Connect with us

Health

A Surprising & Lesser Known Way To Prevent Multiple Cancers

Published

on

Looking for a reason to exercise?  How does cancer prevention and treatment sound?

advertisement - learn more

It’s well known that exercise is essential in the treatment of heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity. But now, scientific research is indicating that being physically active is key to a lifestyle that may prevent and even help treat many forms of cancer. Exercise may be a side-effect free alternative to suffering the ravages of cancer.

It’s been known for some time that exercise may play an important role in preventing three types of cancer: colon, breast, and endometrial. More current research swells that number to over 13. Let’s take a look at some of that research and the new study that expands exercise’s potential to stave off cancer.

Take note that most of the research to date does not prove that exercise mitigates cancer risk entirely, but it does indicate a strong associational link.

The Anti-Cancer Potential of Exercise

Colon Cancer

According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), “Colon cancer is one of the most extensively studied cancers in relation to physical activity.”

advertisement - learn more

The NCI reports on numerous studies indicating cancer prevention. Here are two of the most significant:

A 2009 meta-analysis found that those who are the most physically active had a 24% lower risk of colon cancer than people who are least active. In 2016, a pooled analysis from 12 U.S. and European prospective, cohort studies found a 16% risk reduction for those most active over those least active.

Breast Cancer

The NCI reports that “many studies show that physically active women have a lower risk of breast cancer than inactive women.”

For instance, in a 2013 meta-analysis of 31 prospective studies, “the average breast cancer risk reduction…was 12%.”

Endometrial Cancer

The NCI states: “Many studies have examined the relationship between physical activity and the risk of endometrial cancer…”

In 2015, a systematic review of physical activity and endometrial cancer (31 studies) found a 20% cancer reduction in those women most physically active.

New Research: A Massive Pooling Study

Most recently, for the first time ever, a massive new study was published online by JAMA Internal Medicine indicating that exercise is associated with lowering the risk of 13 cancers. Twenty-six cancers were studied. The research, a meta-analysis, included 1.4 million subjects, including 186,932 cancers over the course of 11 years. The surprising findings were as follows:

  • Esophageal cancer, a 42% lower risk
  • Liver cancer, a 27% lower risk
  • Lung cancer, a 26% lower risk
  • Kidney cancer, a 23% lower risk
  • Stomach cancer of the cardia (top portion of the stomach), a 22% lower risk
  • Endometrial cancer, a 21% lower risk
  • Myeloid leukemia, a 20% lower risk
  • Myeloma, a 17% lower risk
  • Colon cancer, a 16% lower risk
  • Head and neck cancer, a 15% lower risk
  • Rectal cancer, a 13% lower risk
  • Bladder cancer, a 13% lower risk
  • Breast cancer, a 10% lower risk

The study stands as a significant breakthrough in our scientific understanding of the relationship between cancer and exercise.

A study co-author, Alpa V. Patel, Ph.D., from the American Cancer Society, put the results this way:

For years, we’ve had substantial evidence supporting a role for physical activity in three leading cancers: colon, breast, and endometrial cancers, which together account for nearly one in four cancers in the United States. This study linking physical activity to 10 additional cancers shows its impact may be even more relevant, and that physical activity has far reaching value for cancer prevention.

Since nearly 51% of people in the U.S. do not meet minimum physical activity requirements, the authors concluded that their “findings support promoting physical activity as a key component of population-wide cancer prevention and control efforts.”

Caveat: The study also found an increase in the occurrence of prostate cancer (5%) and malignant melanoma (27%). The authors indicated that the increase in melanoma occurred in regions of the U.S. with higher levels of UV radiation. They stressed the importance of taking proper precautions. Prostate cancer increases may be due to screening bias. Healthy men are more likely to have health exams.

Takeaway: Regular aerobic exercise can have a profound impact on your cancer susceptibility.

cancer-treatmentExercise and Cancer Survival

Besides lowering the risk of cancer, exercise also shows promise as a means of helping cancer survivors remain cancer-free. The research shows that exercise or overall physical activity can positively affect known aspects of cancer survival.

Weight Gain

For a cancer survivor, both reduced physical activity and the effects of cancer treatment can lead to weight gain, which itself is linked to worse cancer survival rates. A 2012 meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials found that physical activity was successful in reducing body weight and BMI in cancer survivors.

