CSN Login
Members Online: 11

Tofu

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

Should women who have had a cancer that contains both UPSC cells and endometriod adenocarcinoma avoid soy? That's my diagnosis, and for almost four years I have been diligent about cutting out foods like tofu. However, after going from a mostly vegetarian diet to eating chicken and occasional meat, I want to return to a plant-based diet that includes tofu a couple of times a week. Would that be safe? I make a wonderful and simple dish that includes curried chick peas (lots of curry powder and extra turmeric), caramelized onions, chopped fresh kale, chopped cherry tomatoes, cubed tofu, and srirracha sauce. What do you think? Any advice is appreciated.

bea-mil's picture
bea-mil
Posts: 106
Joined: Jun 2010

Wow, it is almost the same dish like mine. I love it. The only difference is that I use a bok choi instead of kale and I don’t use srirracha sauce, instead I add some ginger and cayenne pepper. If you buy this sauce check the ingredients, most of them contain sugar and distilled vinegar (good only for cleaning). I try to avoid processed foods as much as possible. Soy and tofu I eat once a week at least .

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

I have used this sauce only once, having recently bought what looks to be a lifetime supply of the stuff. My intention was to duplicate some of the flavor of Ma Po Tofu, a Szechuan dish that I love but rarely eat now because of all of the fat. I always check ingredients, since I never eat processed food or sugar (slipping only rarely); but this time I read on the bottle that srirracha sauce is made from ground peppers and failed to notice the sugar and chemicals on the more complete ingredients list. I may give the sauce away and try to make my own pepper paste using Szechuan peppers, garlic, and a little olive oil. That may work, right?

Thanks, bea-mil, for enlightening me.

california_artist
Posts: 850
Joined: Jan 2009

Sounds lovely.

Two things come to mind. First, of the three forms of estrogen, only one tends to promote cancer, and as the way of things, the lowly cabbage is able to effect a change in that cancer promoting form of estrogen and make it transform to one of the less harmful forms. So, have some cabbage either before of with the meal, would assume with the tofuy meal.

Secondly, when having something with estrogens, i would tend to avoid xenoestrogens, such as coffee.

But, for the most part, having tofu in moderation --I would tend to not worry. It's the overall bent of what you eat and how those foods work together to fight cancer that matters.

Monday will be four years for me since my official diagnosis. While I do want to have a party, I don't want the cancer cells to think I am gloating and let me have it, so my joy will be low key, in case they are listening. Now all the new girls probably think I am nuts and not just a girl from New York with a very bizarre outlook on life.

Love, hope, kind thoughts and a successful anti cancer journey to us all,

Claudia

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

Let's have a virtual low-key celebration: I'll saute some cabbage with turmeric, pepper, and olive oil and make Karen's curried chickpea and yam dish. I am just a couple of months away from my own four-year mark. Although I am in no way going to give up my anti-cancer diet, I am hoping my efforts will be permanently successful. I give you lots of credit for getting me on the right track.

With hope and love to everyone.

Jill

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

I've got a similar cancer which is just as aggressive.....MMMT. My nutritionist, plus integrative doc suggested only 2 servings of whole soy in food per day. Note, avoid any soy listed with "isolates"...not good at all. The nutritionist who's a breast cancer survivor, recommended watching the soy I add to my diet, as the jury is still out on how soy affects one, especially with hormone type cancers.

One question to you experts on food preparation, what type of "sauce" do you use with any of your vegie saute dishes?

Jill, proud to read about your upcoming 4-year mark....whatever you're doing, keep it up. Love reading your posts.

Hugs,
Jan

RoseyR
Posts: 462
Joined: Feb 2011

So great to hear that you're approaching four-year NED status: fabulous!

Of course you should celebrate.

What I keep reading about soy is that it is always safe in fermented form (tempeh, miso, seitan) but controversial when not fermented. But even a little tofu now and then--as long as not daily--is safe.

Jan, did your onc tell you that our kind of tumor is hormonally sensitive? When I asked mine, she said, "Not USUALLY."

Leaving me in the lurch!

Best
Rosey

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

I did ask my oncologist this question and he suggested I avoid anything with hormones. I'm just very weary of soy as happened to have been on some major powder supplements prior to cancer, which had soy isolates as main ingredient....boohoo! To this day, wonder if these supplements had a bearing on my start with the cancer journey. More reason to follow more nutrients from our food supply vs. adding lots of supplements.

EVERYTHING IN MODERATION~

Jan

Fayard's picture
Fayard
Posts: 343
Joined: May 2011

I make a sauce with fresh almond butter, coconut aminos (instead of soy sauce), water, garlic, turmeric, salt and pepper.

I pour it on sauteed tofu with onions, string beans, and bell peppers.
Even my husband likes it.

However, I try to stay away from tofu as much as I can.
I eat it probably 1 to 2 times per month.

Felicitaciones to both of you for reaching almost 4 years!

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

Isn't that awesome. Almost 4 years and after spending an hour and a half with snow shovel today I feel pretty good.

My celebration is big smile on my face, not calling myself survivor.

But back to tofu. I can by tofu here (Edmonton) no-GMO and using that as eggs in scrambled eggs recipices. Onion, turmeric and tofu. Salt if you need it.

willbesurvivor's picture
willbesurvivor
Posts: 50
Joined: Jan 2011

I would avoid it if I could, anything with hormones can't be good with this type of cancer - even our oncologist said that they can never know what effect foods, HRT etc do to our bodies.

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

I start almost every vegetable dish that I make by sauteing onions in olive oil until they are translucent, then adding spices--which might include turmeric, curry, ginger, and a bit of tomato paste; or lemon and oregano; or chopped tomatoes and basil--and vegetables. If I am making an Indian dish, the vegetables might include kale, chickpeas, and yams; an Italian dish, zucchini, broccoli raab, or broccoli; a Greek dish, some feta cheese crumbles (just a little), cucumbers, peppers, red onions, oregano. I might serve the mixture on a whole grain like spelt or quinoa and often add a bean. I also make soups the same way: sauteed onions, often pureed red tomatoes or canned organic fire-roasted tomatoes, some type of bean, a whole grain pasta, and lots of fresh vegetables. One trick I sometimes use is to puree one quarter to one half of the ingredients and add the puree to the chunky vegetables. This is the basis for my lentil, minestrone, carrot and ginger, and mushroom soups.

I find it empowering to share recipes and food ideas, and I would LOVE to hear what other women are eating.

HellieC
Posts: 425
Joined: Nov 2010

Like you, I like to make my own soups. And I always start with good old onions, too! I make all sorts, depending on which vegetables are in season, But I particularly like to use butternut squash which is lovely mixed with carrot, tomato and lentils, with tumeric, a little chilli powder and whatever else is to hand. Although the quantities vary each time, so it is difficult to give a proper recipe!
I must try the "one quarter puree" idea, so that you get a lovely rich base but it feels more like a meal - great idea - why didn't I think of that?!
All this food talk is making my hungry. I'm off to my diet club tonight, so eating will have to wait until my return.
Kindest wishes
Helen

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

I don't use recipes either, Helen, but I try to create them so that I can post them here. My soups sound very much like yours, the only difference being that I thicken them a bit by pureeing a few spoonfuls.

Soups are a delicious and flavorful way to eat all sorts of healthy, cancer-fighting vegetables and spices as well as take advantage of what local farms have in season. I can't wait for gazpacho season. Did you know that there is a version made with white grapes and avocado?

Warm regards,

Jill

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

...and thanks for your kind words about my four years of NED. I am too superstitious to feel really safe, but I do spend less time being numb with anxiety. I do believe in changing the way we lived pre-cancer.

JoAnnDK
Posts: 276
Joined: Jun 2011

From the National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM)

About Phytoestrogens

Some botanical products, such as soy and red clover, contain estrogen-like compounds called phytoestrogens. Plants rich in phytoestrogens may help relieve some symptoms of menopause. However, it is uncertain whether this relief comes from phytoestrogens or from other compounds in the plant. Much remains to be learned about these plant products, including exactly how they work in the human body. Doctors caution that certain women need to be particularly careful about using phytoestrogens, especially:

* Women who have had or are at increased risk for diseases or conditions that are affected by hormones, such as breast, uterine, or ovarian cancer; endometriosis; or uterine fibroids

* Women who are taking drugs that increase estrogen levels in the body, such as birth control pills; MHT; or a type of cancer drug called selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), such as tamoxifen

There are an awful lot of warnings and cautions on this website about CAM/herbs/botanicals. Hard to absorb it all.

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

There is lots of information from respected sources saying that UPSC and clear cell are NOT affected by estrogen. That being said, I would still worry about eating too much tofu and other soy products. However, I wouldn't worry TOO much.

california_artist
Posts: 850
Joined: Jan 2009

I'm sorry honey, you know I love ya, I'm just kidding around. At least you are trying to know everything and sharing, big time and I do love you for it.

Totally agree with your conclusions.

Kisses,

Claudia

daisy366's picture
daisy366
Posts: 1493
Joined: Mar 2009

I would be interested in that info about UPSC not being hormone sensitive. Mine is now - though it didn't used to be. Doc said that cancer unpredictable and can morph which mine obviously did.

I don't think we can make global conclusions like that, though perhaps, in general these are not hormone sensitive. Each person's situation is different and obviously subject to change without our knowing this. Without that new testing this would not have come to light.

The whole issue of hormones is a big one. Meat, dairy, and processed soy (eat edamame instead of tofu) encourage hormone growth which fuels cancer cells.

Mary Ann

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

• “…hormone therapy is not effective in the treatment of uterine papillary serous carcinoma because it is not hormone sensitive.”

http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-edge-newspaper-2010/dec-03b.html

• “Type II EC, which includes uterine serous cancer (USC), clear cell cancer and grade 3 endometrioid carcinoma, typically occurs in older, thinner patients and is not hormone dependent. “

Schwartz PE. The management of serous papillary uterine cancer. Curr. Opin. Oncol. 18(5), 494–499 (2006). [In my opinion, Peter Schwartz is the leading expert on UPSC in the U.S.]
Goff BA. Uterine papillary serous carcinoma: what have we learned over the past quarter century? Gynecol. Oncol. 98(3), 341–343

• “Unlike the more common endometrioid adenocarcinoma, UPSC does not develop from endometrial hyperplasia and is not hormone-sensitive.”

Gründker, C: Günthert, AR: Emons G. (2008). "Hormonal heterogeneity of endometrial cancer." Adv Exp Med Biol 630: 166–88

• “Type II carcinomas include…serous histologies…and demonstrate no hormonal risk factors.

Gynecologic Oncology article authored by Paola Gehrig among others—can’t copy line; it’s a PDF file that won’t “copy.”

daisy366's picture
daisy366
Posts: 1493
Joined: Mar 2009

Thanks for taking time to share all that data. Interesting. Hope that Caris report is accurate!! I guess there are always exceptions to the rule.

MA

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

I would trust the Caris report and your doctor. Your UPSC obviously morphed into something else, and the hormone treatment WILL knock it back!

Jill

daisy366's picture
daisy366
Posts: 1493
Joined: Mar 2009

A friend loaned me the China Study for a week. Have you read this? Sure makes the case for plant-based diet. Animal proteins feeds cancer big time. I'm not done with book but it is a must read for us.

I've been a good girl since Thursday - 100% plant-based. It will be interesting to see what Chester does. I had a baseline ca125 yesterday. It was 26 a month ago.

Take care. Mary Ann

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

I eat a 100 percent plant-based diet about 80 percent of the time; I strongly believe in eating this way, but I am only human and give in to a craving for fish and chicken from time to time. GOOD for you that you are reading the China Study and are focusing on limiting your animal proteins. I'm sure you know by now that I think this (and exercise) are two of the best ways of being your own advocate in fighting Chester.

All the best. Jill

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

I know I am an outsider to this board, but I look in from time to time. Just felt compelled to share some information about diet that I have obtained from my naturopath. She recommends a Paleo diet. I know this is controversial and many sources, The China Study included, would beg to differ. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the China Study appears to be based on a diet consisting of commercially raised meats and extrapolates many assumptions from the evils of milk to the evils of meat.
My naturopath researches issues to death before recommending them to her patients. She is an ovarian cancer survivor who still has a tumor living on her liver. Although she was initially diagnosed as stage IV ovarian cancer 20 years ago, she declined surgery and treatment due to the poor outcome the doctors were giving her. So she has found a way to make the bulk of her cancer retreat and to keep it inactive through diet and lifestyle. She can tell if something she is doing is detrimental because her CA-125 goes up. If she stops it, it goes down. She adopted the Paleo diet over a year ago and her CA-125 is lower than it has ever been.
If that were not proof enough that meat is not the feeder of cancer we've been taught to believe, consider this. Her blood type O cancer survivors who eat a vegetarian diet almost all have recurrances if they don't eat some meat. Jill, I think the 80% vegetarian diet is less dangerous because I interpret that to mean you eat meat 20% of the time?
I met up with a woman who lived in a commune that was heavily into a raw vegan diet. She was excommunicated from the commune because she developed ovarian cancer. She's beening dealing with it for 2 1/2 year and has not acheived remission, but in the meantime, almost sll of the other members of the commune either have cancer or have died. This is pretty strong evidence that eating only vegetables does not keep you healthy.
My naturopath went to the Block Center a few months ago, to visit one of her patients and to shadow Dr. Block for a few days. Many conversations and much exchenge of information occurred. There was a large naturpathic conference last weekend in Phoenix. Dr. Block was there and announced that the diet he will be incorporating into his clinic is moving away from a vegetarian one and more towards Paleo.
For clarification, Type A blood people should eat little to no red meat, whereas red meat is okay for blood type O people who do not have elevated iron levels. Eating meat does not mean going to your local grocer and picking up the hormone and antibiotic laced meats they sell. It means finding a source of organic, cleanly raised meats and wild caught fish. Cleanly raised meats means grass fed AND grass finished. It may take some looking, but that stuff is out there.

kkstef's picture
kkstef
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2008

Tethy, I found this post most interesting. I honestly had not heard of the Paleo diet before and I will gather more info. Please do not consider yourself an OUTSIDER! All opinions and thoughts are appreciated. I really enjoy the discussions that take place here and the varying opinions.

I have read very compelling discussions about the importance of grass fed AND grass finished animals. It is challenging to find a source I must admit.

I also found it interesting that Blood type enters in to this equation. I am Type 0.

More things to research... Many thanks!

Karen

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

or in other words gluten free diet.
This is not first time when I find info how cancer people are able survive on gluten free diet.

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

In regards to China Study, I'm just now completing this book.....

The study examined mortality rates, diets, and lifestyles of 6,500 people in 65 rural counties in China, and concluded that people with a high consumption of animal-based foods were more likely to suffer chronic disease, while those who ate a plant-based diet were the least likely. The study was conducted in China because it has a genetically similar population that tends to live in the same way in the same place and eat the same foods for their entire lives.

The authors conclude that people who eat a plant food/vegan diet—which avoids animal products such as beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs, cheese, and milk—will minimize or reverse the development of chronic diseases. They also recommend adequate amounts of sunshine to maintain sufficient levels of vitamin D, and dietary supplements of vitamin B12 in case of complete avoidance of animal products and to minimize the usage of vegetable oils.

My question to you can you go further in depth on the theory of eating meat, depending on your blood type. I've not researched B12, per the China Study, but assuming there's a correlation between meat and B12??? Assuming eating only vegies isn't giving us the B12, causing cancer recurrence? Wild caught fish be a replacement for the meats?

Wow 20 years with no recurrence, your naturopath truly has a wonderful story to tell all of us.

Thanks again my friend...always love your posts!
Jan

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

Jan,
I can ask for more specific informatino regarding the scientific reasoning behind eating meat as a cancer survivor. One thing I'm quite sure weighs in has to do with B12. I just finished a book on autoimmune diseases, and, according to the authors, all autoimmune can be traced to vitamin B12 deficiency, which is a result of improper digestion of proteins and leads to the breakdown of various pathways in our bodies. One pathway that is affected s the body's ability to process vitamin D. Depending on which pathways are affected, determines the type of autoimmune the patient ends up with. The author cites the high occurrance of heart disease and diabetes among the vegetarian populations in India. This breakdown also results in elevated homocystines, which leads to these diseases. I spoke to the author of the book on the phone last week, and she says they are coming out with an updated version, as their rearch has revealed a links between the inability to properly digest protein and some types of cancer.
I do know that my naturopath preaches eating a high protein diet and low carbohydrates. I recently attended a talk given by a doctor from Denver who blames carbs on all of our serious diseases. I might have had difficutly with his position had I not recently read another book that explains the things in our lifestyle that lead to chronic disease. The author of this book tells us that our current environment is very bastardized as compared to the environment of our ancestors. In pre-historic times, carbohydrates were only available to humans in the summer months. Through winter, they ate mostly protein. So our bodies evolved to survive a feast and famine cycle every year. Now that carbs are available to us year round, and our bodies are not adapted to this, we develop serious illnesses, including cancer.
The books: "Autoimmune:The Cause and the Cure" by Annesse Brockley and Kristin Urdiales
"Lights Out" by T.S. Wiley
Both of thes books are filled with references that support the authors' position. The autoimmune book lines out a diet to resolve the inability to digest protein. I tried it and have to say, for me, it worked swimningly.
Kate

bea-mil's picture
bea-mil
Posts: 106
Joined: Jun 2010

There are as many diets and theses as many scientist we have. It is up to us to determine which one is best for us. When I thing about our ancestors’ diet I take into consideration few things:

-Our digestive system is more like that of herbivore. Initially, we were similar to creatures that evolved from animals like herbivore apes. These apes looked similar to man and walked upright with their arms and hands. They naturally foraged for food and ate roots, berries, fruits and nuts. They also lived moment to moment constantly foraging for food.

-The way our body is build, it is rather hard to imagine our ancestors running through the woods catching an animal with bare hands, killing it with bare hands and tearing apart with their bare hands. We don’t have evolutionary capabilities of a specialised carnivore to hunt. When you look at predators and carnivorous animals you can see that they have teeth designed to rip and tear. Their teeth are not designed for chewing. Animals that are designed for chewing like herbivores have flat teeth that are designed to breakdown food.

Our ancestors became hunters after their brains and intelligence grew, allowing more complex use of tools and cooperation in hunting. Before that they ate what they found: fruits, vegetables, nuts, roots, and shelfish (if they lived by the water). There has been speculation that the high levels of long chain poly-unsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs) found in fish and shellfish could have been instrumental in the evolution of the hominin larger brain. This is because the brain is mostly made up of the same LCPUFAs, specifically arachidonic acid and docosahexaenoic acid. While these can be synthesised from other lipids such as linoleic acid and α-linolenic acid which are available in other foods, the transformation is less efficient. Therefore a diet abundant in these ideal brain nutrients may have been the factor that allowed the brain to enlarge while the rest of the body remained roughly the same.

"A team of scientists from the University of Arkansas and Worcester Polytechnic Institute developed the software, called “scale-sensitive fractal analysis,” to analyze fossilized tooth surfaces through a confocal microscope, which allows three-dimensional analysis of an object. The researchers were examining the microscopic wear and tear on individual teeth of our ancestors to see what they were really munching on.
There were different species from which the latest Homo developed. The group of scientist looked at two of them: one from southern Africa and one from eastern Africa. Like us, they walked on two legs when on the ground, and their brains were a bit larger than chimpanzees'. They used to believe they were dietary specialists because they had big crests on their skulls, which would have anchored large chewing muscles, and big teeth. They thought these animals ate nuts, fruits and seeds. But when they looked at eastern African Paranthropus, it was nothing like that. The teeth had a different kind of carbon, and they were loaded with scratches, not pits. It looks like they were specializing on grass, not nuts and fruit seeds.
The researchers say this suggests that both species relied on their less preferred foods during periods of food scarcity. “If members of a species live in a seasonal environment, they can get all the soft fruit they need during the wet season” , “But come dry season, they may have to process something very hard or tough like roots and nuts in order to survive.”

Ancient humans ate different things depending on where they lived. In short, early humans' genes did not "design" their food habits. Environment did.

Bea-Mil

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

I agree that the environment designed our ancestor's food habits. And when I speak of ancestors I speak of ancestral Homo sapiens. They were omnivores, not carnivores nor herbivores. Our teeth, like theirs are not the same as those of carnivores, but are the same as modern and paleo omnivores. When I consider comparisons of the morphology of various types of mammals and their diets, I also want to consider the physiology involved. When I look at the feces of herbivores, they are all pelleted or balled, like deer and horses. There are no herbivores that produce feces similar to human feces. Carnivores and omnivores, however, do produce feces similar to our own. Additionally, most herbivores, not all, have multiple stomachs for the digestion of vegetation. The occurrence of a single stomach appears in all omnivores and carnivores. Again, I am not saying humans evolved to eat solely meat, but they did evolve as omnivores. Omnivores are animals that eat both meat and vegetation. So, comparing our morphology only to carnivores and herbivores does not address the group to which we are a member.

bea-mil's picture
bea-mil
Posts: 106
Joined: Jun 2010

Is there a such thing as a true omnivore? How do you classify animals as herbivores, carnivores, granivores, fructivores or omnivores? Are humans really omnivores?

Human beings are brought up on the notion that they are omnivores but are they really? In fact is there really a such thing in nature as a true omnivore? The way biologists distinguish between these is by an animal’s digestive system. Carnivores, herbivores, granivores and fructivores all have distinct biological characteristics.

Carnivores have sharp, pointed teeth and a short digestive tract. A carnivore’s system is biologically suited to quickly eliminate meat before it putrefies and to eliminate dietary cholesterol. Carnivores also secrete the enzyme uricase which breaks down uric acid in meat. By comparison herbivores have long digestive tracts and digestion begins in the mouth. Herbivores secrete an enzyme in the saliva that breaks down the plant cells whereas this not true of carnivores.

Granivores also have a differently designed digestive system. They have a beak and a crop. They have two stomachs, one glandular and one muscular. Their pancreas has three outlet ducts and they have lengthy intestines with tiny follicles or cavities. This kind of digestive system is designed around ingesting grains and seeds. Fructivores digestive systems are meant to derive large amount of energy from fruits and nuts. Most primates are fructivores.

The simple fact with humans is that they taught themselves to eat everything. Humans have a digestive system consistent with herbivores. Human beings are not natural meat eaters. This can be easily pointed out by their teeth. Human teeth are not meant for tearing into flesh and bone.

Humans cannot digest grass and have great difficulty digesting raw vegetables. Wheat cannot be eaten in its raw form and beans are potentially toxic if eaten raw. In fact, after 10,000 years of eating grain many people still have difficulty digesting it.

Food residues can form during digestion that can cause problems. If these residues originate from starchy foods they can form lactic acids and short-chain fatty acids that can irritate the intestinal wall and cause an upset stomach and diarrhea. Protein residues can release peptides and amino acids that can form into nitrogen compounds known as amines. Amines are pungent and toxic and unlike odorous intestinal gas from fermentation in the gut can be dangerous. The proteins from amines damage the intestinal wall and causes it to secrete protein and fluid to nourish the flora in the gut thus allowing them to leak through the intestinal wall, get into the blood and travel all the way up to the brain.

As can be seen there are many clear cut signs that human beings are not in any way true omnivores. What some call an omnivore others might call a biological garbage disposal and garbage disposals eventually get clogged up, overused and quit working.

Have you noticed that in the animal world all animals have very simple diet? The carnivores eat meat, the granivores eat grains and so on...they are basically healthy.
Only humans so called omnivores are having health problems (generally speaking).

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

Aw really, no true omnivores? You have just negated grizzly bears, skunks, rac****s, opossums, most primates and humans. I know they exist. I’ve seen all of these. I even embarrassed myself and posed the question to my wildlife biologist husband. Yes, there are true omnivores and we are them. Sorry, I cannot agree that our digestive system is closer to herbivores than to carnivores therefore we are, by default, herbivores. That’s like saying by default I drive a pickup truck because there are only compacts and pickups and no SUVs.

I realize that once someone has bought into a specific diet whether for religious reasons, societal reasons, or by what they believe to be accurate science, it becomes a very emotional issue. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been reamed for saying that eating sugar as a cancer survivor is not a good idea. But we owe it to ourselves to look at all the science with an open mind.

http://www.biology-online.org/articles/humans-omnivores.html

bea-mil's picture
bea-mil
Posts: 106
Joined: Jun 2010

What I was trying to say is that from anatomy point of view there is no such thing like omnivore, through the evolution though some of the carnivores became so called omnivores.

The bear is one of the perfect examples. They, like other carnivores can trace their pedigree back to the miacids, small, snouted, weasel-like animals that lived 50 million years ago. After a period of almost exclusively eating meat, they became omnivores for reasons that are yet to be explained. The giant panda departed the furthest from a strictly carnivorous diet, and until recently they were thought to be strict vegetarians...I’m not going to dispute what happen through the evolution... and most importantly if the evolution went in a good direction. You were reaching deep to our ancestors for some prove (to eat meat or not to eat) and I had followed you.

I simply think that since we are not carnivores by nature...maybe we shouldn’t include any meat in our diet? There must be something wrong that we- humans are doing since we are the most sick in the whole animal world.

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

I know that we could debate the diet thing to death, and probably not come to any agreement. I would encourage you to read the book I mentioned "Lights Out" by T.S. Wiley. It is entirely based on research that has been conducted at the National Institute of Health and her input as a journalist and background in anthropology. It contains some amazing insights into artificial light, sleep, hormones, neurotransmitters, diet, and exercise.
I look at our more recent human history and accept that cancer is a modern disease. Our grandparents rarely had to deal with this disease, and they ate plenty of animal protein and even lard. Our world is different now, with artificial fats, commercially raised meats and veggies, and many new toxins. When I look at this from a paleontological perspective (what I studied in grad school), it makes complete sense to me. When there is a change in an organism's environment, it is the individuals with the greater genetic variablility that survive and the ones with less are less adapted to their environment and are at risk of death. Humans have affected the global environment radically in the last century, and many species are genetically not able to adjust to changes this rapid. When you look at the number of extinctions in the last 100 years, this indicates that the changes humans are making to the environment are as fast as only the most catastrophic events in the Earth's history.
Doctors blame the genes in people who get cancer, for not performing properly. I see it differently. I would have been perfectly healthy if I'd lived 100 years earlier. Those same genes that would have thrived 100 years ago, however, are not well adapted to today's environment. Therefore, natural selection is selecting against me. It's not personal, it's nature. There are plenty of folks wandering around out there being exposed to toxins and eating non-nutritious and toxic food, and they are fine. They have the genes that allow them to live like that. I don't. So, I work as hard as I can to duplicate the lifestyle of my grandparents.

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

B12 helps formation of red blood cells and maintaining of central nervous system. Vitamin found in --
. Fish
. Poultry
. Meat
. Dairy

RDA of B12 per day is 2.4 mcg (ex; polluck 3.68, Cod 1.05, salmon 3.05, etc.)

Per China Study - pg 230-232 (parts quoted from the book)
Plant foods have dramatically more antioxidants, fiber and minerals than animal foods. In fact, animal foods are almost completely devoid of several of these nutrients. Animal foods,m on other hand, have much more cholesterol and fat. They have slightly more protein than plant foods, along with more B12 and Vit D, although the vit D is largely due to artificial fortification from milk. Since nutrients are primarily responsible for the healthful effects of foods and because of these major differences in nutrient composition between animal and plant based foods, isn't it therefore, reasonable to assume that we should expect to see distinctly different effects on our bodies depending on which variety of foods we consume?

By definition, for a food chemical to be an essential nutrient, it must meet two requirements:

. the chemical is necessary for healthy human functioning
. the chemical must be something our bodies cannot make on their own, and therefore, must be obtained from an outside source.

One example of a chemical that is not essential is cholesterol, a component of animal-based food that is nonexistent in plant based food. While cholesterol is essential for health, our bodies can make all that we require; so we do not need to consume any in food. Therefore, not an essential nutrient.

There are four nutrients which animal based foods have that plant based foods, for the most part, do not ---

cholesterol
Vit A
Vit D
B12

Three are non-essential nutrients. Cholesterol (discussed above) is made by our bodies naturally. Vit A can be readily made by our bodies from beta-carotene and vit D can be readily made by our bodies simply by exposing our skin to about 15 minutes of sunshine each day. Both of these vitamins are toxic.

Vit B12 is more problematic. B12 is made by microorganisms found in the soil and by microorganisms in the intestines of animals, including our own. The amount made in our intestines is not adequately absorbed, so it is recomme3nded that we consume B12 in food. Research has convincingly shown that plants grown in healthy soil that has a good concentration of Vit B12 will readily absorb this nutrient. However, plants grown in "lifeless" soil (non-0rganic) may be deficient in Vib B12. In the US, most of our agriculture takes place on relatively lifeless soil, decimated from years of unnatural pesticide, herbicide and fertilizer use. Plants grown in this soil and sold in our grocery stores lack B12. In addition, we live in such a sanitized world that we rarely come into direct contact with the soil-borne microorganisms that product B12. At one point in our history, we got B12 from vegetables that hadn't been scoured of all soil. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that modern Americans who eat highly cleansed plant products and no animal products are unlikely to get enough vit B12.

If you do not eat any animal products for three years or more, or are pregnant or breastfeeding, you should consider taking a small B12 supplement on occasion, or going to the doc annually to check your blood levels of b12 and homocysteine. Likewise, if you never get sunshine exposure, especially during the winter months, you might want to take a Vit D supplement.

I call these supplements "separation from nature pills" because a health y diet of fresh, organic plant-based foods grown in rich soil and a lifestyle that regularly takes you outdoors is the best answer to these issues. Returning to our natural way of life, in the small way provides innumerable other benefits as well.

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

Tethys, What I'm reading, if I stick with my normal fish (mainly Wild fish such as Salmon) a few times per week, you're telling me this will increase my B12...per the RDA? I'm not a VEGAN as still eat fish and eggs on occasion.

Trying to wrap my arms around all this insight...very interesting if nothing else!!

Hugs,
Jan

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

Jan,
Yes, the fish and eggs should give you adequate vitamin B12 to help keep you healthy. It might be interesting to see if you don't eat any animal protein for a few days, do you feel a bit better after you eat it? This is an indication that you need it. My naturopath says that the vegetarian patients who she convinces to include eggs in their diets a few days a week, feel good after eating the eggs and not as good after a few days. Vitamin B12, I have learned, is so essential to a whole slew of processes in our bodies. The book I mentioned before, "Autoimmune: The Cause and The Cure" presents research that indicates the inability to digest proteins properly leads to vitamin B12 deficiency, which leads to vitamin D deficiency, elevated homocystines, and a whole breakdown of various systems in our bodies, all linked to vitamin B12 deficiency. The author believes the reason women are more prone to autoimmune than men is because of the B12 deficiency that occurs during preganacy. She also believes that vegetarianism, due to the lack of B12, also predisposes people to autoimmune.
I'm actually working with my naturopath and the author of the book to get to the bottom of supplemental vitamin D. The author believes it is detrimental, my naturopath believes it is essential. So, the jury is out, but the questions and research continues. Right now, I'm still taking mine. The downfall to getting all of our vitamin D from sunlight is that if we bathe within 72 hours of receiving the sunlight, we interrupt the process that incorporated the vitamin D into our system. That is why my naturopath says that our daily wash should be just "pits and parts" and every few days we should have a full blown bath.

jazzy1's picture
jazzy1
Posts: 1387
Joined: Mar 2010

One thing about eggs, have B12 and vit D...see below listing with 2 eggs as serving size....

Potassium - 168 mg
Phosphorus - 207 mg
Calcium - 87 mg
Magnesium - 15 mg
Iron - 1.46 mg
Sodium - 342 mg
Manganese - 0.027 mg
Zinc - 1.22 mg
Copper - 0.017 mg
Selenium - 27.4 mcg
Vitamin C - 0.2 mg
Vitamin B1 (thiamine) - 0.063 mg
Vitamin B2 (riboflavin) - 0.533 mg
Niacin - 0.096 mg
Pantothenic Acid - 1.229 mg
Vitamin B6 - 0.144 mg
Folate - 37 mcg
Vitamin B12 - 0.94 mcg*****
Vitamin A - 642 IU
Vitamin E - 1.33 mg
Vitamin K - 4.9 mcg
Vitamin D - 59 IU*****
Contains some other vitamins in small amounts.

You posted "vegetarian patients who she convinces to include eggs in their diets a few days a week, feel good after eating the eggs and NOT AS GOOD AFTER A FEW DAYS...?? Is this what you wished to convey...feel worse later?

You've convinced me to purchase the Autoimmune book as I do have osteoarthritis and know this will be of great help for my aches and pains...more side affects from my chemo and external radiation.

I'm a huge advocate for Vitamin D...check out the link www.grassroots.com...wonderful information. We simply cannot get enough of this vitamin during winter months, and if you look at ratings for less sunshine in the northern US population....more disease. Let me know what you find during your journey with this new research. Never read or heard about bathing within 72 hrs. after being in sunlight...where was this published?

You ask how I feel with only vegies for a few days, then add fish or eggs? Yes I do feel a bit sluggish, in fact, my body does crave some type of protein to keep my energy level up, even with my organic whey twice per day.

One interesting side note, my mother in law who's 87 yrs eats whatever falls before her...meat, fish, bologna, butter, eggs, mush, etc, etc, Her doc does blood work on her every month and her B12 has been very low for a long time. Doc put her on a monthly B12 shot which seems to be helping and without it, she's sluggish, showing low iron. Interesting as she eats so much fish, poultry, meat and dairy. Note, she does take quite a few meds for everything from high blood pressure to cholesterol....thinking these meds with all the side affects challenge her proper daily vitamin levels.

Hugs,
Jan

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

Jan,
Yes that is what I was eluding to. If you eat animal protein only occasionally, you may find you feel better after eating it and not as good after not eating it for a few days. It is possible, according to the author of the autoimmune book that your gandmother's medications are interfering with her gut and therefore her ability to digest protein and extract vitamin B12.
I will have to ask my naturopath about the 72 hours not bathing issue. She presented that to a group of us who went on a 5 day retreat last fall for women thriving with cancer.
Kate

RoseyR
Posts: 462
Joined: Feb 2011

Thanks again for riveting information, Tethys.

I agree with your naturopath that we bathe far too often in this nation ("cleanliness is next to Godliness" is an old mantra that Europeans laugh at) and although I showered most of my adult life every day or every OTHER day--and shampooed nearly that often--it's curoius how, instinctively, after starting chemo I did instead what your naturopath recommends. I had also read, of course, how toxic our flouridated showers are--and the steam from them that we inhale--and didn't want to subject my body to it nearly as often.

The ONLY question I have re autoimmune disease among vegan cultures is this one: If India has a high rate of diabetes, it has--according to Dr. D Servan Screiber--a far lower incidence of cancer and Alzheimer's, which he attributes, correctly or not, to the vast intake of turmeric/curcumin.

Would be curious to hear this author's response to his claims.

Best,
Rosey

RoseyR
Posts: 462
Joined: Feb 2011

Another question I have about this fascinating theory (that even cancer may be an autoimmune disease) is this: If its origin is vested in Vitamin B-12 deficiency that in turn is prompted by pregancy (hence more autoimmune disease in women than men), what do we do with the fact that uterine cancer--and even breast, for that matter--occur in highest rates among women who have NOT borne children? "Nulliparity" again and again shows up as a status strongly associated with rates of gynecological cancers.

In raising this question, I'm hardly dismissing the possible link between B-12 deficiency and autoimmune disease. Just the association with pregnancy.

And by the way: My OWN B-12 status as a childless woman was about 320 when at my own insistence, I had a neurologist test it before starting chemo. (Had read that neuropathy is more likely when you start chemo with low B-12 levels.) Normal in an adult is 200-800 but even my integrative doctor said, "You do NOT want to start chemo at less than 600." (Did my renowned Cancer Treatment Center ever test my B-12 levels before rushing to administer chemo? Of course not!)

Finally: I can't help wonder if low B-12 status (which runs in my family) also explains the MS-like symptoms I eperienced in my early thirties (total loss of sight in one eye--regained, thankfully, in about six weeks) and an episode involving spasms in my upper leg ten years ago. (The MRI was, according to one neurologist, "borderline" i suggesting it could be MS--a notoriously hard disease to diagnose. I resolved these symptoms, which I endured for a few months, believe it or not, with eight capsules of ginger a day; it took just a few days. And thankfully, I've been incredibly "healthy" most of my life, seldom eve catching many colds or flus.

But I suspect you're on to something here, Tethys.

I will look into this book.

Best,
Rosey

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

The MS would clearly be linked to the author's theory, as MS is an autoimmune condition. With regard to your observation that certain cancers are more prevelant in childless women; it's true that one would think that a childless woman would not have had the B12 deficiency experienced with pregnancy and should therefore be less prone. I can't answer that directly, but I do think it is difficult to put a finger on one specific variable that leads to cancer for all of us. I think cancer can result from a variety of issues, just as I cited in another post that genetically I am predisposed due to stress and inflammation, not to mention the BRCA1 mutation. So, it is possible that the childless women are more prone through a different pathway than those who have children.

Tethys41's picture
Tethys41
Posts: 1053
Joined: Sep 2010

Here are two obscenely long reviews citing the flaws in The China Study.

http://rawfoodsos.com/2010/07/07/the-china-study-fact-or-fallac/
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/cancer/the-china-study-vs-the-china-study/

Fayard's picture
Fayard
Posts: 343
Joined: May 2011

Very interesting input.
I do eat mostly plant based food; however, I do also eat wild fish and shrimp, fish 1 to 2 times per week, and shrimp twice a month.

Thank you!

kkstef's picture
kkstef
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2008

Mary Ann

This book had been on my reading list. I know Claudia and someone else recommended it. A great book....I finally read it a couple of months ago...wish I had read it a long time ago! Very compelling. The author was also mentioned in the Forks not Knives book.

I am thinking Chester is headed for the hills!

Best to you!

Karen

JoAnnDK
Posts: 276
Joined: Jun 2011

I am sitting here looking at my pathology report which clearly says "UPSC" and "hormone positive". I cannot believe Mary Ann and I are the only people with this pathology.

Unless "hormone sensitive" has another meaning....

Rewriter's picture
Rewriter
Posts: 494
Joined: Dec 2009

You might find some good information by Googling "Is uterine papillary serous carcinoma hormone positive?" One of two of the dozens of articles I found did say that MOST cases of UPSC were NOT hormone positive, which does leave room for a few cases where UPSC does respond to estrogen.

california_artist
Posts: 850
Joined: Jan 2009

another more common uterine cancer cells, which are hormone positive. With mixed histology, a lab report will the read hormone positive with the word predominantly of say some percent is hormone positive.

This is just the first article I found. Seems the manner in which it is evaluated can over estimate the ER positive component.

Summary: Uterine papillary serous carcinoma (UPSC), an aggressive histologic variant of endometrial cancer, is particularly resistant to cytotoxic chemotherapy. In reviewing a group of patients treated with cisplatin, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide, we were surprised to find that 90% of specimens tested by biochemical analysis were positive for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), or both. To further study receptor content and localization, we performed immunocytochemical analysis (ICA) on 29 archival UPSC specimens. In ER studies, three specimens were unevaluable because of inadequate internal controls; of the remaining 26, only two were ER positive, showing weak, focal staining. In PR studies, 18 samples had adequate controls, and all tumor specimens were receptor negative. Corresponding biochemical ER data were available for 11 cases, of which 10 were ER positive. ICA, however, showed all 10 to be negative. Biochemical PR data were available for seven samples: Six were positive. All six biochemically positive PR specimens were PR negative when analyzed by ICA. Biochemical assays for ER and PR may overestimate positivity as a result of contamination with normal tissue or the presence of receptor-positive typical endometrial adenocarcinoma in tumors of mixed histology. ICA may eliminate this problem, but it has technical limitations, especially when used for archival tissue analysis. Because urinary papillary serous carcinoma appears to be a receptor-negative tumor, further evaluation of hormonal therapy is not likely to be beneficial.

==End article

However, as knowledge can change with further research, let's say someone didn't think this report was all there was to say, and decided that result could be changed, deciding to further look into why and how it might change, the up to the minute attitude could in fact be in a state of flux. I love it when things change for the better. Hormone sensitivity would change everything for those of us with UPSC. Will look some more, as last time I investigated this hormone thing was over three years ago. Don't you just love it when people don't simply accept that things are unchangeable, and go looking for further truth, or to change the unchangeable?

Do you realize what this would do to current treatment if it were true? Holy Toledo! To be able to attack this on a less lethal level with hormone therapy, as is currently done when a woman would like to have children if the cancer is discovered on a woman in childbearing years if she chooses. That would turn things around.

That article keeps on rattling around in my head. I go to do something else and then come back.

What if the truth of the matter is that UPSC is truly positive to bio chemical agents, hormones, and so tests positive for hormone sensitivity to bio chemical agents, but does not have those same eR/pr receptors accept immunocytochemical concoctions, which is the current standard treatment? That would be a huge variant. I wish I had chosen research in my college days.

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

My pathology report said same as JoAnn. Mixed pathology and receptor positive

california_artist
Posts: 850
Joined: Jan 2009

JoAnn's didn't mention that her report said mixed histology. That was something I mentioned that is often the case with UPSC, in that there are other types of cancer cells present and those can be hormone sensitive.

I was questioning whether UPSC itself could be hormone sensitive to bio logic agents.

Still snowing by you.

Today was a lovely day here in Portland. Took a drive out to the Columbia Gorge. Absolutely beautiful.

Back to the mixed histology thing. If it is mixed, why don't they give us progesterone, as unopposed estrogen is thought to be the problem. When I was waiting for my surgery, which was a long wait, two months, I used bio-identical? progesterone cream, which is not the artificial progestin, and my bleeding stopped. My onc told me to stop using it so I did.

I had some liver issues and progesterone can affect clotting I think. You can look it up if it interests you.

Oh, well, this year I'm focusing on my liver and painting. What are you planning for the coming year?

culka's picture
culka
Posts: 158
Joined: Oct 2009

Don't even mention that S-word. Last weekend about foot, yesterday few inches, today it is continue. I hope everybody like my measurement. I'm strictly metric system girl.

What is my plan for this year? Who caress about cancer. A few years ago I read on raw food web about Anastasia, recluse from Siberia and now, time is right, I'm reading books about her. Author is Vladimir Megre, all series have 9 of them.
Main idea: every family should have family domain, size 1 hectare, which is about 2.5 acres. That size of property is enough to make you efficient and you can make your own garden of Eden. Till now I did clearly understand why I bought acreage less then a year after cancer news. Now I know, to build our own domain and trust me we will.
Check your library, printed version I have from there and e-book is in laptop.

About your liver. Epsom salt and liver flush is my remedy. Even coffee enemas working like liver flush. Comparing picture on web with my own experience, it is, I saw that.

For everybody:
I'm so sad about Diane news and so scare for myself. Bet like everybody else. Wish everybody with recurrence to be back in NED soon.
About The China study and meat consumption. Meat is still meat, no matter if it is organic or with other label. Our body needs enzyme to digest it and we need same enzymes to identify cancer cells for our immune system. And if Mr. Campbell said no more than 10% animal product, why we even think about 80% plant base and 20% meat (should be animal base, include milk, eggs....). Just simply don't go over 10% and you will be on safe side.
In rural China people eat about 61 grams of protein from any source and from this number only 10% is from animal base . Whole 6 grams of meat proteins. I'm not an expert, but this should be enough even for B12.

Subscribe with RSS
About Cancer Society

The content on this site is for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Do not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting with a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult your healthcare provider with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your condition. Use of this online service is subject to the disclaimer and the terms and conditions.

Copyright 2000-2014 © Cancer Survivors Network