Doc Loco Posted May 3, 2011 Share Posted May 3, 2011 (edited) The Johanna Budwig Cancer Diet LINK TO DR BUDWIG Alternative CancerFree Lifestyle Website The Johanna Budwig Diet was developed by German biochemist and physicist Dr. Johanna Budwig in the 1950’s. Dr. Budwig discovered the blood of those with cancer always had gross deficiencies of phosphatides and lipoproteins, while healthy persons did not have this deficiency. This deficiency resulted in reduced oxygen levels in the cells. Normal cells only become cancer cells when they have these reduced oxygen levels. [see: Cancer-Stress Link] Dr. Johanna Budwig then developed a simple diet to re-oxygenate the body’s cells. She discovered the saturated fats we were using in our Western diets did not contain pi-electrons. Pi-electrons are like spark-plugs for our cells to help them to “breathe” properly. Pi-electrons allow the body’s cells to assimilate and transport oxygen, and to detoxify cellular waste. Dr. Johanna Budwig discovered the best source of Pi-electrons was found in two unsaturated fatty acids of flaxseed oil. These unsaturated fatty acids (linolenic and linoleic), not only re-oxygenate the body’s cells, they also repair and restore the lipid membranes of all cells in the body, and they do this by replenishing the loss of critically needed phosphatides and lipoproteins that are always – as stated earlier - grossly deficient in cancer patients. But there was one problem. How could Dr. Johanna Budwig get the unsaturated fatty acids of the flaxseed oil into the cells of cancer patients? Only water-soluble solutions can enter cells, and an oil, however fantastic it is, is not water-soluble and therefore cannot enter our cells. After many years of clinical research, Dr. Budwig found that by combining flaxseed oil with the sulphurated amino acids found in cottage cheese – the flaxseed oil would become water-soluble, and immediately available for use by the body’s cells. What has also recently become apparent is just how important the cottage cheese is in the Johanna Budwig Diet. Not only does the cottage cheese make the flaxseed oil water soluble to re-oxygenate the body’s cells to prevent cancer mutations, it contains two ingredients that fight cancer in the best possible way. The first ingredient is sulphur. Sulphur helps to detoxify the body and prevent the growth of cancer cells. According to the National Cancer Institute sulphur compounds make cells vulnerable to the stress created by products of cell division. Because cancer cells divide very quickly, they generate more stressors than most normal cells. Thus, cancer cells are damaged by the presence of sulphur compounds to a much greater extent than normal cells. The other important ingredient in the whey (the liquid part) of cottage cheese, is dextrorotatory lactic acid. This positive form of lactic acid – when given in high doses - normalizes the cell’s pH to healthy levels of around 7.4pH. Normalizing pH of the body’s cells is critical in cancer recovery. [see: pH and Cancer] Secondly, normalising the pH balance also stimulates adrenaline production, preventing a build up of glucose in cells. Preventing this glucose build-up in cells is critical in cancer recovery, as viral-bacterial-yeast-like fungus feed on and ferment glucose, breaking the cell’s Krebs (oxygen) cycle, causing cells to mutate into cancer cells. Thirdly, dextrorotatory lactic acid of the whey in cottage cheese neutralizes the toxic, levorotatory lactic acid of the tumour into a non-toxic, racemic form. This is of utmost importance, as it removes the stimulus for an increase in the cell division rate. Fourthly, the whey of cottage cheese has powerful anti-microbial and anti-viral properties. Lactoferrin and lactoferricin in whey inhibits bacteria, yeast, fungi, and parasitic protozoa. As normal cells lose their ability to exchange oxygen due to the presence of viral-bacterial-yeast-like fungus - causing them to mutate into cancer cells - killing these microbes is also paramount in cancer recovery. Finally, the whey of cottage cheese stimulates the growth of various cells of the immune defense system including lymphocytes, macrophages/monocytes, humoral immune response, and antibody response. The Johanna Budwig Diet is considered by alternative cancer authorities as the premier anti-cancer diet in the world today – and they are not alone. So impressive is the Johanna Budwig Diet’s ability to treat cancer, even aggressive cancers like brain cancer, the two active components of the Johanna Budwig Diet – flaxseed oil and the whey of cottage cheese – are currently being studied by the US government to determine their anti-cancer benefits, with excellent results being shown to date, and with the flaxseed oil even reaching clinical trial stage. National Cancer Institute - Clinical Trials on Flaxseed Oil The National Cancer Institute, a division of the US Government, is currently conducting clinical trials using flaxseed oil on stage 1 & stage 2 breast cancer patients. The objectives of the clinical trial are: 1. Compare the effect of flaxseed and placebo vs anastrozole vs flaxseed and anastrozole vs placebo on breast tumor growth as measured by changes in tumor biomarkers from initial tumor biopsy to tumor resection in postmenopausal women with newly diagnosed, estrogen receptor-positive, stage I or II breast cancer. 2. Compare rates of proliferation (i.e., Ki-67) and apoptosis (i.e., caspase) in tumor biopsy and resection specimens from these patients. 3. Compare growth factor and signaling pathway protein expression (i.e., ERa, ERß, PgR, HER2, IGF1, IGFIR) in tumor biopsy and resection specimens from these patients. 4. Compare antibody-screen-derived recurrence scores in tumor biopsy and resection specimens from these patients. 