Re: [cancercured] Re: One way to treat cancer???

Hi Comdyne,

I don't agree with the bra thing 100%. Wearing a bra did not give me
adrenal fatigue and did not mess up my hormones. So again, there is
more than one "cause" for breast cancer. If bras caused cancer, all
women would have breast cancer. But obviously, they do not. Therefore,
bra wearing is not the only cause of breast cancer.

Remember that 100 years ago, the genetic mutations did not come into
play because there were not the kind of toxins we have today. So, you
cannot compare. If we tested people 100 years ago for these mutations,
they would probably be there. The cause of cancer is multiple.

Cancer is definitely a disease of civilization. But not all people
living in civilization are sick. So again, there are other factors that
come into play.

ar

On Thu, 01 May 2008 22:21:50 -0000, "comdyne2002" <comdyne@intcom.net>
said:
> All very good points. No doubt modern cancers are far more prolific
> than 100 years ago. Our World is chock full of toxins. They pump
> halogens into the water supply and say that it is safe when it is
> known to trigger arterial plaques and they tell people that fluoride
> is good for their teeth, none of which is true. Dental amalgams,
> mercury in Tuna fish, automobile emissions, nuclear power, high
> tension lines, etc., all very much different than in the near distant
> past. But the results of the past say something loud and clear.
> Cancer is a disease of civilization. Sure there may be some genetic
> pre dispositions, even this doctor whose book I'm reading now states
> that endocrine disfunction is largely genetic. The point is that
> cancer is now epidemic and wasn't 100 years ago. That is a strong
> case for environmental causes and not much from a genetic standpoint.
>
> Most breast cancer is due to poor drainage due to the wearing of
> bras. 100 years ago women didn't wear such stuff and didn't suffer
> from BC. One fellow rebuffed me the last time I made this statement
> in that women trussed themselves up way back then. Of course they did
> for social events but said garments were not a part of daily apparel.
> People also got a lot of sunshine before sunscreens were invented and
> they weren't keeling over from cancer.
>
> The farther we get from Nature, the sicker we become. The levels of
> cancer increases as the populations get farther away from the equator
> so it isn't due to exposure to sunlight, its the lack of it that
> induces the disease. This is a complex problem for sure, but IMO,
> much of it is under our control and not a part of fate.
>
> "Our faults lie not in the stars, but in ourselves, for we are our
> own underlings..." You know who...
>
> http://www.sott.net/articles/show/150704-The-vitamin-D-miracle-Is-it-
> for-real-
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
--
Arlyn Grant
arlynsg@123mail.org

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cancercured/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cancercured/join

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:cancercured-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:cancercured-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
cancercured-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/