Quality of Life

Studies have shown that exercise interventions with cancer survivors had positive effects on quality of life issues such as self-esteem, body image, emotional stability, sleep, anxiety, fatigue, pain, sex, and overall social functioning. Other studies have found that physical activity reduces fatigue and depression and improves physical, social, and mental health.

Recurrence, Progression, and Survival

Physical activity after cancer diagnosis has been linked to better outcomes in specific cancers:

  • Breast Cancer: 40 -50% lower risk of cancer recurrence
  • Colorectal Cancer: 31% lower death rate
  • Prostate Cancer: limited evidence, but one study found a 61% lower death rate in those that exercised at least three hours per week.

What We Still Need to Know

New research is being performed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Dr. Lee Jones, who directs the Cardio-Oncology Research Program, and his team are attempting to learn how exercise may mitigate the cardiovascular side effects of treatment, as well as prevent cancer and cancer recurrence. It has been historically assumed that cancer patients are unable to participate in exercise programs. Jones’ research is looking at two paradigm shifting areas:

  1. Mitigating the negative impact of chemotherapy and radiation on cancer patients. Jones is finding that the debilitating effects of cancer therapy can be improved in people who participate in structured exercise programs
  2. Looking at the potential of exercise as an anti-cancer “drug” that would be prescribed to patients similarly to any other cancer drug.

Christine M. Friedenreich, PhD, an expert on physical activity and cancer risk with Alberta Health Services, says that much more needs to be known about exercise and cancer prevention. Some question for future inquiry include:

  • Can resistance training also mitigate cancer susceptibility?
  • What is the type, intensity, and amount of exercise needed to reduce cancer risk?
  • How physically active at various times of life does one have to be to reduce risk?
  • Does exercise benefit those with genetic susceptibility to cancer?
  • Does physical activity prevent cancer or does physical inactivity cause cancer?

The hope is that, soon it will be possible to provide exact exercise prescriptions to individuals that can help prevent cancer, decrease recurrence, and foster greater survivability.

Conclusion

Given current scientific knowledge, it may be best to adopt a moderate to rigorous aerobic exercise program to help reduce your chances of developing specific cancers.

If you already have received a cancer diagnosis, speak to your oncologist about the role exercise can play in your recovery.

 

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Investigation Shows The MMR Vaccine Was Approved Based On Small Studies Showing Disturbing Results

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A FOIA request by Del Bigtree reveals that the 8 studies supporting the release of the MMR vaccine were only 6 weeks long, used only 800 children, and led to damaging respiratory and gastrointestinal illnesses to many of the children.

  • Reflect On:

    Are we ready to collectively deal with the implications of ongoing revelations of industry malfeasance with regards to vaccines that for some may require a shift in long-held beliefs?

Amidst a rash of efforts to bring forward mandatory vaccination in pockets of the United States is the recent move in New York City to declare a public health emergency Tuesday over a measles outbreak and order mandatory vaccinations in one neighborhood for people who may have been exposed to the virus.

Mayor Bill de Blasio announced the unusual order to address what he said was a measles “crisis” in Brooklyn’s Williamsburg section, where more than 250 people have gotten measles since September. The order applies to anyone living, working or going to school in four zip codes in the neighborhood. The declaration requires all unvaccinated people who may have been exposed to the virus to get the vaccine, including children over 6 months old. People who ignore the order could be fined $1,000.

Challenging Assumptions

This kind of invasive move gives rise to several serious questions, including challenging many of the assumptions that are necessarily made to justify such a move.

Assumption #1: People who may have been infected with the measles should get vaccinated immediately. De Blasio wants people who may have been infected with the measles to get vaccinated. The assumption here is that the vaccine would actually help someone who has the virus by preventing them from getting the measles or preventing them from spreading it to others. But this just doesn’t stand to reason. If someone is already infected, getting a measles vaccine will not prevent the outbreak. That’s not what a vaccine is designed for. And while the person is going through the 2-week period it takes for the vaccine to take hold, it’s quite possible that this will weaken the immune response to the actual measles infection the person has. Quarantining people suspected of being infected would be the sensible response, not vaccinating. If they happen to have the measles, no problem. Once they recover they will then be immune for life.

Assumption #2: The MMR Vaccine Can Create Herd Immunity. There is an article in the Huffington post entitled ‘I’m No Anti-Vaxxer, But the Measles Vaccine Can’t Prevent Outbreaks,’ in which Dr. Gregory Poland, who strongly advocates for vaccines, notes that outbreaks are often initiated and spread by people who have been fully vaccinated against the measles–over 50% in the case of a 2011 outbreak in Quebec. How is this possible? While this Quebec outbreak happened within a community that supposedly had achieved herd-immunity status of over 95% vaccinated, the facts are, as the article notes, that “9 per cent of children having two doses of the vaccine, as public health authorities now recommend, will have lost their immunity after just seven and a half years. As more time passes, more lose their immunity.” Therefore, herd immunity for measles is simply impossible to achieve with this vaccine.

advertisement - learn more

Assumption #3: The MMR Vaccine, in de Blasio’s words, is ‘safe, effective, and life-saving.’ The claim that the MMR vaccine is ‘life-saving’ does not stand up to simple statistics, as we detail in our article ‘Statistics Show The MMR Vaccine Kills More People Than The Measles Does.’ Whether it is effective, we have already seen that it is incapable of creating herd immunity, wanes over time, does not work at all for some people, and in some of the latest outbreaks the majority of people infected were fully vaccinated. Is it safe? This is the important question we cover in the next section.

The Studies That Stand Behind The Approval Of the MMR Vaccine

The pharmaceutical industry, as well as governmental regulatory bodies like the CDC and the FDA, assure the public that they take the safety of vaccines seriously, and that there is irrefutable science behind the notion that vaccines are safe in terms of the studies that their approval is based on.

However, a Freedom of Information Act request by Del Bigtree has revealed absolutely startling information about the studies that supported the approval of the MMR vaccines that have been injected into our children. To begin with, only 8 studies were conducted and the total combined number of children participating in the studies was only a little over 800! Furthermore, the studies only recorded symptoms for the first 6 weeks after the vaccines were given, unlike many other drug studies that follow symptoms for 5 years or more. And finally, the study revealed serious side-effects in those receiving the vaccine, including a highly significant number of participants who suffered upper respiratory illness and gastrointestinal illness, which has been linked to autism.

In our latest episode of The Collective Evolution Show on CETV, Joe, Arjun and I discussed New York’s mandatory vaccination order as well as Del Bigtree’s analysis of the MMR studies he received and the reason that Big Pharma not only does not want to do proper, large-scale studies on the safety of vaccines, but they also want to try to prevent other researchers like Dr. Christopher Exley from doing so as well.

You can watch the full episode of The Collective Evolution Show where we talk about this subject in more detail here.

You can go here to see the full episode of ‘The Highwire’ where Del Bigtree breaks down the MMR studies in question.

The Takeaway

The veils of illusion that have been masking the truth are lifting as our consciousness awakens. Transparency is coming, though how long it takes will depend on our continued efforts to dig for and spread the truth far and wide.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Merck’s Julie Gerberding Wins Industry ‘Woman Of The Year’ Award For Putting Profits Ahead Of Human Health

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Julie Gerberding, the Healthcare Businesswomen’s Association 'Woman of the Year,' is a prime example of someone who has gone through the revolving door between government regulatory agencies and the corporations they are supposed to be regulating.

  • Reflect On:

    It is becoming clear that our authorities in government and business alike are making decisions purely for their own interests, in utter disregard for human safety and well-being. How does this realization play a role in our awakening?

If you are not already clear about how the Corporatocracy that we live in is able to consistently serve their own power and wealth interests at the expense of our heath, well-being and prosperity, then the case of Julie Gerberding should provide some excellent insight. Her career path makes her the poster child for people who want to succeed in the world by embracing the corrupt, deceitful system that is currently in place.

Here is the blueprint: first, become an expert in a very specific area through a good old fashioned Western education. Use the talent and intelligence you have been blessed with to move up the ranks in your chosen industry to gain a position of power within the highest government agency in your field. Work in close collaboration with the corporations you are supposed to be the watchdogs for, and display a particular talent to get away with murder, not only deflecting obvious conflicts of interest and preventing them from materializing into lawsuits, but also demonstrating a highly developed ability–and willingness–to garner public trust around the safety and effectiveness of the products being pushed by the corporations you are colluding with.

Julie Gerberding

Julie Gerberding completed her internship and residency in internal medicine at UCSF, where she also served as Chief Medical Resident before completing her fellowship in Clinical Pharmacology and Infectious Diseases. She earned an M.P.H. degree at the University of California, Berkeley in 1990.

Before becoming CDC Director and ATSDR Administrator, Gerberding was Acting Deputy Director of the National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID). She joined CDC in 1998 as Director of the Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, NCID, where she developed CDC’s patient safety initiatives and other programs to prevent infections, antimicrobial resistance, and medical errors in healthcare settings.