5. Compare changes in steroid (i.e., estradiol, estrone, SHBG, DHEAS, testosterone, and androstenedione) and growth hormone (i.e., IGF1, IGFBP3) profiles from initial tumor biopsy to tumor resection in these patients. US Department of Agriculture finds Whey Prevents Cancer A team of Agricultural Research Service funded investigators from the US Department of Agriculture — Reza Hakkak, Martin J.J. Ronis, and J. Craig Rowlands — led by neuroendocrinologist and nutritionist Thomas M. Badger, has found that a modified whey protein, which Badger developed, prevents breast cancer in some laboratory rats. It's an important medical discovery, considering that 180,000 U.S. women develop breast cancer each year—and 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer over her lifetime. Whey is notably present in the liquid component of cottage cheese. The researchers studied an animal model of breast cancer. Over 3 years, female Sprague Dawley rats were fed one of two diets—one containing casein, the major protein found in milk, the other containing processed whey protein, which is found in the watery liquid that separates from milk during cheese making. The researchers have filed for a patent on the modified whey protein. "One hundred percent of the rats fed the casein diet developed mammary tumors, but only about 50 percent of the whey-fed rats developed tumors," says Badger, who is based at the Arkansas Children's Nutrition Center in Little Rock. "In addition, it took longer for the mammary tumors to develop in the whey-fed rats, and they had fewer tumors." "This data is extremely important," he says, "because it demonstrates that in the animal model most used to study human breast cancer, a common dietary factor reduces the incidence of developing such tumors." [united States Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service] I find it odd that flaxseed and whey are studied apart from each other, yet the combination of the two are not. It is the synergistic effect of the fresh compounds mixed together and tested in the fresh state allowing no decomposition which should be researched in a double blind format as a possible and viable cure for many forms of cancer. Why has no one in researching for cures for cancer done this heavy lifting in over 60 years??? The Johanna Budwig Cancer Diet - Easy To Prepare The Johanna Budwig Diet is not only considered by experts as the best cancer diet in the world today, it is also one of the simplest and best tasting! Below is a 5 minute video that demonstrates just how easy it is to prepare the Johanna Budwig Diet for those with cancer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZgLvg1ixhk&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZgLvg1ixhk&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object> Use flaxseed oil (ideally) from the refrigerated section of your health food store. Refrigerate and check the expiration date to make sure it has not expired. Do not use High Lignum flaxseed oil. Mix two tablespoons of cottage cheese to one tablespoon of oil. Prepare the amount you are consuming at one time so it is mixed fresh each time. Start slowly with the oil, maybe just once a day and work their way up letting the body adjust. The flaxseed oil and the cottage cheese must be thoroughly mixed at a low speed, using a Hand (Wand) Blender. Blend to a creamy texture with no flaxseed oil remaining. Consume the mixture immediately after preparation. You can flavor the mixture each day (if you like) adding nuts (pecans, pine nuts, almonds or walnuts - not peanuts), banana, organic cocoa, shredded coconut, fresh pineapple, blueberries, raspberries, or cinnamon. US National Institute of Health Finds Flaxseed Halts Cancer Growth A new US study suggests that flaxseed, which is rich in omega 3 fatty acids and lignans, can stop prostate cancer tumours from growing. The study was presented at the 43rd annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Chicago on Saturday by researchers from Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. The researchers think that flaxseed, which has similar properties to sesame seed, probably interrupts the chain of events that eventually makes cells multiply out of control and become a tumour. Dr Wendy Demark-Wahnefried, a researcher in Duke's School of Nursing and lead investigator on the study said that: "Our previous studies in animals and in humans had shown a correlation between flaxseed supplementation and slowed tumor growth, but the participants in those studies had taken flaxseed in conjunction with a low-fat diet." However, she explained that: "For this study, we demonstrated that it is flaxseed that primarily offers the protective benefit." The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, and researchers at the University of Michigan and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill also took part. Demark-Wahnefried and colleagues recruited 161 men who were due to have surgery for prostate cancer (prostatectomy: where all or part of the prostate gland is removed). The patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups. One group took 30 grams of flaxseed a day for an average of 30 days before they had the operation (the flaxseed only group). Another group did the same but also followed a low-fat diet (20 per cent or less of their calories from fat). A third group did not take the flaxseed and only followed a low-fat diet, while the fourth group, a control, had none of the interventions. After the surgery, the researchers examined the tumour cells under a microscope to assess how quickly they had multiplied. They then compared the men who had only flaxseed, with or without following a low-fat diet, with the men in the other two groups: no intervention and low-fat diet only. They found that the slowest rate of tumour growth occurred in the two flaxseed supplemented groups. Demark-Wahnefried said: "The results showed that the men who took just flaxseed as well as those who took flaxseed combined with a low-fat diet did the best, indicating that it is the flaxseed which is making the difference." The flaxseed supplement was given in ground form because in the whole form the seed coat is hard and undigestible. The patients took the flaxseed either in drinks, sprinkled on food, or with yogurt. Flaxseed is thought to stop the growth and spread of cancer cells. This could be because the omega-3 fatty acids it contains interferes with the ability of cancer cells to cling onto other body cells, said Demark-Wahnefried. The lignans it contains may also have antiangiogenic properties, the ability to stop the blood supply to the tumour. Demark-Wahnefried said that they were "excited that this study showed that flaxseed is safe and associated with a protective effect on prostate cancer". In next phase of their research the team hopes to study the preventative properties of flaxseed, and its effect on patients with recurrent prostate tumours. As well as being antiangiogenic, the lignans in flaxseed, one of the richest sources of these fibre-related compounds, are thought to interfere with or prevent cell division and affect hormones. They are antimitotic, affect androgen metabolism and have estrogenic effects, said Demark-Wahnefried. It has been 61 years since Dr Budwig's discovery...why so long do the ACS & NCI wait to test this? Again: I find it odd that flaxseed and whey are studied apart from each other and found to be beneficial alone, yet the combination of the two are not studied at all. It is the synergistic effect of the fresh compounds mixed together and tested in the fresh state allowing no decomposition which should be researched in a double blind format as a possible and viable cure for many forms of cancer. Why has no one in researching for cures for cancer done this heavy lifting in over 60 years??? Could it simply be that there is no money to be made if simple cheap cures are proven to be valuable? Edited May 4, 2011 by Doc Loco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Loco Posted May 3, 2011 Author Share Posted May 3, 2011 There are many alternative treatments for cancer that have never been 'researched or developed and approved' due to lack of profitability for the research sponser: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3x-Uj4yAMY&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3x-Uj4yAMY&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object> To say that 'everything possible is being done to find a cure for cancer' is not the truth. If you know your Bible: 3,000 years ago King Nebuchadeser of Babylon was told by Daniel the prophet to "go forth and eat grass like a cow" to cure his cancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Loco Posted May 4, 2011 Author Share Posted May 4, 2011 (edited) Dr. Mark, on 03 May 2011 - 09:48 PM, said: "Part of the deal with being a doc is, you can never stop learning. Never. You HAVE to...medicine advances literally on a daily basis. You read, you go to seminars, you have to take tests, exams...it's an evolution. If there was any scientific basis to believe that this diet would cure cancer, I would be all over it. As it is, the most I can say, based on the science, is that it will decrease your risk of cancer. That's all. Any physician that says it can cure cancer, well to them I'd say: "Prove it. Do the double-blind controlled studies. Show me." Testimonials are not proof. They are just stories. Laetril had tons of stories, too. I repeat, this diet has been around for most of the last century, and still...just stories. No studies. No real, reproducible scientific proof." -Doc (Dr. Mark) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This never was a personal attack on anyone here, rather a critique of a system gone wrong and unwilling to test some very simple food based alternatives as effective cancer fighters. Selective redundant research to reinforce the status quo of radiation therapy is a reptant waste of the resources generated thru public fundraising. It's like you take your Harley to the dealer to fix a problem, and the dealer keeps changing out the wrong part and charging you and the bike is still not right ad infinitum until the service guy says you know, we've approved a technique whereby we radiate your motorcycle to make it run better. Now the treatment is extremely expensive, so we hope for your sake, your machine is still under warranty! The problem as I see it is that no one affiliated with the mainstream medical profession whom are able to get any of the research dollars are willing to do the testing within the main stream medical field and to even broach the subject (as I just did) brings on unprecedented denial of responsibility, claims of 'we are doing all we can', "it would be a waste of time", quackery! etcetera ad infinitum. Bullshit! There are plenty of research dollars funding redundant cancer research which could in all good conscience be applied to the top hundred all natural alternative treatments. If testing could be done on the top hundred out of the thousands of alternative treatments some very good valuable info would be found. Perhaps an Alternative Cancer Society of Natural Healing should begin competing for legitimacy and public fundraising. The public wants this research done ~ that can not be denied! The public in large measure is supplying the funding for this research, yet the research everyone wants is never approved. If doctors cared to any great extent about anything other than the surgery, chemo