Topic: Breast Cancer risk linked to long-term abx?
Truthfinder
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8512
posted
I ran across this doing some cancer research for a friend.....
Perhaps there have been some more recent studies done..... ? This is from 2004.
If there is a correlation between the risk of breast cancer and the use of long-term abx, it certainly makes me wonder if perhaps it is the proliferation of fungi from taking abx - and not the abx drugs themselves - that is the problem.... and this would certainly tie into Dr. Simoncini's theory that cancer is caused by forms of Candida (see recent thread about Simoncini) ......
Long-term Use of Antibiotics Possibly Linked with Increased Risk of Breast Cancer February 2004 (Study was published in the February 18th edition of JAMA)
The article is fairly short.... here's the conclusion:
quote:"While the implications for clinical practice will not be clear until additional studies are conducted, the results of this study support the continued need for prudent long-term use of antibiotics and the need for further studies of the association between antibiotic use and cancer risk."
-------------------- Tracy .... Prayers for the Lyme Community - every day at 6 p.m. Pacific Time and 9 p.m. Eastern Time � just take a few moments to say a prayer wherever you are�. Posts: 2966 | From Colorado | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
CaliforniaLyme
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 7136
posted
Yes as a matter of fact the EXACT same researcher did a further study and found the following- absolutely nothing definitive in that regard but suggestion, possibility- both of which could be bias- or not!! ********************************************
1: Cancer Causes Control. 2006 Apr;17(3):307-13.
Association between antibiotic use prior to breast cancer diagnosis and breast tumour characteristics (United States).
Velicer CM, Heckbert SR, Rutter C, Lampe JW, Malone K.Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, 98195, USA. [email protected]
OBJECTIVE: To determine if breast tumour characteristics varied by antibiotic use prior to diagnosis in 2,266 women with primary, invasive breast cancer.
METHODS: Subjects were women enrolled at Group Health Cooperative, a health plan in western Washington state, for at least 1 year and diagnosed with breast cancer between 1 January 1993 and 30 June 2001. Case status, tumour features, and patient characteristics were ascertained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry and Group Health Cooperative electronic files. Prescription information was obtained from electronic pharmacy records.
RESULTS: Compared to non-use, antibiotic use prior to breast cancer diagnosis was not associated with a less favourable tumour profile (as measured by cancer stage, grade, and size), oestrogen receptor negative tumours, or lobular histology, after controlling for age and length of enrollment. Nonetheless, while not achieving statistical significance, our results suggest that antibiotic use may be associated with less favourable breast tumour features.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found no association between antibiotic use and breast tumour features and no dose-response gradient. However, the results are consistent with the possibility that antibiotic use may increase the risk of less favourable tumours. Larger studies are required to further investigate this hypothesis.
PMID: 16489538
-------------------- There is no wealth but life. -John Ruskin
All truth goes through 3 stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer Posts: 5639 | From Aptos CA USA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
CaliforniaLyme
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 7136
posted
And this was the conclusion of an Australian cohort investigating the issue- QUOTE:
It is most likely that antibiotic exposure represents a confounding factor rather than a causation for breast cancer ************************************* 1:Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005 Jul;92(2):163-7.
Antibiotic exposure and breast cancer in New Zealand.
Didham RC, Reith DM, McConnell DW, Harrison KS. Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners (RNZCGP) Research Unit, Department of General Practice, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, , Dunedin, New Zealand. [email protected]
Aims To investigate the hypothesis that use of antibiotics is related to subsequent development of breast cancer and also to apply this theory to other cancer types. Materials and methods A nested case-control study was conducted, using data linkage between the RNZCGP Research Unit database and the New Zealand Hospital Separation Diagnosis database. Cancer related hospital admissions were identified between 1998 and 2002, and prior antibiotic exposure in these patients was then found.Results A total of 6678 patients were identified with a newly diagnosed cancer in this time period. A slightly increased odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) for breast cancer was seen with penicillin, 1.07 (1.02-1.13). Penicillin was also associated with an increased OR with lung and respiratory cancer, 1.13 (1.06-1.21), and skin neoplasms, 1.05 (1.02-1.08). Significant associations were seen between macrolides and leukaemia, 1.15 (1.01-1.30), lung and respiratory cancers, 1.23 (1.10-1.38) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, 1.26 (1.02-1.55). Tetracyclines were significantly associated with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, 1.12 (1.01-1.24). Cephalosporins only showed a significant association with leukaemia, 1.35 (1.06-1.71), sulphonamides with colorectal cancers, 1.12 (1.01-1.24), and 'other' antibiotic classes with bladder and renal cancers, 1.34 (1.07-1.67).
Conclusions It is most likely that antibiotic exposure represents a confounding factor rather than a causation for breast cancer and other cancer types.
PMID: 15986126
-------------------- There is no wealth but life. -John Ruskin
All truth goes through 3 stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer Posts: 5639 | From Aptos CA USA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
CaliforniaLyme
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 7136
posted
We have had 1 support group member die of breast cancer and Relapsing Fever- and what was notable about her is that she was NOT in treatment and had not been-she was NOt on antibiotics- she had gone off due to pain med dependency issues- and it was during that later untreated period in which she developed cancer. She was not on longterm abx like the rest of us!!
-------------------- There is no wealth but life. -John Ruskin
All truth goes through 3 stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer Posts: 5639 | From Aptos CA USA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Truthfinder
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8512
posted
Thanks, Sarah, but I'm not sure either study is applicable....
In the first study you posted, they were NOT looking at `risk' of developing breast cancer, but of `breast tumor characteristics' - a bit different than the original study.
In the second study you posted, they looked at `antibiotic exposure', not necessarily long-term abx exposure. Again, not quite the same thing.
The original study looked at past exposure to long-term abx, not necessarily the development of cancer while taking abx (or at least that was my understanding).
I still wonder about the `fungus connection' here.......
-------------------- Tracy .... Prayers for the Lyme Community - every day at 6 p.m. Pacific Time and 9 p.m. Eastern Time � just take a few moments to say a prayer wherever you are�. Posts: 2966 | From Colorado | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
map1131
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 2022
posted
Could it be the bacteria that the abx is suppose to be attacking that is causing the cancer?
Three years ago, my mammogram found unknown suspectious place in one of my breast compared the mammogram the year before.
They brought me back in to further mammo that one area in one breast. They twisted and turned that breast every which way trying to get better mammo xray on that breast spot.
Looked at it again in 6 mths and it hadn't changed and was determined it probably is not cancer.
It appeared after I did hormones including female hormones that were babely non-existant in my extensive hormone urine test. I did they hormones for almost a year prior to this suspect mammogram.
Who knows? Was it the hormones? The three years of abx? Was it a large group of spirokettes hanging out deep in my breast?
My immune system seems to have it walled off. Muscle testing during that period, my body said leave it alone. It's not cancer. But I won't take hormones again. But then again never say never.
Pam
-------------------- "Never, never, never, never, never give up" Winston Churchill Posts: 6478 | From Louisville, Ky | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had always hoped that with all the things going on with me I would avoid cancer. So far I have, but my LLMD told me I am at high risk for it because of the poor condition of my body. I think I just would not be able to fight it off.
-------------------- "His faithful love endures forever." Psalm 136 Posts: 189 | From MN | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged |
kelmo
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8797
posted
My opinion, is this disease brings about an imbalance in our hormones. How many of us have issues with that?!
With the balance in favor of estrogen, leaving us progresterone deficient (stress on the body always uses progesterone reserves), we have an increased chance of cancer.
Estrogen builds new cells, progesterone takes away dead cells. As these dead cells pile up, they create tumors and cysts. Some of these become a great place to harbor disease.
Anything that kills bacteria is going to leave dead stuff behind.
The best defense is to make sure your hormones are balanced with a good bio-identical progesterone cream.
Posts: 2903 | From AZ | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
TerryK
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 8552
posted
Fungus is an opportunistic infection. Perhaps a fungal infection brings down the immune system which then allows cancer to develop?
I think it's possible that many of us have fungal infections because our immune systems are depressed. ABX can cause candida and in fact it's hard NOT to get candida when taking abx. This would lower the immune system too.
Truthfinder, this is about leukemia and fungus rather than breast cancer and fungus so I hope it's OK to post it in this thread.
Maybe getting rid of a fungal infection cured these children of leukemia because it improved their immune system?
