Posters of Philippine Breast Cancer Network

The Philippines has a breast cancer epidemic

Big trees and breast cancer

Sometime in September 2013, I was brought by two sisters and a brother-in-law of mine to the North Grove Trail of the 26 sq km Calaveras Big Trees State Park in Arnold, California. Our mother had just succumbed to cancer and they brought me around before I headed back home to the Philippines.

The wonder and miracle of nature can not but occupy one's mind in the midst of these big trees. For me, it furthered my comprehension of nature's most often disregarded miraculous healing process.

Giant sequoias (also known as Sierra redwoods) are said to be the largest living things to exist on earth. Their fossil record dates back 180 million years to the age of the dinosaurs when these trees could live over 3,000 years. They grow as tall as 90 meters high and as wide as 17 meters in diameter.

Giant sequoias evolved in the presence of fire; they have not only adopted to it, but depend on it in several ways. Heat from fire causes the cones to open and release their seeds. Fire clears the ground of duff, litter and brush, so the tiny seeds can reach mineral soil and receive plenty of sunshine.

The thick bark does not burn easily and it would take a large fire with enough heat for the bark to burn. And when this happens, nature's process of healing itself takes place when a new bark grows over the burned wood.

A tree that has lived 2,000 years may have survived more than 100 fires because of their thick protective bark.

Then, in the southern Sierra Nevada east of Visalia, California is the Sequoia National Park which spans more than 1,600 sq km. This park (60 times the size of Calaveras) is famous for having five out of the ten largest trees in the world including the General Sherman tree which by volume, is the largest known living single stem tree on earth.

I couldn't help but relate a woman's reproductive health system to that of these magnificent tress, specifically breast cancer. These trees have a natural immune system that has allowed themselves to survive so many years with self-repair and self-healing mechanisms. Only by securing a safe and uncontaminated natural environment can these trees be prevented from acquiring illnesses and disease. And so too with women's health and reproductive system. 

In the 1850's, the largest tree in the North Grove was felled by ambitious speculators. Had it been allowed to grow, it may have rivaled the largest of the giant sequoias. Such destruction of nature continues to this very day in the Philippines where breast cancer is a public health epidemic.

Every woman who dies from breast cancer is said to have been robbed of 20 years of her life. This fallen tree symbolized for me the numerous unnecessary mastectomies done on women - chopping off breasts prior to chemotherapy and radiation. The incidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment has even been institutionalized by health insurance which does not support natural approaches in breast cancer treatment.

Only when government and society realize and address the real causes of the rising incidence of breast cancer - the ignored environmental and occupational risk factors of the disease, can Joyce Kilmer's famous poem then be likened to a woman. 

Freedom from Breast Cancer!

Philippine Media black out on the 25 Year Canadian Study on Mammography

There seems to be a total media silence in the Philippines on significant studies on breast cancer published by two internationally reputable medical journals. Considering that our country has a breast cancer epidemic and loud pronouncements by the Department of Health, medical organizations and various hospital based breast cancer support groups, a search on mammography in the websites of major news networks showed disheartening results.

This validates the high degree of influence of the medical-pharmaceutical industry on local media which does not only misinform but even keeps the general public ignorant on the most dreaded disease of all women.

The Lancet published in 22 October 2011 an article entitled, “Breast and cervical cancer in 187 countries between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis.” According to the article, global breast cancer incidence increased from 641,000 cases in 1980 to 1,643,000 cases in 2010, at an annual rate of increase of 3.1% and killed 425,000 women in 2010, of whom 68,000 were aged 15-49 years in developing countries. In the Philippines, 1 in 13 women will get breast cancer in her lifetime with our country registering the highest increase worldwide of 589% in a 30 year period.

Twenty eight months later, the British Medical Journal published just last 11 February 2014 a research entitled, “Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: randomized screening trial.” The research involved 89,835 participants aged 40 -59 and concluded that annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer 22% of screen detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed, representing one over-diagnosed breast cancer for every 424 women who received mammography screening in the trial. 

Following are the most recent search results on mammography from 8 selected media (online, Television and print) where the country's leading newspaper's latest was even 4 years ago written by a doctor based in Cebu. Another doctor's article on his hospital's mammography was the latest item of a TV network. The country's leading television network was about a company's upgrade of its mammogram units while another newspaper showed in its business page the acquisition of hospital while another news daily was abut a hospital's modern mammography. Only an internet based news network mentioned the Canadian Study but only in reference to having both breasts removed as having better survival. The remaining two simply had items from Reuters on how important mammography is. Note the dates of each article.

Rappler 12 February 2014 : Women diagnosed with breast cancer caused by a notorious gene have a much better survival chance if they have both breasts removed instead of one, a study said. Another study in the same journal, meanwhile, cast doubt on the value of annual mammogram screening of women aged 40 to 59. It is the latest evidence in a long-running debate about the usefulness of a costly procedure that sometimes results in over-diagnosis – the discovery (and treatment) of cancers that would never have caused symptoms or death during a woman's lifetime. 

Manila Bulletin 31 December 2013 : Women should have a mammogram – an X-ray of the breast tissue scanning for early signs of cancer -every two years between ages 50 and 74, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control. 

ABS-CBN News 16 December 2013 : Last year, Philips agreed a partnership with Abu Dhabi's new, 196-bed Burjeel Hospital to supply, install, maintain and upgrade medical equipment including MRI and CT scanners, digital mammography units and ultrasound machines.

Manila Standard Today 25 October 2013 : The latest acquisition increased Metro Pacific’s total hospital bed capacity to 2,137 beds. The hospital will construct a new four-story building, which would be completed by early 2015. The building will house the most advanced diagnostic imaging center in the province, with initially a 64-slice CT scan and digital x-ray machines, and eventually a 1.5 Tesla MRI and a digital mammography machine. 

TV5 InterAksyon News 02 October 2013 : Manila Doctors Hospital (MDH) offers the latest digital mammography services should your surgeon requests you to have one. With the digital mammography, images and results are readily available. Brightness, darkness, or contrast of photos can be adjusted and sections of an image can be magnified after the mammogram is completed, making it easier to see subtle differences between tissues. 

GMA News 19 March 2013 : In the latest installment in the mammogram debate, a new study finds that getting a mammogram every other year instead of annually did not increase the risk of advanced breast cancer in women aged 50 to 74, even in women who use hormone therapy or have dense breasts, factors that increase a woman's cancer risk. 

Philippine Star  12 May 2012 : Doctors encourage women to undergo annual mammography tests because the Philippine Cancer Society reports that breast cancer is now the leading cause of death among women.

Philippine Daily Inquirer 18 January 2010 : If the new guidelines are officially adopted, women who are younger than 50 opting to have a screening mammogram will not be covered by their health insurance.  They advocate the return to the former guidelines: annual screening starting at age 40, and starting at age 30 (or earlier) for higher risk women.

Correlating the 30 year incidence study and the 25 year research on mammography with media's indifference on the breast cancer epidemic in the Philippines, places a gigantic burden on the PBCN in its advocacy. Only by massive public awareness can this silence end. The PBCN continues to seek a staunch and fearless ally in the national government to seriously address this pressing situation.

2014 World Cancer Marketing Day

"The greatest risk of getting breast cancer tomorrow is being born today in a developing country. The greatest risk of not surviving breast cancer today is being a woman in the Philippines." - Rosa Francia Meneses, 1999 World Conference on Breast Cancer

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

The primary goal of the World Cancer Day on February 4th is the significant reduction of death and illness caused by cancer by the year 2025. Previously set to 2020, the organizers led by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) will always extend the deadline because cancer is an incurable disease.

Considering that UICC was founded 80 years ago when cancer was not yet a prevalent disease, it would be interesting to know how such an organization can possibly exist for such a long period and now come up with a most overarching goal. In the world cancer day's website, one is even asked to sign up for a “cancer free world!” 

During the 2002 World Conference on Breast Cancer in Victoria, B.C., I was accosted by a Berkeley Professor for the PBCN handouts which stated “Stop Breast Cancer!” Short of saying that I was out of my mind, he categorically stated it will never happen. The global movement for the eradication of breast cancer, of which the Philippine Breast Cancer Network is a part of, carries a patient's perspective as opposed to the medical point of view. In this regard, our advocacy is much, much bolder than that of the UICC.

The UICC will never have in its Board of Directors, well respected doctors and scientists who will not tow the line of the pharmaceutical industry. Supporters of the UICC include AMGEN, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Bayer, Novartis, Sanofi and MSD. Would anyone ever think that the UICC would ever bite the hand that feeds it? Rather, it would serve themselves to nurture a lucrative cancer market! 

Early 2012, a cancer stake-holders consultative meeting was held under the wings of the UICC. Just like the World Cancer Day which sounds and looks good, it didn't smell nice. They will forever push lifestyle and pharma but never touch on the environment.Cancer meetings that look good but smell bad!

Even the Department of Health has no standing program on cancer which is not even listed in its disease surveillance because for the DOH, cancer not a disease that needs to be seriously addressed. Looking back, all their past programs on breast cancer have failed miserably from the time it embarked 20 years ago to reduce the incidence rate of breast cancer in the country. 

All it can offer is the Medicines Access Program of DOH-NCPAM which caters to the medicinal needs of patients who cannot afford treatment for Breast Cancer Stage I-IIIA Patients through the Philippine Cancer Society. Try availing of this. Another breast cancer program to surely fail.

Then, under its Z Benefit Package, PhilHealth announced in 2012 that it would provide to its members P100,000.00 for the treatment of breast cancer (stage 0 to IIIA). In reaction to this, I warned PhilHealth of the over diagnosis and over treatment of breast cancer.  Yet now, the Pre-Authorization checklist for breast cancer is no where to be found in the website of PhilHealth! Was it scrapped just a few years after it was offered to its members? If so, why?

Patients are the major stakeholder and they must be at the center of all decision making. Women do not want to have breast cancer yet they are being led to believe that with early detection, there is a cure. So are women being made to have annual cancer causing mammograms? Prevention is knowing and avoiding identified environmental carcinogens.

The World Cancer Declaration's Target # 3 states: "To reduce exposure to cancer risk factors." If they really mean on having a world free of cancer, you do not reduce but eliminate known environmental causes of breast cancer! The incidence rate of breast cancer worldwide has nearly tripled since 1980 and will certainly be a "run away train" in the years to come. In our country, 1 in 13 Filipino women will get breast cancer.

One of the Global Advocacy Messages states, “That the success of early detection programs can be measured by a reduction in the stage of the cancer at diagnosis with earlier diagnosis associated with a reduction in the risk of dying from cancer."

It takes 5 to 10 years before the first symptoms of breast cancer are manifested. How then can there ever be early detection? So all women must undergo annual mammograms year in and year out until one day they are told that they already have breast cancer? Will all women starting at age of puberty be periodically screened for breast cancer? Will women with early diagnosis, even of the non-invasive type be made to lose their breasts and later submit to chemotherapy just to supposedly make sure she is said to be cancer-free and cured? How I wish it were as simple as that!

And now, the Philippine Medical Association (PMA) is calling for the return of local public hospitals and health centers to the control of the Department of Health (DOH) because local government units (LGUs) have failed to adequately provide quality health services to the people. The shortage of 930,000 doctors was even cited. Unfortunately, as I had earlier shown, the DOH can not or will not truly act on the cancer epidemic, except to banner pink ribbons and support pharmaceutical initiatives. The solution lies not in having so many doctors but in having lesser patients!

Yes, the World Cancer Day is one huge marketing event of the cancer industry – just like the breast cancer month every October. I would like to refer to a parable about saving babies from drowning in a river. All heroic efforts were focused downstream until one asked "who’s throwing all of these babies into the river in the first place!" To truly end breast cancer, we must look upstream and stop the cause.

On natural supplements and breast cancer

In bold prints are my comments on the newspaper article of the Oct 28th issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer  about the press conference sponsored by the PSMO (Philippine Society of Medical Oncologists) called "Dietary Supplements in Cancer Treatment."

A well-informed cancer patient is an empowered patient. But the barrage of often-conflicting information sourced from the Internet can be overwhelming, and deciding which to believe can be paralyzing.

ON THE CONTRARY, CYBER INFORMATION HAS OPENED THE DOORS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY CONFINED TO THE MEDICAL & SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY AND HAS NOW ALLOWED THE PRINCIPAL STAKEHOLDERS TO ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN SEEKING THE TRUTH! PARALYZING FOR THE MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR CANCER INDUSTRY BUT EMPOWERING FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC!

Green tea, malunggay oil, vitamin C, guyabano and even red wine are believed to have properties that can cure cancer. How true are the claims?

“I am telling you right now, guyabano is not an anti-cancer fruit,” said Dr. Ellie May Villegas, the feisty, petite vice president of the Philippine Society of Medical Oncology (PSMO).

IT MAY NOT BE A TRULY ANTI-CANCER FRUIT BUT IF IT EVEN ACTS AS A PLACEBO IN ADDRESSING NON-CANCEROUS SYMPTOMS, THEN WHY NOT? FURTHERMORE, IT CAN DO NO HARM.

“We rely only on evidence. Guyabano is not proven to kill cancer cells, and yet it is marketed as 10 times more potent than Adriamycin, a commonly used drug in chemotherapy. Adriamycin is a very potent anti-cancer drug. Why do you associate it with a fruit? They don’t even know what they’re saying.”

NOT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF GUYABANO BUT INSTEAD OF SHOOTING IT DOWN, SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH MUST BE DONE TO INVESTIGATE WHATEVER CURATIVE OR PREVENTIVE BENEFITS WHATEVER FRUIT OR HERB HAVE, NO MATTER HOW MINIMAL. BUT THEN, WHO WOULD FUND THE RESEARCH ON FRUITS, VEGETABLES AND HERBS WHEN THESE ARE WIDELY ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC WHILE DRUGS ARE NOT!

Confusion

In a press conference sponsored by PSMO called “Dietary Supplements in Cancer Treatment: Investigating the Claims,” Villegas said guyabano, also called Brazilian pawpaw, is confused with the pawpaw tree Asimina triloba (Annonaceae), known as the North American pawpaw.

The Asimina triloba fruit, which in no way resembles the guyabano, contains the natural compounds acetogenins that are proven to help regulate various types of cancers.

“When the North American pawpaw is taken with chemotherapy, patients and physicians noticed an above average amount of tumor shrinkage after the first treatment than normally expected with chemotherapy alone,” she said.

PSMO PRESIDENT Dr. Felycette Gay Lapus

Villegas was expressing concern over networking companies that profit from making bogus claims about natural cures.

CONCERN MUST NOT BE ON PROFITS OF NETWORKING COMPANIES BUT ON THE BENEFITS OF ANY SUPPLEMENT. TRUE THAT A LOT OF EXAGERATION IS DONE TO SELL THESE SUPPLEMENTS BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT BUSINESS AND MARKETING IS ALL ABOUT! EVEN SODA IS BEING ADVERTISED TO HAVE VITAMIN C!  IT MATTERS NOT IF THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY RAKES UP BILLIONS OF PROFITS FOR AS LONG AS THEIR DRUGS CAN CURE CANCER!

PSMO believes in the multidisciplinary approach: surgery, radiation, chemotherapy and, when proven safe and effective, dietary supplements to complement the treatment.

“With the proliferation of scientifically unsupported alternative cancer treatments, PSMO has established that there is a need to educate the public on how to address the cancer problem. We put together a position paper to help guide fellow oncologists, doctors and patients in making correct choices,” said PSMO president Dr. Felycette Gay Lapus.

THE NEED IS TO EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ON THE CAUSES OF BREAST CANCER AND NOT ON SURGERY, CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADIATION. THE MEDICAL APPROACH IS NOT NECESSARILY THE CORRECT CHOICE. WHAT MATTERS MOST IS THE PATIENT’S FULLY INFORMED DECISION AND NOT THE DOCTOR'S. THIS IS THE REASON FOR THE PROLIFERATION OF WHATEVER ANTI-CANCER SUPPLEMENTS – BECAUSE PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO GET CANCER AND FOR THOSE AFFLICTED WITH CANCER, THE FEAR OF MEDICAL APPROACHES HAVE BEEN MOUNTING DUE TO THE FAILURE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE TO CURE CANCER.

Scientific evidence

In a PowerPoint presentation, Villegas said commonly used supplements not supported by high-level scientific evidence include homeopathic products, high doses of oral multivitamin supplements, vitamin C + collagen, high doses of oral vitamin C, oral stem cell enhancers/fibroblast growth factor enhancers, ozone therapy (IV), and heavy metal chelation therapy that removes heavy metal toxins supposed to cause cancer.

“Randomized controlled trials in advanced cancer patients taking 10 grams per day of oral vitamin C did not demonstrate any significant benefits. These can, in fact, interfere with the action of chemotherapy and radiation therapy. That’s why we always advise our patients to tell us what they’re taking,” Villegas said.

ON THE OTHER HAND, CHEMO AND RADIATION RENDERS NATURAL SUPPLEMENTS USELESS! IN FACT, TO APPEASE PATIENTS IN COMPLYING WITH TOXIC AND INVASIVE TREATMENTS, SUPPLEMENTS ARE BEING ALLOWED AS SUPPOSED COMPLIMENTARY MEASURES. BUT THE TRUTH IS THAT CONVENTIONAL AND NON-CONVENTIONAL APPROACHES CANNOT EXIST ALONSIDE EACH OTHER.

Villegas said that metabolic therapies such as nutritional therapies, Gerson Regimen, Kelley Therapy, Gonzalez Regimen, Contreras Therapy and Manner Therapy—also known as detoxification/cleansing regimens—do not work.

They can even cause nutritional deficiencies, she said, while some entail potentially toxic doses of supplements or agents. Coffee enemas, for instance, can cause sepsis, dangerous electrolyte deficiencies, and even death.

“The colon or large intestine is there for the stool to pass through. Why do you have to clean an organ that is supposed to be dirty? It is supposed to facilitate the removal of toxins via the stool. The American Cancer Society strongly urges cancer patients not to seek treatment with metabolic therapies. No published evidence supports their claims,” she said.

UNFORTUNATELY, VILLEGAS IS HIGHLY UNINFORMED AND MISEDUCATED. HAD SHE ATTENDED THE WORLD CONFERENCES ON BREAST CANCER IN CANADA SINCE 1997, SHE WOULD HAVE NOT HAVE STOOD HER GROUND. IN FACT, THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY IS A VERY POOR AND BIASED SOURCE OF INFORMATION.

Lactic acidosis

Commonly used supplements supported by very limited scientific evidence, but not enough to suggest use, include transfer factor, malunggay oil, intravenous hydrogen peroxide, mangosteen extract pills, guyabano extract pills and resveratrol/grapeseed extract (provided they are not used with Tamoxifen).

AGAIN, THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCES WHICH ARE NOW SLOWLY BUT SURELY ENTERING MEDICAL JOURNAL IN NORTH AMERICA AND EUROPE. THE BREAST CANCER DRUG, AVASTIN CARRIED SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHEN IT WAS RELEASED TO THE MARKET, ONLY TO BE PULLED OUT BY THE US FDA BECAUSE IT WAS LATER FOUND TO BE INEFFECTIVE!

“We cannot promote malunggay oil to be used as an anticancer agent because this has never been used on humans. What you can eat in a diet, eat it. Do not put it in a capsule or tea,” she said.

HUH? AND THE FOOD CAPSULES TAKEN BY ASTRONAUTS IN SPACE IS NOT NUTRITIOUS? HELLO, THERE IS SUCH A THING AS FOOD TECHNOLOGY!

  

Severe lactic acidosis was reported with mangosteen juice daily for 12 months, and patients eventually died not from their cancers, but from the lactic acidosis from mangosteen, Villegas said. Mangosteen may also interfere with certain chemotherapy drugs, and must be used with caution by diabetics due to its high sugar content.

AGAIN, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT JUICES ARE EVALUATED ON HOW THEY INTERFERE WITH DRUGS! SO WHY ARE NATURAL FOODS VIEWED FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF CHEMO? BUT OF COURSE, DIABETIC CASES HAVE RESTRICTED FOOD INTAKES – AND SO ALSO DO HYPERTENSION, OBESITY, PREGNANCY AND ALL OTHER HEALTH CONDITIONS!

Resveratrol, which can be found in red wine, is also consumed as a dietary supplement for its purported antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

“Because resveratrol exhibits estrogen-like properties and activates transcription by both the estrogen and androgen receptors that lead to stimulation of cancer cell proliferation, patients with hormone-sensitive cancer should use it with caution,” she said.

ALL SUPPLEMENTS JUST LIKE DRUGS ARE TAKEN FOR THEIR RESPECTIVE INDICATIONS AND ACTIONS. THIS IS THE REASON WHY THERE CAN BE NO ONE SUPPLEMENT FOR ALL INDICATIONS AND AILMENTS.

It may also protect against chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity, although more studies are needed to confirm its effect on humans, Villegas said.

“I caution breast cancer patients taking Tamoxifen not to take these supplements with resveratrol or grapeseed,” she said.

DO NOT TAKE TAMOXIFEN IN THE VERY FIRST PLACE! TAMOXIFEN CAN EVEN LEAD TO SECONDARY CANCERS!

Scientifically supported

Among the commonly used supplements supported by high-level scientific evidence are CoQ10 (decreases cardiotoxicity in Anthracycline chemotherapy); R-alpha lipolic acid (decreases neuropathy); American ginseng, rhodiola, ashwanga (decreases fatigue); calcium citrate/carbonate (bone support); ferrous sulphate (anemia support); vitamin B12 (anemia support for gastropathy and post-gastric resection in patients with B12 deficiency); whey protein/L-glutamine and branched chain amino acids (protein support for patients undergoing surgery); and polyglycoplex (viscuous fiber for patients needing weight loss and modulation of body mass index).

As for omega-3 fatty acids, although studies on their role in cancer prevention are inconclusive, Villegas said, they may reduce colon cancer risk, improve immune response in patients with colorectal cancer, and are associated with reduced occurrence of renal cell carcinoma in women.

Fish oil supplementation may reduce the risk of breast cancer, she said, although high-blood concentration of omega-3 is associated with increased risk of prostate cancer.

Other commonly used supplements supported by high-level scientific evidence include vitamin D, beta glucans, bio-available curcumin, green tea, pomegranate, acetogenin molecules and bio-available silymarin phytosome.

SO NOW THERE ARE SUPPLEMENTS THAT ARE SCIENTIFICALLY SUPPORTED? OH WELL, LET THE PUBLIC WAIT AND SUFFER UNTIL SCIENCE COMES TO THE PUBLIC’S RESCUE WAITING FOR SCIENTIFIC BREAKTHROUGHS IN CANCER CURE. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE CANCER, YOU CAN NOT WAIT! ONE WILL HAVE TO DECIDE WHAT ROUTE TO TAKE. 

Safe, efficacious

“We’re not saying no to supplements. We just want to direct patients to those which work and how to safely combine them in a complementary fashion with chemotherapy drugs in a safe and efficacious manner,” said Dr. Omid Etemadi, a board-certified integrative medicine doctor who trained at the National Cancer Institute in the US.

Etemadi said no supplement has been shown to cure cancer on its own.

YES, NO SUPPLEMENT CAN CURE ON ITS OWN. AS A MATTER OF FACT, CANCER HAS NO CURE. ONE THING FOR SURE THOUGH, CHEMOTHERAPY WILL MAKE MATTERS WORSE. AND BY THE WAY, TRAINING IN THE US NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE DOES NOT MAKE ONE A GURU.

“There are anecdotal reports, case reports that patients have been cured through very significant lifestyle changes, but these are very rare—more the exception than the rule. More than 99.9 percent of them will not benefit from diet and supplement alone,” he said.

I BEG TO STRONGLY DISAGREE!

He said surgery may cure stage 1 cancer, while surgery or radiation with chemotherapy or targeted therapy may cure stage 2.

IN MANY INSTANCES, STAGE 1 CANCER CAN DO EVEN WITHOUT SURGERY AND WILL EVEN BE AGGRAVATED WITH RADIATION AND CHEMO.

“For stage 3 and 4, we prolong the lives of patients if we use standard care. The cancer doesn’t completely regress, but it doesn’t grow anymore.”

PROLONG LIFE? MORE OF EITHER HASTEN DEATH OR PROLONG UNDUE SUFFERING.

“Dietary supplements may help reduce the side effects of standard care, may help survival rate and prevent cancer recurrence. But I would not recommend that patients use them alone,” said Etemadi.

SURGERY, CHEMOTHERAPY AND RADIATION WILL NOT HELP SURVIVAL RATES NOR PREVENT RECURRENCE.

Read more: http://lifestyle.inquirer.net/133877/guyabano-and-supplements-alone-wont-beat-cancer-doctors-say#ixzz2jC2v5v00

Angelina Jolie's Personal Choice

On May 15th, I was called by a major TV network inquiring if the PBCN had a similar case like Angelina Jollie. When I replied that we know of no cases of prophylactic mastectomy, the TV researcher then asked if we knew of any scheduled case of mastectomy who they could interview. I told her to best contact any major hospital because for sure, they would have mastectomy cases. Then on May 21st, I was invited and accepted a live early morning TV interview to publicly air the PBCN's view on the matter. The entire TV staff and crew listened intently as I spoke and even another guest of the Department of Health promoting one of their many health programs kept nodding. Because of the public interest generated, I was interviewed live the next day over a radio program. Following were my main points:

1. Breast removal for preventive purposes is not a guarantee or assurance that breast cancer will be prevented. In fact this option belongs to the age-old Halsted era when it was said by prominent surgeons that to prevent breast cancer, it would be best to simply remove the breasts of a female the moment she is born. "no breast - no breast cancer." The truth is that breast cancer can develop even without breasts because it is a hormonal disease that does not exempt flat-breasted women or lesbians.

2. In the Philippine setting, most if not all females value and treasure their breasts and in fact will not just agree to breast removals. Note that majority of women place their hands on their chest whenever they bend so as not to expose the cleavage of their breasts, wear shirts when swimming and do not wear clothes which easily expose their breasts. This cultural practice will withstand medical options for breast removals just for preventive purposes.

3. Regardless of hereditary risk factors or genetic dispositions to breast cancer, there are non-invasive options that are kinder that will not permanently damage a woman's self-esteem - avoiding and eliminating known environmental risk factors and causes of breast cancer!

4. Angelina Jollie does NOT represent the common woman NOR can she be made an example to follow. Personalities remain to be media materials and their individual choices or views can not and should not influence the general public as being even close to the truth. Her personal life does not even have to be discussed to see why she is very far from being like you, your daughter, your sister or your mother.

5. A woman with the stature of like Angelina can do anything with her body and still maintain her status and even increase her public image just as others have done - change the color of one's skin, tatoo one's entire body or even change gender. Definitely not the case with most women who live ordinary lives. And not every woman has a Brad Pitt by her side!

6. Lastly, my own wife was diagnosed with late stage breast cancer when our youngest daughter was only five years of age.  Because it takes 5 to 10 years before the first symptoms of breast cancer are manifested, our daughter was definitely conceived when her mother already had breast cancer! Our daughter is genetically predisposed - in vitro! So does that mean that our daughter, now aged 18 will have to loose both her breasts to prevent her from getting the disease that took away her mother at an early age? NO WAY! There are other ways of preventing a woman from getting breast cancer no matter the genetic predisposition!

Breast surgeon Shelley Hwang, MD, chief of breast surgery and professor of surgery at Duke University Medical Center and Duke Cancer Institute, who did not treat Jolie, when interviewed by WebMD stated the following salient points:

1. Only about 5% of all breast cancers are in women who have this genetic mutation.

2. Most breast cancer experts would agree that the choice is really the patient's to make, and I really want to emphasize, it is a choice.

3. The women who should absolutely consider genetic testing are those who themselves have had a triple-negative breast cancer, the kind associated with BRCA mutations, at an early age, under 45, people who have had both ovarian and breast cancer in family members, and people who have breast cancer in the family and are of Ashkenazi Jewish descent.