and pharmacuetical money machine, then why is there not a concerted effort made amoung health professionals to get the research done? No one is willing to fund the research. Why? Why? Why? There are less invasive treatments less harmful methods of exposing cancer tumors to oxygeon that destroys only the cancer cells rather than poisoning the whole organism with radiation contamination. It is only a matter of time until we look back at chemotherapy as some sort of medieval aberation (a panicked departure from what is right) institutionalized and perpetuated by the monied interests in control. The future will look back at radiation therapy in the same light as electroshock therapy used in the mental health field for so long before being proven as a technique suitable to barbaric torture. All of the might and power of research is slanted to reinforce the status quo bringing nothing new that would complicate or threaten the present medical money machine worldview. It is not in the financial interests of those who hold the gold. Remember the golden rule: "Those who own the gold make the rules." Much of this gold comes from everyday people who want every stone upturned in the search for better cures ~ Let those who donate the $$$ decide the focus of new research. I find it odd that flaxseed and whey are studied apart from each other, both are found to be benign beneficial alone, yet the combination of the two are not researched at all. It is the synergistic effect of the fresh compounds mixed together and tested in the fresh state allowing no decomposition which should be researched in a double blind format as a possible and viable cure for many forms of cancer. Why has no one in researching for cures for cancer done this heavy lifting in over 60 years??? Edited May 4, 2011 by Doc Loco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Mark Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 But Doc, they are studied... sometimes at Duke, even. Quote from Dr. Charles Horton of Duke University Hospital: "We have a duty to examine and study each new cancer-cure proposal, no matter how unreasonable it may seem." The money isn't all from 'Big Pharma'...actually, most research is done not at drug labs, but at university hospitals and research facilities and at the National Institutes of Heath, which recieve NO money from drug companies. The idea that there is something so simple that could cure such a horrific disease is attractive and seductive...but it's not realistic. That would be like saying that we are driving down the interstate and not seeing the median. Let me give you a mechanical analogy...this is like those 'miracle mileage' devices that you see advertised sometimes in the back of magazines..."Improves mileage 300%', and it's usually due to some simple thing that 'mainstream scientists' have amazingly overlooked, but will make your car get 75mpg or whatever. It'd sure be great...but if you test them, they just don't hold water...those miracle inventors in their garages are bound by the same laws of physics as the physical chemists and physicists in multimillion dollar labs who are desperately trying to find a way to stretch a gallon of gas.(click here for miracle gas mileage device tests) As far as a conspiracy to suppress or deny effective alternative treatments...no such conspiracy has ever been exposed. Yet many patients—especially those whom standard medicine cannot cure—embrace the notion that a small but dedicated band of rebels is defying the medical establishment by making natural cures available. And desperate patients may find it more comfortable to believe that cures are being suppressed than to feel that their situation is hopeless. The conspiracy charge has two common scenarios. In one, opposition is based on fear of competition. In the other, a cure discovered within the establishment is suppressed. Neither of these situations makes sense. The medical establishment is not a single entity. The health-care industry includes physicians, nurses, other health professionals, insurance companies, private consumer organizations, universities, government agencies (such as the FDA), hospitals, HMOs, other managed-care organizations, professional organizations (such as the AMA), pharmaceutical companies, and other private corporations. These groups may have competing interests; and, within each group, individual members may also have competing interests, and many have no financial stake in patient care. Some private physicians get paid for each patient they see, but others do not. Most who work for HMOs or other managed-care organizations are either salaried or capitated (receiving a fixed monthly sum per patient not per service). Those who pursue an academic career may be salaried and/or obtain money from research grants. For physicians on fixed incomes, more patients means more work, but not more money. Some physicians dedicate their career to public health and do not see patients at all. And if an expensive cancer treatment could be replaced by something much less costly, insurance companies would embrace it. Believe me...Insurance companies and drug companies are squarely in opposite corners. Insurance companies would LOVE this. They would never again have to pay for surgery, chemo, radiation and expensive drugs. The medical professionals most likely to know about a new cancer cure would be those in academic medicine and research. New potential treatments are usually discovered by basic scientists who do laboratory research on the underlying mechanisms of disease. Their findings then suggest possible treatment strategies for those diseases. Drug companies or research institutes such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) or the National Cancer Institute (NCI), then fund clinical research to see whether the potential new treatment works—first on animals and then on humans. The final arbiter of such new treatments is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which decides whether new treatments are safe and effective for their intended purposes. What about scientists who discover new treatments? If they can demonstrate effectiveness, publishing their data will bring them fame and fortune. The benefits could include research grants, academic promotion, enhanced research facilities, speaking invitations, honors, awards, and other career opportunities. Even scientists who are selfish and greedy would have much to gain by making their information public—and so would the institutions in which they work. The prestige involved in being the institution that found the cure for cancer...immeasurable. What about drug companies? Won't they simply abandon a new drug that threatens their existing drugs? This scenario is also far-fetched. Drug companies are continuously looking for new drugs, because existing drugs have patents that will run out. Also, any company that can market a new drug that is effective against cancer will come out billions of dollars ahead, even if existing drugs become obsolete. Some conspiracy theorists claim that drug companies ignore "natural" substances that cannot be patented and therefore cannot be profitable. However, if a natural substance is found useful, drug companies can develop related chemicals that are more effective. Here is an example: we know now that a major cause of male infertility is a problem called 'DNA fragmentation' which is breaks in the sequencing of DNA contained in sperm. This causes an inability of the newly formed embryo to proceed with cell division past the third day of conception when the male genome kicks in. The problem can be corrected with supplementation by certain antioxidants and minerals, Co-Q, selenium, zinc, and so forth. The drug companies jumped on it and now have compounded vitamins that supply this exact need. You can do the same thing yourself by going down to the local Wal Mart and buying them, but they are selling like hotcakes. Go figure. All it is, is a certain list of vitamins and minerals, easily found online or at your reproductive endocrinologist, but the drug companies are making money on it anyway. Same with a cancer cure...they could refine the active ingredients, and sell them. Even if a short-sighted drug company executive decided to suppress a new drug because it was too effective, the scientists involved might still go public with the information, for the general good if for no other reason. Among the dozens of people who have inside knowledge, someone is likely to have a conscience. Besides....the need for drug company support could be eliminated by obtaining a grant from the National Cancer Institute. Also, if the treatment really worked, other researchers would eventually be able to demonstrate to the world that the treatment did in fact cure cancer. This has never been done for any supposedly "suppressed" cancer cure. Conspiracy theorists have claimed that if a simple and inexpensive replacement for today's treatments were found tomorrow, all U.S. medical schools would teeter on the verge of bankruptcy, because cancer treatment is such an important part of their income. This assertion has several flaws: A "simple and inexpensive" replacement for today's treatments is very unlikely. Cancer is not a single disease, but group of more than 100 different types. No single treatment has proven effective for every cancer, and no such "magic bullet" is likely to be discovered in the near future. Even if a magic bullet could be found, it would not be available soon and extensive testing would be required before standard treatments could be ethically abandoned in its favor. The necessary research would take many years, giving hospitals and medical schools time to adapt. Physicians and researchers would not be put out of work by any such innovation. If the new treatment results in an oversupply of cancer specialists, fewer physicians-in-training would choose this specialty, and some oncologists would retrain for another type of practice. Some researchers might need to change the focus of their research, but their basic skills should make that simple. (Besides...my job is in no danger. Believe me, in the ER, most of my business comes from people doing stupid things to themselves or each other, and there is NO shortage of them.) Anyway...I can understand the desire for a simple, effective cure for cancer. We all want it. My nephew, Reed, died a month ago from Ewing's Sarcoma, a particularly nasty form of childhood bone cancer. He fought it for four years before it killed him. If there was any alternative treatment that truly could have saved him, I would have been in favor of it. He died in incredible pain, screaming when MG and his mom moved him to change his sheets or his pajamas. If there was anything...ANYTHING...that would have saved him and my family that torture, we would have done it. My sister researched innumerable alternative cures, trying to find something, anything....and that is typical when patients go terminal. Some alternative treatments, like Budwig's diet are innocuous. Others are downright dangerous, and some require you use their treatment in preference to accepted medical practices or they "won't work"..and that is just criminal. Again...if only it were that simple. Fuck cancer. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Resort Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Mark Posted May 4, 2011 Share Posted May 4, 2011 OK, so some alternative therapies are better than others....LMAO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.