Go Back Natural Medicine Talk > Health > Cancer

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
� #1
Old 01-15-2013, 12:05 PM
Ted_Hutchinson's Avatar
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,727
Blog Entries: 4
Ted_Hutchinson will become famous soon enoughTed_Hutchinson will become famous soon enough

But you do have to retain your common sense when reading any research or hypothesis.

It doesn't take long to find out what controls MYC

Vitamin D receptor as a master regulator of the c-MYC/MXD1 network

Vitamin D is an antioxidant, so throw antioxidants out of your supplements and you lose control of MYC regulation and allow cancer cell replication to go unhindered.

Watson talks about
" The circadian rhythm regulator (PER2) by negatively regulating Myc levels functions as an important tumour suppressor"

But we all know what controls circadian rhythm.
The ANTIOXIDANT melatonin.

It's absolutely true that if you work shifts or otherwise disrupt melatonin secretion you increase your cancer risk.

From dawn to dusk your body is set to produce the ANTIOXIDANT Vitamin D3 and from dusk to dawn it's supposed to create the ANTIOXIDANT Melatonin.
Do we think that the Evolutionary process got it absolutely wrong by setting human DNA to produce antioxidants 24/7 whenever it gets the chance?
it's just unbelievable anyone can suggest that antioxidants such as vitamin D and melatonin are the cause of cancer.

If you don't believe me go to pubmed and search for the antioxidant CURCUMIN and CANCER and you'll seeABOUT 2000 different papers explaining the different ways this antioxidant also helps reduce your cancer risk or improves your cancer prognosis.

Sure there is a lot of extremely poor research into the roles of antioxidants but that is partly a reflection of the researchers and not the fault of the antioxidants.
How many of these studies used synthetic rather than natural antioxidants?
How many papers are based on what are thought to be the least effective form of Vitamin E rather than the most effective forms?
If you were running a trial on selenium would you say the same daily intake was to be used in areas of selenium toxicity and in areas of selenium deficiency. In other words is the the amount that goes in the mouth that matters to the level in the body that counts?
It's the same with Vit D research. All they are bothered about is oral intake and not achieving the 25(OH)D that humans living as human DNA evolved naturally reach vitamin D equilibrium.
Reply With Quote
� #2
Old 01-16-2013, 09:44 AM
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 227
Living Food is on a distinguished road

Dozens of antioxidants have been proven to neutralize carcinogens and prevent the genetic damage that causes cancer in the first place. Antioxidants are extremely important for all aspects of health, especially for cancer prevention. This hypothesis is very poorly thought out, I'd even say absurd. The lower your antioxidant levels the more likely you are to get all sorts of diseases.

The key is to get natural sources of antioxidants rather then the synthetics formed from coal tar, GMOs and petroleum.
Reply With Quote
� #3
Old 01-16-2013, 09:45 AM
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 227
Living Food is on a distinguished road

The problem is that most researchers are too busy looking at the branches to even see a whole tree, let alone the entire forest.
Reply With Quote
Reply Bookmark and Share

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The insulin hypothesis is NOT the same as the Carbohydrate Insulin Hypothesis. Ted_Hutchinson Exercise & Dieting 1 04-28-2012 05:54 AM
Antioxidants and Cancer - Researchers Admit Mistake Harry Hirsute Cancer 4 04-30-2008 08:45 AM
Unexpected Protein Interaction Suggests New Lou Gehrig's Disease Drug Target george jacob Other Diseases 1 01-28-2008 06:33 AM
Antioxidants do not counter cancer chemotherapy bifrost99 Cancer 0 04-15-2007 06:57 PM
Vit C and antioxidants for Cancer Treatment Marcus Cancer 1 11-08-2006 07:20 AM