I recently spoke with a nurse who was diagnosed, as an adult, with leukemia. She endured the chemotherapy regimen her doctors prescribed, only to suffer from a secondary fungal infection during that time. The intensity and duration of the antifungal treatment rivaled that of the chemotherapy. At any rate, she recovered from both afflictions and went back to work.
Later, as a result of another workup -- which included a liver biopsy -- for some returning symptoms she had, bad news was again brought up. "Your leukemia has returned," her oncologist told her, and he proceeded to lay out the next line of chemotherapy drugs she would have to take.
Given that her chances of dying were much higher now that her cancer had returned, she opted to get a second opinion on her biopsy before proceeding with her next round of chemotherapy. She took her tissue sample to another hospital, and what she was told there was absolutely stunning: "You don't have leukemia," remarked the pathologist, "what you have is a fungal infection!"
The scenario that her doctors figured was that her previous fungal infection had returned -- a total possibility. But for this nurse, more questions were raised. She thought, for example, "If they diagnosed my fungal infection as leukemia this time, is it possible that they were wrong the FIRST time? Was my leukemia really a fungal infection to begin with, and was my so-called 'secondary' fungal infection I had earlier really a full-blown manifestation of what originally might have looked like leukemia?"
Of course, she would never get answers to these questions, for to fully investigate thoughts like these might imply that a diagnostic error was made on the part of either her initial oncologist or pathologist.
Nevertheless, an intense six months later -- some of it spent in the hospital -- of high-dose, powerful antifungals finally achieved a cure for her fungal infection. Today, she is again back at work, exuding more than ever with compassion for her patients. It really struck me when she told me where she works, because in her case, her occupation may very well relate to what she had suffered over the past two years. It turns out that she works at a bone-marrow transplant center, and is in daily contact with children with leukemia.
Now, the thought of her "acquiring" something as grave as leukemia would almost be preposterous to some. But the temptation to scratch our heads and wonder about this is unbearable. What if she really did have a fungal infection -- and NOT leukemia -- her first time around? And if so, did she "catch" this from her precious little patients?
Fungal infections not only can be extremely contagious, but they also go hand in hand with leukemia -- every oncologist knows this. And these infections are devastating: once a child who has become a bone marrow transplant recipient gets a "secondary" fungal infection, his chances of living, despite all the antifungals in the world, are only 20%, at best.
And then the unthinkable thought arises: what if all of these children didn't even have leukemia, but rather a fungal infection, just as this nurse did? If doctors, in the 21st century, could mistake a fungal infection for leukemia in this nurse, could the same fate have fallen upon these children?
Doctors in general are not very good at diagnosing fungal infections because their medical school training is based so heavily on the role of bacteria and viruses in the area of infectious diseases. Fungi have been a forgotten foe ever since the advent of antibiotics. Once we had a drug that could kill bacteria, the interest in and the study of fungi fell to the wayside.
Laboratories display the same difficulty in diagnosing fungal infections: current tests for detecting the presence of fungi are both terribly scant and sorely antiquated.
Despite these training and technical inadequacies, there have been at least a few good reports that implicate the role of fungi in causing leukemia.
For example, in 1999 Meinolf Karthaus, MD, watched three different children with leukemia suddenly go into remission upon receiving a triple antifungal drug cocktail for their "secondary" fungal infections.(1)
Pre-dating that, Mark Bielski stated back in 1997 that leukemia, whether acute or chronic, is intimately associated with the yeast, Candida albicans. (2)
Finally, almost 50 years ago, Dr. J. Walter Wilson, in his textbook of clinical mycology, said that "it has been established that histoplasmosis and such reticuloendothelioses as leukemia, Hodgkin's disease, lymphosarcoma, and sarcoidosis are found to be coexistent much more frequently than is statistically justifiable on the basis of coincidence." (3)
Histoplasmosis is what we call an "endemic" fungal infection. It is most commonly acquired in regions surrounding the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys in the United States. One becomes ill by merely inhaling the tiny fungal spores of this fungus. (For more information on histoplasmosis and other endemic fungi, you can visit: http://www.doctorfungus.org/). Three similar reports like this over the span of 40 years should convince us to at least study the role of fungi in cancers like leukemia a little more thoroughly.
The late Milton White, MD., did exactly this. He fully believed that cancer is a "chronic, intracellular, infectious, biologically induced spore (fungus) transformation disease." (4) Using the proper isolation techniques (involving saline instead of formaldehyde as a tissue transportation medium between the operating room and the pathology lab), he was able to find fungal spores in every sample of cancer tissue he studied. His lifetime work has been routinely dismissed as nothing more than an unproven postulate.
Regardless, wouldn't you expect all of this information to make front-page headlines in every newspaper across the country, if not the world? Instead, every one of these findings was merely a brief mention -- only curious thoughts that one might entertain but never take seriously.
The fact is, if leukemia and fungal infections "co-exist" so frequently, and if an antifungal drug cocktail effectively cured at least these three children of their leukemia, then I say we put the brakes on right there. Is there a need to go any farther, except to more deeply investigate the need for antifungals in treating leukemia and not just the secondary infections that arise in the course of chemotherapy?
In his book, The Germ that Causes Cancer, author and television host Doug Kaufmann asserts that not only fungi, but also foods play a role in the etiology of cancer. He has seen children become free of their documented leukemia once the child's parents simply changed the child's diet. Kaufmann's diet is base on the widely-published problem of mycotoxin contamination of our grain foods.
Grains such as corn, wheat, barley, sorghum, and other foods such as peanuts, are commonly contaminated with cancer-causing fungal poisons, or "mycotoxins." (5,6) One of them, called aflatoxin, just happens to be the most carcinogenic substance on earth. If this is indeed a problem, Kaufmann asserts, then cereal for breakfast and soda pop for dinner may not be conducive to a cancer-free lifestyle.
A case in point: in a grain-based diet, we consume, on average, from 0.15mg to 0.5mg of aflatoxin per day. (7) Further, he states, it is not the sugar alone that is the problem in our western diet, but the fungal toxins that are found in the sugary grains. More than once has Kaufmann interviewed a caller (on his health talk show) who absolutely craved peanut butter and popcorn just prior to their diagnosis of cancer.
Fungi are such a nuisance in carbohydrate foods in particular because fungi need carbohydrates to thrive. Therefore, it is rarer to see fungal contamination problems in foods like vegetables and high-protein foods.
Kaufmann goes on further to explain how even antibiotics may play a role in the disease process. Antibiotics destroy the normal, protective gut bacteria, allowing intestinal yeast and fungi to grow unchecked. These internal, gut yeast make toxins, too. This can lead to immune suppression, symptoms of any autoimmune disease, or even cancer. "If the onset of any symptom or disease- cancer included- was preceded by a course of antibiotics," he maintains, "then look for a fungus to be at the root of your problem."
David Holland, MD Co-author, The Fungus Link, Infectious Diabetes. 20 May 2003 MediaTrition, Inc.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References: 1. Karthaus, M. Treatment of fungal infections led to leukemia remissions. Sept. 28, 1999
2. Bielski: Boyd, W. Introduction to medical science. 1937. Lea & Febiger. Philadelphia, PA.
3. Wilson, J.W. Clinical and immunological aspects of fungus diseases. 1957. Charles C. Thomas. Springfield, IL.
4. White, M.W. Medical Hypotheses. 1996;47,35-38
5. Mycotoxins: Risks in Plant, Animal, and Human Systems. The Council for Agricultural Science and Technology. Task Force Report No. 139. Jan 2003. Ames, IA.
6. Etzel, R.A. Mycotoxins. Jan 23, 2002. 387(4). Journal of the American Medical Association
7. Cheeke, P.R. Natural toxicant in feeds, forages, and poisonous plansts. 1998. Interstate Publishers, Inc. Danville, IL.
Posts: 6286 | From Oregon | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
luvs2ride
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8090
posted
I have long heard that cancer is a disease of malnutrition.
Even though many Americans are obese, they are malnurouished because of the typical American diet.
The 3 main causes of Leaky Gut Syndrome are in order:
1-Antibiotics 2-Stress 3-Bad Diet
Leaky Gut occurs when Candida Albicans (fungi) overtake the gut flora and eat holes into the mucal lining of the intestines.
Here is the American Cancer Society's information regarding the connection of diet and cancer. Keep in mind that bad diet is the 3rd cause of Leaky Gut.
I won't quote the entire article but here is their summary.
BOTTOM LINE
One third of all cancer deaths are related to diet and activity factors. Let's challenge ourselves to lose some extra pounds, to increase our physical activity, to make healthy food choices, and to look for ways to make our environments healthier places to live, work, and play.
Obviously, fungi overgrowth can be caused by longterm antibiotics. Fungi overgrowth causes damage to the gut lining allowing fungi, parasites, bacteria and partially digested food to enter the bloodstream reeking havoc on our bodies.
Seems Dr Simoncini is not so far off after all.
Luvs
-------------------- When the Power of Love overcomes the Love of Power, there will be Peace. Posts: 3038 | From america | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many of the abx that we take can cause leukopenia and neutropenia (lower the number of white blood cells and neutrophils).
I think Septra is one of the worst offenders.
Perhaps if these white blood cells stay suppressed for too long it allows cancer to grow.
I do believe I have seen a study that says doxy actually decreases cancer... sorry, can't obtain a link right now.
Posts: 211 | From NC | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
pamoisondelune
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 11846
posted
Here's another quote about the original article:
2004 Posted: 9:09 AM EST (1409 GMT)
The use of antibiotics has increased dramatically in the past decade, government figures show.
VIDEO According to a new study, heavy use of antibiotics may increase a woman's risk of developing breast cancer.
(CNN) -- Increased use of antibiotics may heighten women's risk of breast cancer, a study looking at possible connections between the two suggests.
Researchers found that women who took antibiotics for more than 500 days or who had more than 25 prescriptions in the course of a 17-year period more than doubled their risk of breast cancer compared with women who had not taken any antibiotics.
The fewer the days on antibiotics resulted in a smaller risk, the authors wrote in the study appearing in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association.
"It's as strong as any of the risk factors that we know," said Dr. Roberta Ness of the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, who is author of an editorial accompanying the study.
"To put it into perspective, the risk for developing breast cancer from hormone replacement use is about a 30 [percent] to 40 percent increase in risk. And here we're talking about a doubling in risk of those women who are using chronic antibiotics."
But researchers caution that the findings do not mean antibiotics cause breast cancer.
"These results only show that there is an association between the two," co-author Dr. Stephen Taplin of the National Cancer Institute said in a statement. "More studies must be conducted to determine whether there is indeed a direct cause-and-effect relationship."
Taking computerized pharmacy and breast cancer screening data in Washington state, researchers compared the use of some of the most frequently prescribed antibiotics by 2,266 women with breast cancer and almost 8,000 without the disease.
Why antibiotics may possibly increase breast cancer risk is still a mystery, researchers said. The conditions that necessitated the antibiotics in the first place may have put the women at higher risk. Or, researchers said, the women in the study who had never taken antibiotics might have been generally healthier overall.
Another theory suggested in the study involves the way antibiotics affect bacteria in the intestine, which may disable possible cancer-fighting properties of some foods. Other explanations involve the effect of antibiotics on the body's immune system.
The research is not the first to show an association between antibiotics and a higher risk of breast cancer, the second most deadly cancer in women. In 1999, a Finnish study of almost 10,000 women found similar results.
Authors of the new study included members from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Group Health Cooperative and University of Washington -- all in Seattle -- and the National Cancer Institute, based in Bethesda, Maryland.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the overuse of antibiotics has exploded in the past 10 years, with the public mistakenly taking the medicine for colds, flu and coughs. These types of illnesses are caused by viruses and cannot be helped with antibiotics, which fight bacterial infections.
Lead study author Dr. Christine Velicer of the Group Health Cooperative said that more research needs to be done to understand any link between breast cancer and antibiotics and that the drugs remain an important health tool.
"At this point, continued, prudent use of antibiotics and recognizing the substantial benefits that antibiotics have is an important way to go," Velicer said.
Posts: 1226 | From USA | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
sparkle7
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 10397
posted
Yes. I think it's important to be cautious.
Diet may be a causative factor but my feeling is that the massive amounts of cancer are due to environmental toxins.
I don't have the statistics but we are exposed to over 100,000 different chemicals every day.
100,000 new chemicals are being developed each year.
There are not many studies done on the cross-reactions of these chemicals.
So, to me abx are just another chemical added to the equation plus the issues of exposure to toxic molds, candida, etc.
Abx are helpful but I'm going to be cautious about long term use.
It's probably especially important if you have breast cancer (or possibly, cancer in general) in your family.
Posts: 7772 | From Northeast, again... | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged |
Truthfinder
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8512
posted
Pam, that's my biggest question, too.
In fact, there was a study done by a young woman - I think she was still a high-school student - and part of her study showed a correlation between a higher incidence of breast cancer in areas of the USA where more Lyme Disease cases are documented. That was not the thrust of her study, though - I think maybe she was looking at the MS-Lyme connection.
Does anyone remember the study I'm talking about? I know it was discussed here on the board in the last couple of years.
Faith, just remember that no ``cause'' has been demonstrated here - just a correlation. Since Lyme tends to suppress the immune system, it only makes sense to get control over the Lyme infection as a general protection of the whole organism (us).
Kelmo, you seem to have done a lot of research on the hormonal aspect of wellness. I can only assume that they made a big difference for you? Frankly, I never had positive results from bio-identical hormones, no matter how we seemed to tweak them for my particular needs. Maybe we just never got it right.
Terry, that's a fascinating article! I think it fits right in here - thanks for posting it.
I agree, Luvs....
But then I read that post that Sparkle put up about all the fungi, bacteria, viruses, heavy metals, etc. found in chemtrail residues - and some organisms had very distinct `lab-engineered' characteristics - and if we are being exposed to that kind of unavoidable garbage, then the role of poor diet and abx exposure becomes a little hazy.
And how many of us know people with very healthy lifestyles (and little or no exposure to abx) who have gotten cancer or some other nasty illness? I know a number of people who fit into that category.
We all have genetic predispositions to certain things, but I don't think that explains it all either.
As the article Pamoison put up says:
``"These results only show that there is an association between the two," co-author Dr. Stephen Taplin of the National Cancer Institute said in a statement. "More studies must be conducted to determine whether there is indeed a direct cause-and-effect relationship."
I think that's important to remember. There's no sense in trying to draw any concrete conclusions at this point.
-------------------- Tracy .... Prayers for the Lyme Community - every day at 6 p.m. Pacific Time and 9 p.m. Eastern Time � just take a few moments to say a prayer wherever you are�. Posts: 2966 | From Colorado | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
map1131
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 2022
posted
Tracy, yes I remember the high school young lady that made a connection between high MS areas and lyme areas.
I don't recall there also being a cancer relation in that research paper. Anyone have this saved in their favorites?
Pam
-------------------- "Never, never, never, never, never give up" Winston Churchill Posts: 6478 | From Louisville, Ky | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
CaliforniaLyme
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 7136
posted
HOnestly, I don't have any proof for this, but I believe Babesiosis causes breast cancer. Why? because I believe Babesiosis is frequently misdiagnosed Lupus. I frankly believe much of lupus is babesiosis.
(throw rocks gently please*)!
And lupus patients have higher rates of breast cancer. That is what I believe the connection is, I do believe there is one and I honestly believe that is it!!! I have believed that for years & years now.
The GOOD news is that Artemisia is anti-cancer and anti-Babs!!! Which is not a coincidence-!!! VERY Sincerely, And truly not crazily if you examine the pathology- Sarah
1: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007 Jun;1108:76-82. Links
Occurrence of malignancies in Hungarian patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: results from a single center.
Tarr T, Gyorfy B, Szekanecz E, Bhattoa HP, Zeher M, Szegedi G, Kiss E. Third Department of Medicine, Medical and Health Science Center, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary.
As a result of increasing life expectancy of lupus patients, malignant disorders have become major determinants of morbidity and mortality.
The objectives of this study were to analyze cancer-associated morbidity and mortality, the type of malignancies in Hungarian lupus patients, and to analyze association with immune-suppressive therapy, disease duration, and age of the patients.
Data from 860 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) patients were retrospectively analyzed in a study period between 1970 and 2004.
Results were compared to data from age- and sex-matched population obtained from the Health for All database, and also to literature data.
A total of 37 patients presented with cancer, reflecting 4.3% cancer-associated morbidity.
Patients were 47 (20-73) years old at the onset of malignancy, which appeared 13 (1-45) years later than SLE.
Cancer prevalence was the highest in the first 5-10 years of lupus. Breast cancer was the most common malignancy (n = 11) followed by gastrointestinal tumors (n = 9), cervix cancer and hematologic malignancies (n = 5 for both), bronchial cancer (n = 4), bladder, skin, and ovarian cancer (n = 1 for each). Standardized incidence ratio was the highest for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (standardized incidence ratio [SIR] 3.5, 95% CI 0.4-12.5) and cervix cancer (SIR 1.7, 95% CI 0.6-4.1). Although 76% of patients with cancer received immune-suppressive therapy besides corticosteroids, no direct correlation could be confirmed between therapy and malignancy. Out of the 164 patients that expired during the study period, 18 were cancer-related. As such the cancer-associated mortality was 11% (18/164). This peaked during the last 4 years of the study period (8/24, 33%). Lupus patients are at high risk for particular types of malignant disorders, highlighting the importance of screening measures and focused patient examination.
PMID: 17893972
-------------------- There is no wealth but life. -John Ruskin
All truth goes through 3 stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer Posts: 5639 | From Aptos CA USA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
CaliforniaLyme
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 7136
posted
!!!!! See? I know, you think I'm crazy*)! but I have believed that babesia causes cancer for a long time now... And that would explain the findings re abx too!!!
What this abstract means is that you are more likely to have chronic Babs if you have cancer predisposition going on- they feed each other- and both cancer cells & Babs get those iron rich cells going that Artemisia destroys!!!
(I'm not crazy, I swear!) This is one of my pet theories from spending years on Pubmed studying this stuff- ******************************************* 1: J Gen Microbiol. 1972 Aug;72(1):79-85.Links
Enhancement and prolongation of Babesia microti infections in mice infected with oncogenic viruses.
Cox FE, Wedderburn N. PMID: 4627209
-------------------- There is no wealth but life. -John Ruskin
All truth goes through 3 stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer Posts: 5639 | From Aptos CA USA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
map1131
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 2022
posted
I don't think you're crazy Sarah. I found this last post very interesting. I really need to go back and study the babs question on myself.
I just tested positive for mycoplasma pnuemoniae and I do not have/had anything that is upper or lower respitory related. So there are bacteria & parasites that hang out where ever they want in the body and lungs don't necessarily show sx?????
Probably should do an artemisia trail?
Pam
-------------------- "Never, never, never, never, never give up" Winston Churchill Posts: 6478 | From Louisville, Ky | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
Truthfinder
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 8512
posted
Sarah, you said: ``I have believed that babesia causes cancer for a long time now... And that would explain the findings re abx too!!!''
I don't understand why that would explain the abx findings..... could you explain.
This study shows some kind of geographical and biochemical relationship between deaths from Lyme and MS (and related diseases) and deaths from Breast Cancer. The association is a big convoluted, but it is there.
I'm not sure I understand this study very well - I THINK the study only looked at counties in the U.S. with populations over 100,000. If so, that eliminates a lot of counties.
The study was primarily about MS and Lyme (and related diseases), but it clearly includes breast cancer and there does seem to be a connection between Lyme and MS; and then a connection between MS and breast cancer.
You will have to sift through a lot of information, but here are a few key paragraphs:
quote:...... The two diseases with a suggested bacterial cause or geographic similarity to MS are Breast Cancer (Cantwell, 1998) and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS, Lou Gehrig's Disease) (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 2003).
The strong association of MS with Motor Neuron Disease (ALS) and the weaker, but significant, association with Breast Cancer, also suggest a possible common environmental, spirochetal, mechanism for these diseases. The well-known relationship between latitude and MS (Warren, 1998) is also seen in these analyses. This relationship is also statistically significant for both Breast Cancer and Motor Neuron Disease at the state and county level as well as Lyme at the county level.
Spirochetes may also act as a gateway for certain types of cancer. Because the spirochetes are so amorphous, they can mimic the body's own cells. Looking life self-material, the bacteria manage to fuse with the cell walls and from there eventually control the activities of the cell, often resulting in cancer (Mattman, 2001). The statistical correlations agree with this; the correlation between MS and breast cancer is significant.
-------------------- Tracy .... Prayers for the Lyme Community - every day at 6 p.m. Pacific Time and 9 p.m. Eastern Time � just take a few moments to say a prayer wherever you are�. Posts: 2966 | From Colorado | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic