4 ms·

I've informally (but seriously) studied natural health for several years, and the natural health community is really quite opposed to most of mainstream medicin

I've informally (but seriously) studied natural health for several years, and the natural health community is really quite opposed to most of mainstream medicines approaches to cancer treatment. Depending on where you're located, you may be able to find naturopathic doctors in your community. One of the best author's I've encountered in this space is Dr. Samuel Epstein -- http://www.preventcancer.com/about/epstein.htm http://www.preventcancer.com/about/epstein.htm who has a huge list of credentials/publications, and goes to great lengths to show why the structure of the cancer industry, including things like the American Cancer Society, at least in the US, isn't well motivated or well suited to promoting the most effective approaches. The natural health community's approach to wellness is fairly intrusive on the normal American lifestyle. Unless you live in a city with a really good selection of restaurants, it often means cooking all your own food and drastically changing your diet. I personally avoid all of: sugar/substitutes, hydrogenated oils, MSG/yeast extract, homogonized milk, refined grains, artificial colors/sweeteners, anything where oils are heated above their smoke point. I mainly eat raw fresh produce, whole grains, and organic meat. I've come to enjoy cooking -- it's a useful skill, both pragmatically and socially. :) Some things frequently mentioned as having anti cancer properties are maca root, and tumeric, especially when combined with black pepper. (all raw.) Some of the very high end multivitamin supplements that you find in health stores include these. Frequent sunlight without sunscreen is important too. In general, the natural health community's perspectives on many things are often counter to mainstream medicine's positions. Be prepared to evaluate some core beliefs in undertaking this research. :)

rms 18y ago
Frankly, I find the idea of "natural health", when pitched to cancer patients, offensive. Sure, I am willing to believe that eating more organic, raw, and otherwise non-processed food seriously reduces the risk of cancer. But prevention is not a treatment. You can't raw food your way to a cure to cancer. It just doesn't work. People die because they become so deluded. Indiscriminate as it may be, chemotherapy works. You suggest that naturopathic medicine is opposed to mainstream cancer treatment, but you don't suggest alternatives. What is an effective alternative to chemotherapy?
- trapper 18y ago
  Can you cite the studies that show that changing lifestyle (organics + supplementation) doesn't influence cancer outcome? Frankly, I find your know-it-all arrogance shocking, and all that is wrong with the medicine. 90% of doctors I have worked with have the same mentality. If it's not studied, how can you come to a conclusion? Here's one little extract to whet your appetite. [edit: btw I am in no way advocating naturopathy, homeopathy or other well debunked shams] ----------------------- Men with early stage prostate cancer who make intensive changes in diet and lifestyle may stop or perhaps even reverse the progression of their illness, according to a new study. The research is the first randomised, controlled trial showing that lifestyle changes may affect the progression of any type of cancer. The research team behind the American study looked at 93 men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who had elected not to undergo conventional treatment for reasons unrelated to this study. The participants were randomly divided into either a group who were asked to make comprehensive changes in diet and lifestyle or a comparison group who were not asked to do so. Participants in the lifestyle-change group were placed on a vegan diet consisting primarily of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes supplemented with soy, vitamins and minerals. They participated in moderate aerobic exercise, yoga/meditation, and a weekly support group session. A registered dietitian was available for consultation, and a nurse case manager contacted the participants regularly.
  - rms 18y ago
    The burden of proof is not on me here. I am certainly in favor of more medical studies about alternative approaches to cancer treatment. More science is a wonderful thing.
    - rarrrrrr 18y ago
      Absolutely. The trouble is mainly research funding, and then publishing and marketing the research that's already happened (there's more scientific research on alternative treatments than is commonly known.) Pharmaceutical companies aren't likely to invest millions studying turmeric, spirulina, chlorella, sunlight, etc. There are credible studies if you intentionally go looking for them, though.
andrewljohnson 18y ago
Get away from here, hippie. Cancer patients need real medicine, not platitudes from morons.

rms 18y ago

Frankly, I find the idea of "natural health", when pitched to cancer patients, offensive. Sure, I am willing to believe that eating more organic, raw, and otherwise non-processed food seriously reduces the risk of cancer. But prevention is not a treatment. You can't raw food your way to a cure to cancer. It just doesn't work. People die because they become so deluded. Indiscriminate as it may be, chemotherapy works. You suggest that naturopathic medicine is opposed to mainstream cancer treatment, but you don't suggest alternatives. What is an effective alternative to chemotherapy?

trapper 18y ago
Can you cite the studies that show that changing lifestyle (organics + supplementation) doesn't influence cancer outcome? Frankly, I find your know-it-all arrogance shocking, and all that is wrong with the medicine. 90% of doctors I have worked with have the same mentality. If it's not studied, how can you come to a conclusion? Here's one little extract to whet your appetite. [edit: btw I am in no way advocating naturopathy, homeopathy or other well debunked shams] ----------------------- Men with early stage prostate cancer who make intensive changes in diet and lifestyle may stop or perhaps even reverse the progression of their illness, according to a new study. The research is the first randomised, controlled trial showing that lifestyle changes may affect the progression of any type of cancer. The research team behind the American study looked at 93 men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who had elected not to undergo conventional treatment for reasons unrelated to this study. The participants were randomly divided into either a group who were asked to make comprehensive changes in diet and lifestyle or a comparison group who were not asked to do so. Participants in the lifestyle-change group were placed on a vegan diet consisting primarily of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes supplemented with soy, vitamins and minerals. They participated in moderate aerobic exercise, yoga/meditation, and a weekly support group session. A registered dietitian was available for consultation, and a nurse case manager contacted the participants regularly.
- rms 18y ago
  The burden of proof is not on me here. I am certainly in favor of more medical studies about alternative approaches to cancer treatment. More science is a wonderful thing.
  - rarrrrrr 18y ago
    Absolutely. The trouble is mainly research funding, and then publishing and marketing the research that's already happened (there's more scientific research on alternative treatments than is commonly known.) Pharmaceutical companies aren't likely to invest millions studying turmeric, spirulina, chlorella, sunlight, etc. There are credible studies if you intentionally go looking for them, though.

andrewljohnson 18y ago

Get away from here, hippie. Cancer patients need real medicine, not platitudes from morons.