But it is perhaps her talent in knowing how to speak with quiet authority, and a persona that people felt they could trust, that not only helped her rise up in the ranks of the government’s regulatory bodies, but also made giants of the corporatocracy take notice and treat her as one of their own. Knowing how to appeal to people emotionally, with eloquence and persuasion, is something you cannot force, nor can you teach it. Some people just have that power. What they decide to do with it is another matter.

Less than a year after she resigned from her CDC post in in January 2009, she was hired as president of Merck’s vaccine division. Now we can look at the low-hanging fruit and remark that during her tenure at the CDC, Merck became the manufacturer of 14 of the 17 vaccines ‘recommended’ for children by the CDC, and 9 of the 10 vaccines ‘recommended’ for adults by the CDC. The conflict of interest here is beyond obvious, and one would be reasonable to assume that this appointment, which garnered over $5 million in stock options alone, amounted to payback for favors done to Merck while head of the CDC.

advertisement - learn more

But I believe Merck saw genuine value in the type of leadership Gerberding brought to the table: a cold and calculating devotion to the bottom line, covered over by a veneer of compassion-like-symptoms and a trustworthy tone of authority. In the pharmaceutical industry, these qualities are gold.

CNN Interview

During our bi-weekly broadcast on CETV, Joe Martino and I had a discussion about the ‘revolving door’ between government regulatory agencies and the corporations they serve. We look at statistics that would literally make your head spin about the hordes of people who have enjoyed the freedom to move from working on one side of the aisle to the other. Typically this pattern serves those willing to ‘play ball’ with corporate powers in their capacity as government regulators, to then be rewarded by the wealthy corporations with cushy jobs and board appointments.

In the case of Julie Gerberding, we dove deep into a CNN interview Gerberding did with Sanjay Gupta while she was at the CDC around the time that the Hannah Poling case was making headlines and getting widespread public attention. (Hannah Poling was the first child to receive money from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program for her vaccine injury; in essence, the government conceded that vaccines caused Hannah Poling’s autism). Big Pharma seemed to be in need of a reassuring voice directed at the public to prevent a massive exodus of parents from the growing vaccine schedules being lined up for their children.

Joe and I talked about the various techniques Gerberding uses to deftly move the conversation from a very vague ‘admission’ of what the government had conceded to assurances that all caring parents should continue to have their children vaccinated.

By some accounts, Julie Gerberding had a significant impact at this time in preventing a complete loss in confidence in vaccine safety, which would have been a major disaster for the pharmaceutical industry. Makes you wonder why she didn’t win the Healthcare Businesswomen’s Association ‘Woman of the Year’ award sooner.

The Takeaway

As difficult as it is for some of us to accept, the belief that those in authority have humanity’s best interests at heart has long run its course. It is an important part of our collective evolution that we realize we cannot count on our elected officials, corporate leaders, bureaucrats or other authority figures to make decisions that are in our best interests, because by and large we are seeing that they are only making decisions in their own interests, for the expansion and consolidation of their power. As individuals we must seek to become sovereigns, and as sovereigns to link together and awaken to our collective power to consciously create the type of world we really want to live in.

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Legal Challenge Against Forced Vaccination Filed in New York City

Published

on

On April 15, 2019, a legal challenge was filed in the New York State Trial Court by Robert Krakow, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Patricia Finn against the New York City Department of Health and Human Hygiene for their forced Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccination. The legal team asked for a temporary restraining order against the mandate that the Judge will likely review and provide an ex parte decision. Children’s Health Defense is supporting these efforts.

Last week, Children’s Health Defense reported that the NYC Commissioner of Health declared a public health emergency, ordering all people who live, work or reside in four Brooklyn zip codes to be vaccinated with the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine. Non-compliance with the order is a misdemeanor subject to criminal and civil fines, including imprisonment. Only those with documented immunity, medical contraindications or infants under six months are exempt from the vaccine mandate.

READ THE PETITION
READ THE MEMORANDUM OF LAW
READ THE AFFIRMATION

Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.

advertisement - learn more

Help Support Collective Evolution

The demand for Collective Evolution's content is bigger than ever, except ad agencies and social media keep cutting our revenues. This is making it hard for us to continue.

In order to stay truly independent, we need your help. We are not going to put up paywalls on this website, as we want to get our info out far and wide. For as little as $3 a month, you can help keep CE alive!

SUPPORT CE HERE!

cards

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod