longer in question. They were more circumspect about the virus' possible role in causing cancer. If SV40 is a human carcinogen, they said, the virus probably requires interaction with other cancer-causing substances like asbestos.

Dr. Janet Butel from Baylor Medical College in Houston said that it simply might be too soon to make a determination, citing the many years it has taken to establish that other viruses cause cancer. But even renowned tumor biologist George Klein from Sweden said he was impressed by Carbone and Schrump's work.

"This strongly suggests that the virus plays a role (in causing tumors)," said Klein, a former chairman of the Nobel Assembly.

Low priority, 2001 In May, shortly after the conference, Strickler's multilab study was published in a small journal called Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Carbone and other SV40 experts dismissed the study. "A garbage paper in a garbage journal," said Garcea, now on the faculty at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

But Strickler strongly defends the study. He said it was the first to use strict controls not used in other studies. He acknowledged, however, that the study "doesn't prove that SV40 is not out there."

Strickler, who now teaches at Albert Einstein School of Medicine in New York, said he remains skeptical about whether SV40 has infected humans, a suspicion he says is shared by the broader scientific community.

But the NCI recently acknowledged that there is evidence to suggest that SV40 "may be associated with human cancer." The NCI statement, released last month, also said that SV40's interaction with "tumor suppressor proteins" indicates "possible mechanisms that could contribute to the development of cancer."

Top NCI officials declined to be interviewed on the record for this report. Fraumeni also declined several requests for an interview.

Dr. James Goedert, the chief of the NCI's Viral Epidemiology Branch who supervised Strickler's work, said that if SV40 is in human tumors, it must be at extremely low levels. To critics who claim the government has downplayed SV40's potential health risks, Goedert responded: "Absolutely not."

He acknowledged that research is needed to resolve the question of whether SV40 is prevalent in the human population and, if so, how it might be spreading. But Goedert said he has no plans for such studies. "It's not our highest priority," he said.

Key figures in developing vaccines and tracing SV40 Dr. Jonas Salk Developed the first polio vaccine using killed virus in 1955. Virologist Albert Sabin Developed an oral vaccine using weakened live virus. Dr. Robert Garcea Used new technology to trace SV40 in children's brain tumors.

Q&A on polio vaccine contaminated with SV40

Q: How widespread is the SV40 infection?

A: Scientists and government health officials don't know because no comprehensive studies have addressed the question.

What is known: During the 1950s and '60s, more than 100 million people worldwide were given SV40-contaminated polio vaccine. The virus also has been found in people who did not receive contaminated vaccine, as well as laboratory workers and monkey handlers. No studies, however, have examined how SV40 might be transmitted between people, or if somehow humans might have become infected with SV40 before the introduction of the tainted vaccines.

Q: Can I be tested for SV40?

A: An accurate blood test does not exist. Current antibody blood tests can be inaccurate, scientists say, because they may also detect the presence of other closely related viruses, and SV40 may be present at such a low level that no antibodies are produced. Researchers are working to create an effective test.

Q: Is the current polio vaccine safe?

A: Vaccine producers, health officials and most scientists believe that it is safe. Manufacturers say they take elaborate steps to test their vaccine for SV40, and the government says it recently tested vaccine samples back to 1972 and found no trace of SV40. Some scientists, including Dr. Michele Carbone, have raised questions about whether manufacturers' testing techniques have been adequate. Carbone, however, tested vaccine from 1996 and found no SV40. He has had his children inoculated.

Q: In which kinds of cancers has SV40 been found?

A: The virus has been detected in rare cancers: -- Mesothelioma, a fatal tumor of the membrane surrounding the lungs. Few cases were reported prior to 1950, but the incidence has grown in the United States to 2,000 to 4,000 cases a year, with greater incidence in Europe. -- Brain cancers: Primarily ependymoma and choroid plexus tumors, but also astrocytoma, glioblastoma, medulloblastoma and meningioma. These make up a total of less than 1,000 U.S. cases each year. -- Bone cancers: Primarily osteosarcoma but also chondrosarcoma and giant cell tumors. These also make up less than 1,000 cases annually. -- Other cancers: A few detections in pituitary and thyroid tumors and lymphomas.


Report sources The sources for this report include the books "The Saga of Jonas Salk" by Richard Carter and "The Health Century" by Edward Shorter; articles in Atlantic Monthly and New York magazine; newspaper archives at The Chronicle and the New York Times; transcript of the 1997 National Institutes of Health Conference in Bethesda; a review of dozens of scientific journal articles and scores of interviews. Related series: Quest for the Origin of AIDS.

How SV40 contaminated polio vaccine ?

When Dr. Jonas Salk introduced the first polio vaccine in 1955, it was hailed as "one of the greatest events in medicine." Within 10 years, U.S. polio cases plummeted from 30,000 to less than 1,000. But in 1960, a monkey virus called SV40 was found in the Salk vaccine. As much as one-third of the vaccine was contaminated. SV40 was also found in earlier versions of an oral vaccine developed by Dr. Albert Sabin that replaced the Salk vaccine in the
1960s. When it was discovered that SV40 caused cancer in lab animals, U.S. health officials ordered vaccine manufacturers in 1961 to eliminate the virus from all future vaccine, although questions remain about whether they succeeded with the Sabin vaccine. .

Making the Sabin vaccine: 1955-1961 Starting in the mid-1950s, both Sabin and Salk vaccines are made by growing polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys, which are natural hosts for the simian virus known as SV40. Special weakened seed strain of polio virus developed by Sabin is grown on rhesus kidney tissue to make large bulk amounts of vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. . Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In 1961, after SV40 is discovered in the vaccines, U.S. health officials order manufacturers to eliminate SV40. Antiserum is used to neutralize SV40 in seed stock, and SV40-free African green monkeys are used to grow bulk vaccine. But some researchers believe small amounts of SV40 may have survived. . Testing Manufacturers check the safety of the vaccine pools by using a series of 14- day growth tests to see if SV40 is present. Making the Salk vaccine: 1955-1961 Full strength polio virus is grown on rhesus kidney to make bulk Salk vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. The polio virus is then killed with formaldehyde, but some SV40 survives. . Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In the original vaccine, the SV40 survives, contaminating up to 30 million Americans. But after 1961, African green monkeys are used to grow bulk vaccine and SV40 is eliminated. Sources: Children's Hospital of Philadelphia; SEER; virus images by Jean Yves Sgro, University of Wisconsin; Chronicle research BIBLIOGRAPHIC NOTE For more information about the simian virus SV40, the following studies or scientific reviews were published during that past year: A multicenter evaluation of assays of detection of SV40 DNA and results in masked mesothelioma specimens. Strickler H, Goedert J., Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Vol. 10, 523-532, May 2001. Simian virus 40 and human cancers, Strickler H., Einstein Quarterly J. Biol. and Med. (2001) 18:14-21. This includes a detailed bibliography that will lead readers to earlier scientific articles. Oral polio vaccine and human cancer: a reassessment of SV40 as a contaminant based upon legal documents. Kops S., Anticancer Research (2000) 20:

4745-4750. Human mesothelial cells are unusually susceptible to SV40-mediated transformation and asbestos cocarcinogenicity. Bocchetta M, Di Resta I, Powers A, Fresco R, Tosolini A, Testa J, Pass H, Rizzo P, Carbone M., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 97, Issue 18, 10214-10219, Aug. 29, 2000. In addition, a bibliography of journal articles by leading SV40 researcher Dr. Michele Carbone can be viewed by clicking on the following link: http://www.chestsurg.org/carbone7.htm
E-mail William Carlsen at wcarlsen@sfchronicle.com.


©2002 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 1

#52 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 December 2002 - 06:06 AM

http://www.laleva.cc...nes_whyNOT.html

Rogue virus in the vaccine Early polio vaccine harbored virus now feared to cause cancer in humans

William Carlsen, Chronicle Staff Writer Sunday


A growing number of medical researchers fear that a monkey virus that contaminated polio vaccine given to tens of millions of Americans in the 1950s and '60s may be causing rare human cancers.

For four decades, government officials have insisted that there is no evidence the simian virus called SV40 is harmful to humans. But in recent years, dozens of scientific studies have found the virus in a steadily increasing number of rare brain, bone and lung-related tumors - the same malignant cancer SV40 causes in lab animals.

Even more troubling, the virus has been detected in tumors removed from people never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, leading some to worry that those infected by the vaccine might be spreading SV40.

The discovery of SV40 in human tumors has generated intense debate within the scientific community, pitting a handful of government health officials, who believe that the virus is harmless, against researchers from Boston to China who now suspect SV40 may be a human carcinogen. At stake are millions of research dollars and potential medical treatments for those afflicted with the cancers SV40 may be causing.

In April, more than 60 scientists met in Chicago to discuss the controversial virus and how it works to defeat certain cells' natural defenses against cancer.

"I believe that SV40 is carcinogenic (in humans)," said Dr. Michele Carbone of Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood, Ill. "We need to be creating therapies for people who have these cancers, and now we may be able to because we have a target - SV40."

But scientists at the National Cancer Institute say their studies show almost no SV40 in human tumors and no cancer increase in people who received the contaminated vaccine.

"No one would dispute there's been a widespread, very scary exposure to the population of potentially cancer-causing virus," said Dr. Howard Strickler, NCI's chief investigator. "But none of our studies and other major analyses have shown an inkling of an effect on the population."

Critics charge, however, that the few studies done by the government are scientifically flawed and that health officials have downplayed the potential risks posed by SV40 ever since they learned in 1961 that the virus contaminated the polio vaccine and caused tumors in rodents.

"How long can the government ignore this?" asked Dr. Adi Gazdar, a University of Texas Southwestern Medical

Center cancer researcher. "The government has not sponsored any real research. Here's something possibly affecting millions of Americans, and they're indifferent.

"Maybe they don't want to find out." The recent SV40 discoveries come at a time of growing concern over the dangers posed by a range of animal viruses that have crossed the species barrier to humans, including HIV, which scientists now believe came from chimpanzees and ultimately caused the AIDS epidemic.

Based on dozens of interviews and a review of the medical research, this is the story of how the campaign to eradicate polio may have inadvertently permitted another potentially deadly monkey virus to infect millions of people - and why the government for years discounted the accumulating evidence suggesting that SV40 may be a health risk for humans.

Polio epidemic, 1955

During the first half of the 20th century, polio struck down hundreds of thousands of people, leaving many paralyzed - some in iron lung machines - and killing others. The worst year was 1952, when more than 57,000 polio cases were reported in the United States. Three thousand died.

Then on April 12, 1955, Dr. Jonas Salk, a slightly built, soft-spoken researcher from Pittsburgh, mounted the podium at the University of Michigan and announced that he had developed a vaccine. That afternoon, the government licensed the vaccine for distribution.

Salk's vaccine was made by growing live polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys. The virus was then killed with formaldehyde. When the vaccine was injected in humans, the dead virus generated antibodies capable of fending off live polio.

Dr. Dwight Murray, then chairman of the American Medical Association, called Salk's announcement "one of the greatest events in the history of medicine."

Within weeks, the stockpiled vaccine was being injected into the arms of millions of people worldwide.

Virus and the tumors, 1959

Four years later, Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, noticed something strange while looking through her microscope. Monkey kidney cells - the same kind used to make the vaccine - were dying without apparent cause.

So she tried an experiment. She prepared kidney extracts from eight to 10 rhesus monkeys and injected tiny amounts under the skin of 23 newborn hamsters. Within nine months, "large, malignant, subcutaneous tumors" appeared on 20 of the animals.

On July 6, 1960, concerned that a monkey virus might be contaminating the polio vaccine, Eddy took her findings to Dr. Joseph Smadel, chief of the NIH's biologics division. Smadel dismissed the tumors as harmless "lumps."

The same year, however, at a Merck laboratory in Pennsylvania, Dr. Maurice Hilleman and Dr. Ben Sweet isolated the virus. They called it simian virus
40, or SV40, because it was the 40th virus found in rhesus kidney tissue. Immunization campaign, 1961 By then, the nation was winning the war against polio. Nearly 98 million Americans - more than 60 percent of the population - had received at least one injection of the Salk vaccine, and the number of cases was plummeting. At the same time, an oral polio vaccine developed by virologist Albert Sabin was in final trials in Russia and Eastern

Europe, where tens of millions had been inoculated, and it was about to be licensed in the United States. Unlike the Salk vaccine, the oral version contained a live but weakened form of polio virus and promised lifelong immunity.

But U.S. Public Health Service officials were worried. Tests had found SV40 in both the Sabin and Salk vaccines - it was later estimated that as much as a third of the Salk vaccine was tainted - and that SV40 was causing cancer in lab animals.

In early 1961, they quietly met with the agency's top vaccine advisers. The agency found no evidence that the virus had been harmful to humans, but in March, the officials ordered manufacturers to eliminate SV40 from all future vaccine.

New procedures were adopted to neutralize the tainted polio virus seed stock and SV40-free African green monkeys were used to produce the bulk vaccine instead of rhesus monkeys.

But officials did not recall contaminated Salk vaccine - more than a year's supply - still in the hands of the nation's doctors.

And they did not notify the public of the contamination and SV40's carcinogenic effect on newborn hamsters.

Hilleman would later explain that government officials were worried that any potentially negative information could ignite a panic and jeopardize the vaccination campaign.

The first public disclosure that the Salk vaccine was contaminated came in the New York Times on July 26, 1961. A story on Page 33 reported that Merck and other manufacturers had halted production until they could get a "monkey virus" out of the vaccine.

When asked to comment, the U.S. Public Health Service stressed there was no evidence the virus was dangerous. No cause for alarm, 1962

The next year, a young Harvard-trained epidemiologist named Dr. Joseph Fraumeni joined the National Cancer Institute and was assigned one of the agency's most important projects: to determine if there was any cancer increase among those injected with the Salk vaccine.

His research would form the basis of the government's position for decades. Working with two colleagues, Fraumeni tested stored vaccine samples from May and June of 1955, the first months of the national immunization campaign, then ranked the samples according to how much SV40 they contained - no, low or high amounts.

It would be the only time U.S. health officials measured the level of SV40 in the 1955-1962 vaccine. Stored samples from that period were later discarded.

Fraumeni identified the states where the SV40-contaminated vaccines had been distributed during those two months. California, for example, received vaccine with a low level of the virus. The study looked at cancer mortality rates for 6- to 8-year-old children vaccinated during that narrow time frame, tracking the group for four years.

The findings, which were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed no significant difference in cancer deaths in states with high or low levels of SV40 in the vaccine when compared with cancer deaths in states with no SV40 in the vaccine. Cleveland children, 1976

Fourteen years later, after isolated reports linking the virus and human cancers, Fraumeni decided to look at another group that had received contaminated vaccine.

The group had been the subject of experiments conducted in the early 1960s at Cleveland Metropolitan General Hospital. To determine the effect of different amounts of the vaccines, researchers at the hospital inoculated newborns from mostly lower-income black families with doses ranging up to more than 100 times the dose recommended for adults.

The experiments took place over three years and involved 1,073 infants. Most were given Sabin oral vaccine later determined to contain SV40.

From 1976 to 1979, Fraumeni and his associates sent letters to the children - now age 17 to 19 - but fewer than half responded. The researchers found no SV40-related health problems from exposure to contaminated vaccine.

However, their 1982 report published in the New England Journal of Medicine acknowledged the study's limitations: A majority of the children had not responded; SV40-related cancers might take longer than 17 to 19 years to develop, and SV40 appears less likely to infect humans through the oral vaccine.

Nevertheless, they called their findings "reassuring and consistent with the prevailing view that SV40 is not carcinogenic in human beings."

Then they decided to end the study, citing "the mounting complexities and obstacles in tracing this particular group and the negative results to date."

The study's closure appeared to end the government's research into the virus. But a few years later there would be a tectonic shift in SV40 research.

First discovery, 1988

In Boston, two researchers stumbled onto something disturbing.

Dr. Robert Garcea and his assistant, Dr. John Bergsagel, were using a powerful new tool called polymerase chain reaction, or PCR, to look for a pair of common human viruses in children's brain tumors.

But a different DNA footprint kept popping up in more than half the tumors. They finally realized they were seeing SV40.

For more than a decade, scientists had reported sporadic findings of SV40- like proteins in human tumors. But the earlier tests were primitive and the results suspect. PCR, however, is capable of amplifying infinitesimal fragments of DNA, which makes detections far more credible.


The findings were troubling. The researchers noted in their published report that the children were too young to have received the contaminated vaccine. But somehow the virus had infected them and embedded itself in their tumors.

Mesothelioma, 1988 That same year, Dr. Michele Carbone was surprised to find a milky, rindlike tumor in a laboratory hamster at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md.

The animal was one of a group given an SV40 injection directly into their hearts. Sixty percent of those hamsters developed the fatal cancer called mesothelioma.

Carbone, a postdoctoral fellow at the institute, knew that SV40 caused tumors in hamsters but only in specific locations where large doses of virus were injected. Here the mesothelial membrane lining the lungs apparently became cancerous from minuscule amounts of SV40 shed by the tip of the needle on the way to the hamsters' hearts.

So he tried another experiment, this time injecting SV40 directly into the thin mesothelial walls of another group of hamsters. Within six months, every animal developed mesothelioma.

Carbone was puzzled. Mesothelioma is a rare cancer. Few human cases were reported before the 1950s, but its incidence had been increasing steadily, reaching several thousand cases a year in the United States by 1988. Studies had linked mesothelioma to asbestos exposure - with tumors usually appearing many decades later. Yet 20 percent of victims had no asbestos exposure.

Carbone decided to use PCR to test 48 human mesotheliomas stored at the NIH. He was stunned: 28 of them contained SV40.

More cancers, 1996 PCR unleashed a wave of SV40 discoveries.

By the end of 1996, dozens of scientists reported finding SV40 in a variety of bone cancers and a wide range of brain cancers, which had risen 30 percent over the previous 20 years.

Then, Italian researchers reported finding SV40 in 45 percent of the seminal fluid samples and 23 percent of the blood samples they had taken from healthy donors.

That meant SV40 could have been spreading through sexual activity, from mother to child, or by other means, which could explain how those never inoculated with the contaminated vaccine, such as the Boston children, were being infected.

Government assurances, 1996 At the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, officials were growing increasingly concerned about the SV40 discoveries.

The findings were of particular interest to Fraumeni, who had been promoted to director of NCI's Division on Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics. His earlier studies concluding that SV40 posed little or no health risk were now under challenge.

But the scientific community was skeptical of the recent SV40 discoveries. As a potent carcinogen in lab animals, SV40 had been used for years as a tool to study cancer. Therefore, the powerful PCR test was suspected of finding stray SV40 fragments that might have contaminated laboratories.

So Dr. Howard Strickler, one of Fraumeni's epidemiologists, led a study using PCR on 50 mesotheliomas from Armed Forces hospitals across the country. And he found no SV40.

Although the findings bolstered the government's long-standing position that SV40 did not appear to be a health risk, federal officials decided to convene a conference on the virus.

In January 1997, 30 scientists gathered at the National Institutes of Health in Maryland. Garcea, Carbone and others presented their evidence showing SV40 in tumors and pleaded for research funding. Strickler presented his mesothelioma study, as well as new research he had just completed, this time working with Fraumeni.

Their new study compared 20 years of cancer rates of people born between
1947 and 1963, and therefore likely to have been exposed to the contaminated polio vaccine, with people born after 1963, who they believed weren't exposed.

Their study found no significant difference between the two groups. Letter of protest, 1998

But when Susan Fisher read Strickler and Fraumeni's study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, she fired off a letter of protest to the publication.

An epidemiologist at Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood, Ill., Fisher challenged the study's methodology, calling it "an error in judgment" and misleading.

Using the same 20-year national cancer database for the two groups, Fisher compared people of the same age - "because these cancers are highly correlated with age" - and she came up with very different results.

Studying 18- to 26-year-olds who probably had been exposed to the contaminated vaccine, Fisher found a 19.6 percent greater incidence of the two major brain cancers linked to SV40 when compared with the incidence in people the same age who were not exposed. She also found 16.6 percent more bone cancers and 178 percent more mesotheliomas among those exposed to the vaccine.

But Fisher cautioned against comparing the two groups. She argued that if SV40 is being transmitted and circulating in the population, then many people in the "unexposed" group would also be carrying the virus and that would undermine the comparison.

Two types of SV40, 1999 For years, researchers had believed that all SV40-contaminated Salk vaccine made between 1955 and 1963 had been used or discarded.

Then in 1999, Carbone was contacted by a former public health director in Oak Park, Ill., who said he had seven sealed vials of vaccine dated October
1955 in a refrigerator in his basement. Carbone, who had left the NIH and joined the faculty at Loyola University Medical Center, ran tests on the vaccine and made a startling discovery: Not only was the vaccine contaminated, it contained a second form of the virus - an "archetypal" SV40 strain.

Although manufacturers switched from rhesus monkeys to SV40-free green African monkeys to grow the bulk vaccine in 1961, they have continued to use potentially contaminated polio seed strains originally grown on the rhesus monkey tissue to start the bulk vaccine process. Manufacturers check the purity of their vaccine with a series of 14-day tests to detect whether any SV40 slipped through.

But when Carbone replicated the tests, he found that the second, slower- growing "archetypal" strain took 19 days to emerge.

It was possible, Carbone noted in a published report, that this second strain of SV40 had been evading manufacturers' screening procedures for years - and infecting vaccine recipients after 1962. Controversial study, 2000

Meanwhile, a new study led by Strickler had bogged down in bitter internal conflict. After the NIH's 1997 conference, nine laboratories were recruited to participate in a government-sponsored study to determine if tests were really finding SV40 in tumors or whether earlier detections were the result of laboratory contamination.

Carbone and other researchers considered the study unnecessary. A similar multilab study led by Dr. Joseph Testa of Philadelphia had just been completed, and it virtually eliminated the contamination theory. The prestigious journal Cancer Research published Testa's findings in 1998. But Strickler pressed on.

An independent laboratory in Maryland prepared mesothelioma samples for the nine labs. When tests revealed almost no SV40 in the tumor samples, some participants questioned the preparation methods used by the Maryland lab. They also challenged Strickler's written conclusion implying that contamination had caused the earlier findings of SV40 in tumors.

If Strickler was right, the earlier SV40 detections were probably the result of stray SV40 in the labs. But critics argued that the study was scientifically flawed and should be scrapped. The dispute became so contentious that FDA officials were forced to intervene and a neutral arbitrator assigned to mediate.

Finally, in early 2000, more than two years after the study was initiated, a carefully rewritten report emerged for publication.

It concluded that contamination was an unlikely explanation for earlier SV40 findings. Then it struggled to explain the discrepancy between earlier detections of SV40 in about half of all mesotheliomas tested and the fact that the nine labs found the virus in only slightly more than 1 percent of the study's tumor specimens.

The report noted that discrepancy might be because of the inefficiency of the method used by the Maryland lab to recover DNA - like the genetic sequences of SV40 - from the mesothelial tissue to create the test samples. The Maryland lab also had inadvertently contaminated some of the laboratory controls and "theoretically" could have contaminated others.

The report concluded by calling for further research. Despite the study's ambivalent conclusions and technical problems, the NCI submitted it to Cancer Research, the journal that had published Testa's study.

It was rejected.
Further discoveries, 2000 In laboratories around the world, researchers continued to find SV40 in a widening range of tumors that now included pituitary and thyroid cancers and some lymphomas.

Meanwhile, an NCI investigator named Dr. David Schrump was able to gut a common respiratory virus and use it to deliver genetic material called "antisense" into SV40-infected mesothelial cells and stop the cells' malignant growth.

His discovery, which was patented by the government, strongly suggested that SV40 contributed to mesothelioma and that a treatment might be possible.

Then in August, Carbone and several colleagues published a major study providing a "mechanistic" explanation of how SV40 contributes to the uncontrolled growth of mesothelial cells. The key, they found, was the large number of "tumor suppressor" proteins found in the mesothelial cells that makes them unusually susceptible to SV40. In most human cells, they said, the virus reproduces itself and kills the infected cell in the process. But in mesothelial cells, SV40 is especially attracted to the "tumor suppressor" proteins and binds to them, knocking them out of action. The virus then lives on in the cell.

The result, they said, is a rate of malignant cell transformation in tissue cultures 1,000 times higher than has ever been observed.

In a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Carbone further explained that asbestos fibers appear to act as a co- carcinogen in mesothelioma by somehow suppressing the immune system's response, which is designed to kill the infected cells.

Chicago conference, 2001 Carbone and others believed that the time had come for another conference on the virus he calls "a perfect little war machine."

In April, more than 60 scientists gathered on a warm weekend at the University of Chicago's downtown conference center. Despite numerous faxes and certified letters inviting him, Strickler declined to attend. Carbone opened the conference by confronting the question of whether SV40 is present in humans. "Sixty-two papers from 30 laboratories from around the world have reported SV40 in human tissues and tumors," he said. "It is very difficult to believe that all of these papers, all of the techniques used and all of the people around the world are wrong."

For two days, scientists from as far away as China and New Zealand presented the results of their studies, with almost every speaker concluding that SV40 was present in the tissues they examined.

One of the newest discoveries came from Dr. Jeffrey Kopp, an NIH scientist who reported finding SV40 in a high percentage of patients with kidney disease. The virus was also present, he said, in 60 percent of a new "collapsing" type of renal disease that was unknown before 1980 but has since increased rapidly in incidence.

There were also reports on efforts to develop a vaccine, recently funded by the NCI, that would allow the immune system to target and eliminate SV40.

At times, the meeting took on almost revivalist overtones as scientist after scientist said he or she was initially very skeptical of SV40's presence in human tumors but was now a believer.

"I was a hard sell," said Testa, the Philadelphia geneticist who conducted the first multilaboratory tests, noting that the study had convinced him.

Gazdar, the cancer researcher from Texas, showed a slide describing his transformation: "Nonbeliever -- Believer - Zealot."

The conference concluded with a consensus among the leading scientists that SV40's presence in human tumors was no longer in question. They were more circumspect about the virus' possible role in causing cancer. If SV40 is a human carcinogen, they said, the virus probably requires interaction with other cancer-causing substances like asbestos.

Dr. Janet Butel from Baylor Medical College in Houston said that it simply might be too soon to make a determination, citing the many years it has taken to establish that other viruses cause cancer. But even renowned tumor biologist George Klein from Sweden said he was impressed by Carbone and Schrump's work.

"This strongly suggests that the virus plays a role (in causing tumors)," said Klein, a former chairman of the Nobel Assembly.

Low priority, 2001 In May, shortly after the conference, Strickler's multilab study was published in a small journal called Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Carbone and other SV40 experts dismissed the study. "A garbage paper in a garbage journal," said Garcea, now on the faculty at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.

But Strickler strongly defends the study. He said it was the first to use strict controls not used in other studies. He acknowledged, however, that the study "doesn't prove that SV40 is not out there."

Strickler, who now teaches at Albert Einstein School of Medicine in New York, said he remains skeptical about whether SV40 has infected humans, a suspicion he says is shared by the broader scientific community.

But the NCI recently acknowledged that there is evidence to suggest that SV40 "may be associated with human cancer." The NCI statement, released last month, also said that SV40's interaction with "tumor suppressor proteins" indicates "possible mechanisms that could contribute to the development of cancer."

Top NCI officials declined to be interviewed on the record for this report. Fraumeni also declined several requests for an interview.

Dr. James Goedert, the chief of the NCI's Viral Epidemiology Branch who supervised Strickler's work, said that if SV40 is in human tumors, it must be at extremely low levels. To critics who claim the government has downplayed SV40's potential health risks, Goedert responded: "Absolutely not."

He acknowledged that research is needed to resolve the question of whether SV40 is prevalent in the human population and, if so, how it might be spreading. But Goedert said he has no plans for such studies. "It's not our highest priority," he said.

Key figures in developing vaccines and tracing SV40 Dr. Jonas Salk Developed the first polio vaccine using killed virus in 1955. Virologist Albert Sabin Developed an oral vaccine using weakened live virus. Dr. Robert Garcea Used new technology to trace SV40 in children's brain tumors.

Q&A on polio vaccine contaminated with SV40

Q: How widespread is the SV40 infection?

A: Scientists and government health officials don't know because no comprehensive studies have addressed the question.

What is known: During the 1950s and '60s, more than 100 million people worldwide were given SV40-contaminated polio vaccine. The virus also has been found in people who did not receive contaminated vaccine, as well as laboratory workers and monkey handlers. No studies, however, have examined how SV40 might be transmitted between people, or if somehow humans might have become infected with SV40 before the introduction of the tainted vaccines.

Q: Can I be tested for SV40?

A: An accurate blood test does not exist. Current antibody blood tests can be inaccurate, scientists say, because they may also detect the presence of other closely related viruses, and SV40 may be present at such a low level that no antibodies are produced. Researchers are working to create an effective test.

Q: Is the current polio vaccine safe?

A: Vaccine producers, health officials and most scientists believe that it is safe. Manufacturers say they take elaborate steps to test their vaccine for SV40, and the government says it recently tested vaccine samples back to 1972 and found no trace of SV40. Some scientists, including Dr. Michele Carbone, have raised questions about whether manufacturers' testing techniques have been adequate. Carbone, however, tested vaccine from 1996 and found no SV40. He has had his children inoculated.

Q: In which kinds of cancers has SV40 been found?

A: The virus has been detected in rare cancers: -- Mesothelioma, a fatal tumor of the membrane surrounding the lungs. Few cases were reported prior to 1950, but the incidence has grown in the United States to 2,000 to 4,000 cases a year, with greater incidence in Europe. -- Brain cancers: Primarily ependymoma and choroid plexus tumors, but also astrocytoma, glioblastoma, medulloblastoma and meningioma. These make up a total of less than 1,000 U.S. cases each year. -- Bone cancers: Primarily osteosarcoma but also chondrosarcoma and giant cell tumors. These also make up less than 1,000 cases annually. -- Other cancers: A few detections in pituitary and thyroid tumors and lymphomas.


Report sources The sources for this report include the books "The Saga of Jonas Salk" by Richard Carter and "The Health Century" by Edward Shorter; articles in Atlantic Monthly and New York magazine; newspaper archives at The Chronicle and the New York Times; transcript of the 1997 National Institutes of Health Conference in Bethesda; a review of dozens of scientific journal articles and scores of interviews. Related series: Quest for the Origin of AIDS.

How SV40 contaminated polio vaccine ?

When Dr. Jonas Salk introduced the first polio vaccine in 1955, it was hailed as "one of the greatest events in medicine." Within 10 years, U.S. polio cases plummeted from 30,000 to less than 1,000. But in 1960, a monkey virus called SV40 was found in the Salk vaccine. As much as one-third of the vaccine was contaminated. SV40 was also found in earlier versions of an oral vaccine developed by Dr. Albert Sabin that replaced the Salk vaccine in the
1960s. When it was discovered that SV40 caused cancer in lab animals, U.S. health officials ordered vaccine manufacturers in 1961 to eliminate the virus from all future vaccine, although questions remain about whether they succeeded with the Sabin vaccine. .

Making the Sabin vaccine: 1955-1961 Starting in the mid-1950s, both Sabin and Salk vaccines are made by growing polio virus on kidney tissue from Asian rhesus monkeys, which are natural hosts for the simian virus known as SV40. Special weakened seed strain of polio virus developed by Sabin is grown on rhesus kidney tissue to make large bulk amounts of vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. . Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In 1961, after SV40 is discovered in the vaccines, U.S. health officials order manufacturers to eliminate SV40. Antiserum is used to neutralize SV40 in seed stock, and SV40-free African green monkeys are used to grow bulk vaccine. But some researchers believe small amounts of SV40 may have survived. . Testing Manufacturers check the safety of the vaccine pools by using a series of 14- day growth tests to see if SV40 is present. Making the Salk vaccine: 1955-1961 Full strength polio virus is grown on rhesus kidney to make bulk Salk vaccine. SV40 from the kidney tissue contaminates the vaccine. The polio virus is then killed with formaldehyde, but some SV40 survives. . Making the vaccine safe: 1961 In the original vaccine, the SV40 survives, contaminating up to 30 million Americans. But after 1961, African green monkeys are used to grow bulk vaccine and SV40 is eliminated. Sources: Children's Hospital of Philadelphia; SEER; virus images by Jean Yves Sgro, University of Wisconsin; Chronicle research BIBLIOGRAPHIC NOTE For more information about the simian virus SV40, the following studies or scientific reviews were published during that past year: A multicenter evaluation of assays of detection of SV40 DNA and results in masked mesothelioma specimens. Strickler H, Goedert J., Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Vol. 10, 523-532, May 2001. Simian virus 40 and human cancers, Strickler H., Einstein Quarterly J. Biol. and Med. (2001) 18:14-21. This includes a detailed bibliography that will lead readers to earlier scientific articles. Oral polio vaccine and human cancer: a reassessment of SV40 as a contaminant based upon legal documents. Kops S., Anticancer Research (2000) 20:

4745-4750. Human mesothelial cells are unusually susceptible to SV40-mediated transformation and asbestos cocarcinogenicity. Bocchetta M, Di Resta I, Powers A, Fresco R, Tosolini A, Testa J, Pass H, Rizzo P, Carbone M., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, Vol. 97, Issue 18, 10214-10219, Aug. 29, 2000. In addition, a bibliography of journal articles by leading SV40 researcher Dr. Michele Carbone can be viewed by clicking on the following link: http://www.chestsurg.org/carbone7.htm
E-mail William Carlsen at wcarlsen@sfchronicle.com.


©2002 San Francisco Chronicle Page A - 1

#53 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 December 2002 - 10:21 PM

"Merry Days forever to all the immortalist."

Fruitimmortal and all,

Yes, have a wonderfull holiday!

bob

#54 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 10 January 2003 - 09:23 AM

Dun DUN DUNNNN!!!

Here you go. Some info.


http://www.bio.com/n...atur...0&Page=1" target="_blank">Defect://http://www.bio.com/newsfeatures/new..."_blank">Defect://http://www.bio.com/newsfeatures/new..."_blank">Defect://http://www.bio.com/newsfeatures/new..."_blank">Defect in Ribosome Function May Cause Cancer

#55 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 21 April 2003 - 01:51 PM

Here is a recent article about new cancer treatments. It is the most promising research I have heard of recently.

***************
April 18, 2003 – Cancer, one of mankind’s oldest threats, is about to come under attack from one of its newest tools: nanoparticles

Building on a body of established medical research, several companies are pushing forward new cancer treatments that send nanoparticles into patients to find tumor cells. Once they do, doctors excite the particles with electromagnetic energy to attack the tumor – essentially, heating them up so much that they cook the cancer to death.

More Details Here

****************

Edited by Mind, 21 April 2003 - 01:52 PM.


#56 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 21 April 2003 - 02:00 PM

Here is new treatment option under current study in the UK.

GM blood kills human cancer cells

For some reason I am more skeptical of this type of treatment. The previous post about nano cancer killers seems more "clean". I guess I have more faith in our newest technology than in our ability to influence nature (ie. our white blood cells) to do our bidding.

#57 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 30 April 2003 - 04:54 AM

This is a very cool "accident" - will give Oncologists something to drool over.

Scientists breed cancer-beating mice

Ok, so they were injecting mice with cancerous cells but one just didn't respond, its immune system would take out all the tumors. Now the 700 mice bred from this male mouse all carry the same trait!!! So its of course all within the strands.

"They are healthy, cancer-free and have a normal lifespan."


Overall this came at an awesome time to help further the golden era of genetic studies.

http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/2982525.stm

#58 DJS

  • Guest
  • 5,798 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Taipei
  • NO

Posted 20 June 2003 - 04:05 AM

Mind.

What is your opinion about the potential of nanoparticles? If you have any more info on the treament or the start ups could you please post them. My greed mechanism just switched on.:))

Thanks
Kissinger

#59 Graziano

  • Guest
  • 4 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Rome,Italy

Posted 20 June 2003 - 05:46 PM

Hello,

I like this site and discussions to make life longer and to how to act against cancer .

However I am disappointed about discussions related to cats . It seems that
someone of you in this discussion , is placing cat life at the same level of human life .
I want say , there are humans (most of them babies) which are dying every second on the world
for low nutrition , and I am surprised to see your worry to make cat's life longer [wacko] .
Really surprised ... how could you have this philosophy ?


Graziano, Rome , Italy

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this MEDICINES advertising spot to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#60 Graziano

  • Guest
  • 4 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Rome,Italy

Posted 20 June 2003 - 06:13 PM

Here is Italy there are several people with over 100 years , especially on Sardinia Isle .

They eat red meat , they smoke (!!) , they drink alcholics (especially wine)
they don't follow especially diet ... so why they can live over 100 years .. ?

I am gone there in Sardinia , and I spoked exactly with these people ..

Well , if you go there , you will experience the "no stress" life .
Their life is longer because their stress is really near to 0 .

They are happy , they have no worry which we are subject on the cities .
They do exactly what they want , with the only tool they received from life ,
the EARTH .

They don't have a car , they don't know what is a tax , they don't read
newspapers , they don't see TV , they don't know what is internet or pay tv ,
they don't practice sport , they are HAPPY , they don't know what is the depression.
They have their family , their animals to eat meat, their vegetables ...
Good climate , good air , pacific place , absolutely 0 stress , 0 problems .
They rarely use medicinal.

Cancer in this place is really rare . Ultra 100 year people are not rare , they are common !
In other words , looking those people , seems that the 0 stress is the
first REAL solution to have a longer life .

So , after visited Sardinia I started to think that the solution to life longer is ...

1) to return to earth life , such as Sardinia people , left the cities .

or

2) find a medicinal to reduce stress (menthal and phisical stress) near to 0 also if we live in a city.
Does it exist ? NO .


Bye
Graziano

Edited by Graziano, 20 June 2003 - 06:21 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users