Credibility of source, "What Your Doctor..."

LtotheK

Credibility of source, "What Your Doctor..."

LtotheK

I'd really like some opinions on Dr. Lee's book.  I'm really discouraged by it, and question some of his early assertions.  He suggests, for instance:

30% of women with malignant breast cancer die, just like they did 50 years ago.

Treatments including chemotherapy, radiation, and tamoxifen don't work

Europeans are 10 years ahead of us in treating breast cancer by doing things like forcing the body into a high fever to eradicate bad cells

And much more.  As I'm looking to begin my chemo in early July, I want to get a better understanding of how hard to push back.  My doctor showed me her online predictor, which shows radation, chemo, and tamoxifen will lower my risk by more than 20% for ten years.  That seems significant to me.  What am I missing?  Even if his progesterone cream is the miracle cure, it isn't vetted well enough to get a doctor on board to prescribe it.

I've done extensive online research to see what others think, and have been unable to get any clear answers.

GryffinSong

Personally, at the risk of sounding harsh, I think he's a quack.

In my opinion, eating a healthy, plant-based diet is the single most important thing we can do for our health. Try reading any of the following:

- "The China Study," by T. Colin Campbell, PhD and Thomas M. Campbell II

- "The Cancer Survivor's Guide, Foods that help you fight back!" by Neal D. Barnard, MD and Jennifer K. Reilly, RD

- "Eat To Live" by Joel Fuhrman, M.D.

The studies are decades old and ongoing, and the evidence is extremely compelling that eating a lot of meat and dairy contributes to high rates of several cancers, including breast cancer, to heart disease, osteoporosis, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, and much more. Since giving up meat and most dairy a month ago my blood pressure has gone down so much I'm off my diltiazam.

I chose to have a mastectomy, chemo and rads. I'd probably make the same decision, even with the information I have now. I figure I've pulled out all the weapons against this thing ... medically eliminating the tumor and hopefully any stray cancer cells, and nutritionally by setting up a healthy, immune-system strengthening diet.

Hugs and good luck!

LtotheK

Thank you so much for confirming what I felt in my gut.  I read the whole thing today.  By his recommendation, we should all give up radiation and chemo, and go the progesterone cream route.  Dr. Susan Love says there are not vetted studies showing progesterone works.  Besides, where would you find a doctor willing to work with you in that way??

I agree re: food, though I am a 22 year vegetarian.  In my case, stress and sugar are probably contributors, along with growing up in Jerzey...

Dr. Love also says consistent exercise, and keeping your BMI within range is the way to go as well.  In my case, I'll keep at it--besides the sugar thing, I really am the model of health recommendations.

I see you have Greyhounds, wonderful!  My brother works with rescues, they are a dream.

CrunchyPoodleMama

He's not a quack, although I believe he doesn't present the complete picture in his book. For example, he dismisses the risk factor of iodine deficiency, when in fact iodine deficiency is a major risk factor for most women who develop breast cancer. I don't believe he claims progesterone cream is a "miracle cure," though he does obviously emphasize its benefits in cases estrogen dominance.

Gryffin, I am an ex-vegan, and one of several big reasons I'm an ex-vegan is that I no longer believe that is the healthiest diet for preventing or fighting cancer. There are key cancer-fighting nutrients that are only available from animal sources. Three books that influenced me the most are:

Anti-cancer by David Servan-Schreiber

Nourishing Traditions by Sally Fallon

The Vegetarian Myth by Lierre Keith

While a mostly plant-based diet is certainly healthy during seasons when plant foods are in season, the fact is our bodies require a certain amount of animal nutrients too (especially during winter/early spring when plant sources are not generally locally in season). Obviously, those animal sources should NEVER be from factory-farmed animals, only pasture-raised... in which case there is an abundance of cancer-fighting nutrients that are more readily bioavailable than in plant foods. 

iodine

How about not reading all those books who the author says that our oncs are mean, vile, and just want to make money.  Had one guy recommend coffee enemas as a cure.  Yeah, right.

If you want other opinions about your treatment: get second and third opinons from board certified oncologists.  Not some nut job like Suzzanne Summers or this quack.

I'm sorry to butt in, but I just get pretty worked up when "what your doctor won't tell you" books come around.  If they had real ans. we'd all be cancer free and they would be making billions of dollars.  If that's not the case then I assume they've not found the REAL ans.  Wouldn't you?

Penne

Hello - I was really disappointed by his book too - it seemed to me that it contained many anecdotal stories about his successes with progesterone, but unfortunately he did not do any clinical studies to support his claims.   I used a natural progesterone cream for about six months before I was diagnosed with breast cancer and I think it actually fed my cancer as it was 100% progesterone positive.  Very disappointing.

3jaysmom

i hate to get all "pollyanna" on u guys, but you always r so combative  !! some of us here, ok, is it only me? cant follow 1/2 of what ur saying, cause im on this huge learning curve!! but, in my little world, people can agree to disagree w/out so much heat.!! Sorry, dont mean 2 offend, but really?

LtotheK

Hi 3jaysmom,

I think this stuff inspires us all passionately, because we have all been so damaged, in one way or another, by not having as many choices as we'd like.  I want this book to be correct, because I don't want to do chemo.  Chemo has been around for 50+ years, same treatments.  It's shocking, on one level, that my grandfather in the 60s got the same chemo I will.  Being scared makes you angry, too.

Everyone here has been so helpful that I try not to read into the "tone".  I know the people here want to help.

crazy4carrots

Just my thoughts, FWIW -- I think it's only natural that, when one hears bad news, such as a bc diagnosis, one looks for alternatives, and holds on to the possibility that what the onc is recommending as tx is not the right one and that there are other tx which will be easier and just as/more effective.

Some of us have complete faith in what our doctor recommends (because she's dealt with this before with many, many patients and adheres to what tons of research indicates).  Others of us try to do our own research and read everything we can get our hands on before agreeing to the tx (the very thought of which scares the dickens out of us).  Still others choose to go the alternative route on the advice of a friend, or books, or stuff they've found on the internet.

The only thing that makes sense for each one of us is that we end up doing what seems the right thing for us.  What someone writes here is probably not going to change our minds about what we feel we should/shouldn't do.  We're all adults....it's entirely up to us.

thenewme

In case anyone is interested in the "other" side of the hormone-balancing fence, here is an article that brings up some very good (evidence-based) points about Dr. Lee's BHRT/progesterone theories.

Should I take Bioidentical Progesterone?

thenewme

Crunchypoodlemama,

You said:  "...in fact iodine deficiency is a major risk factor for most women who develop breast cancer." 

I wonder if you might have a source for that, since it's contradictory to the information I've found in my research, and I'd like to learn more.

shannon56

Real life examplet here:  In 1986 my aunt was dx with ILC and 19 of 29 nodes +.  She wanted the most drastic treatment available and got it.  They didn't do rads after mx back then but she's been cancer free ever since.  BTW she was well within her BMI range and ate a well rounded diet.

On the other hand I was dx with IDC Stage 1 but her2+.  Had chemo (I requested it) and rads, and herceptin for a year.  Approx 6 wks after the last herceptin I had my PET/CT scan and it appears I have an ipsilateral recurrence (recurrence adjacent to original site).  The culprit wasn't my BMI but the HER2+.  Turns out a lot of patients that have lumpechtomy with that endup with a recurrence in the first 3 to 4 years.

My thoughts are that doctors write books to make money so read very carefully and check for studies.

shannon56

MHP70 -- the only people I know who've died from BC are those that DIDN'T do chemo.  All the rest are still alive.

althea

I'm just one chapter into Dr Lee's book, but I've been wanting to read it for a long time.  When I was newly dx'd, I read Dr Northrup's book, Women's Bodies Women's Wisdom.  She talked about estrogen being in charge of cells cycling in, and progesterone being in charge of cells cycling out (apoptosis).  And then after that, all I heard about was estrogen estrogen estrogen.  I kept wondering, is progesterone the hormonal ugly stepchild?  Why is all this effort focused on suppressing estrogen when progesterone is the one governing cell death?  My library didn't have Dr Lee's book.  I tried getting it through the interlibrary loan system.  The man is no longer living, so it's not like it's a brand new book! 

Meanwhile, back at the oncologist, I asked the nurse one time about getting my estrogen levels tested.  Her perky voice went up an octave and said "oh, we only test for CANCER related things!"  This was the same nurse who answered my question about getting a flu shot during radiation treatments.  In the same high voice, she said, "Oh!  I don't see why not!"  It made me wonder how she navigates her way home at night.  I asked the onc directly, and his was response was that he didn't find the information useful.  He hands out a scrip for tamoxifen without batting an eye but won't even feign interest in what my estrogen levels are?  That was early in my journey, before I knew what I've spent 4 years learning about alternative treatments.  ...things that you have to find on your own because your doctor won't tell you.  

For information on iodine, read "Why you need iodine and why you can't live without it" by Dr David Brownstein.  On the web, breastcancerchoices.org, stopthethyroidmadness.com and naturalthyroidchoices.com are good places to read.  

As for people who've survived bc without chemo, my mom is a 30 year survivor this year and *all* she had back her day was surgery.  Of course, in her day, they yanked every lymph node in sight.  She was never the same after her surgery, but bless her heart, she'll be turning 83 this year.  Her mom before her had the same history and lived to be 84.  When I wonder about who's making boatloads of money, I'd wager a guess that it would take a boatload of books to add up to just one session of chemotherapy.  I have paperwork that shows the chemo was $8000 per treatment, and let's not forget the $5000 shot of neulasta the next day.  

mhp70, I know the information overload is incalculable just after dx. At this point, I think you'd probably benefit considerably by understanding the difference between relative and absolute statistics.  Go to breastcancerchoices.org to find a good explanation.  And good luck in your journey.

CrunchyPoodleMama

Crunchypoodlemama,you said: "...in fact iodine deficiency is a major risk factor for most women who develop breast cancer."

I wonder if you might have a source for that, since it's contradictory to the information I've found in my research, and I'd like to learn more.

Wow, that's one fact that's universally acknowledged in both the "alternative" AND conventional medical arenas. Just out of curiosity, where did you get your contradictory info? (BTW - just because your doctor doesn't know about something doesn't mean it's not well-known within the medical community. It pays to do your own homework, if you haven't figured that out from this board. ) Here are just a few of many studies and reviews in peer-reviewed journals.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16025225
This paper reviews evidence showing iodine as an antioxidant and antiproliferative agent contributing to the integrity of normal mammary gland. Seaweed is an important dietary component in Asian communities and a rich source of iodine in several chemical forms. The high consumption of this element (25 times more than in Occident) has been associated with the low incidence of benign and cancer breast disease in Japanese women. In animal and human studies, molecular iodine (I(2)) supplementation exerts a suppressive effect on the development and size of both benign and cancer neoplasias. This effect is accompanied by a significant reduction in cellular lipoperoxidation. Iodine, in addition to its incorporation into thyroid hormones, is bound into antiproliferative iodolipids in the thyroid called iodolactones, which may also play a role in the proliferative control of mammary gland. We propose that an I(2) supplement should be considered as an adjuvant in breast cancer therapy.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14965610

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18645607
"The protective effects of iodine on breast cancer have been postulated from epidemiologic evidence and described in animal models. The molecular mechanisms responsible have not been identified but laboratory evidence suggests that iodine may inhibit cancer promotion through modulation of the estrogen pathway. To elucidate the role of iodine in breast cancer, the effect of Lugol's iodine solution (5% I(2), 10% KI) on gene expression was analyzed in the estrogen responsive MCF-7 breast cancer cell line. Microarray analysis identified 29 genes that were up-regulated and 14 genes that were down-regulated in response to iodine/iodide treatment. The altered genes included several involved in hormone metabolism as well as genes involved in the regulation of cell cycle progression, growth and differentiation. Quantitative RT-PCR confirmed the array data demonstrating that iodine/iodide treatment increased the mRNA levels of several genes involved in estrogen metabolism (CYP1A1, CYP1B1, and AKR1C1) while decreasing the levels of the estrogen responsive genes TFF1 and WISP2. This report presents the results of the first gene array profiling of the response of a breast cancer cell line to iodine treatment. In addition to elucidating our understanding of the effects of iodine/iodide on breast cancer, this work suggests that iodine/iodide may be useful as an adjuvant therapy in the pharmacologic manipulation of the estrogen pathway in women with breast cancer."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17956159
"Several studies have demonstrated that moderately high concentrations of molecular iodine (I(2)) diminish the symptoms of mammary fibrosis in women, reduce the occurrence of mammary cancer induced chemically in rats (50-70%), and have a clear antiproliferative and apoptotic effect in the human tumoral mammary cell line MCF-7."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20363723 

The iodine thread on this forum has a wealth of information, including many more articles in peer-reviewed medical literature than just this cursory sampling. It will connect the dots for you re: why most people in our culture are now iodine deficient (hint: bromine/bromide exposure) and all the research that's been going on for the past several years in the medical community (and many many years before that if you consider studies outside the medical industry), and the role iodine deficiency plays in breast cancer (and consequently the role it should play in prevention and treatment).

I read the bioidentical progesterone article you linked, eager to find some "evidence-based" facts there. I was disappointed to find that it was nothing more than one person's postulations without any citations or links to actual research. Did you link the wrong article perhaps?

Member_of_the_Club

I think the book is fairly old, on top of everything.  Didn't he recently die?  (I don't want to start any rumors here, but I thought I read that.)  I don't think Europeans are treating cancer with high fevers these days.  We have European sisters on these boards and I've never heard them mention this.

 My chemo protocol was new when i had it -- dose dense AC plus T -- and now I believe it is out of date.  It isn't true that they're using the same protocols as they did 50 years ago.  Some of the drugs are old, but some aren't at all, like herceptin, and aromatase inhibitors.  

iodine

Sorry if I ticked anyone off with my blunt comments.  Been here too long and used "shorthand" rather than a more acceptable way to "speak".  I regret anyone I have upset.

May I add to MOTC's comments that the meds for treatment of chemo side effects are more effective, used more frequently, and less expensive than they were even 10 years ago.  Now, I chose mx over rads/lump, which was offered.  I declined chemo because, at the time, it offered only a 3% chance of being effective for women like me. 

Yes, I researched what information that was available, on the net and Dr. Love's book and a couple others.  I do have to say that I gained the most reliable info from this site and these boards.  My onc was impressed not only with my questions but my responses to the ans.  And I made sure I had an onc. who wanted me to ask questions and respond to the ans.

konakat

Shannon -- I need to correct your perception of all people who did chemo are alive.  First, many  women diagnosed with BC do not need chemo.  They have surgery (sometimes rads) and that's the end of it - they're fine.  Of course it also can come back and bite you on the ass later regardless of what stage you're initially diagnosed at and what your treatment was or wasn't.  Come have a visit to the Stage IV board.  Chemo's definitely prolonging my life with a good quality of life, (when I was off chemo/or it stopped working my cancer grew like crazy), but it sure isn't going to cure me. I'm going to die. There is no cure.

LtotheK

I just wanted to comment on a couple more things, thank you ALL for such a robust conversation!

First, while I do believe that certain protocols will replace chemo in the future, I don't now of a way to study them.  I haven't seen a forum, for instance, of women who chose to go against their doctors wishes to do chemo/radiation/tamox and went the progesterone balancing route who had good results.  This would be interesting!

Dr.Lee did die, yes.

There are a ton of vetted studies out there on how the only value of chemo in ER+ young patients is that it causes menopause, or that vitamin D may have a significant prophylactic effect.  I guess what I still ask is, if these are studies to work with, why would my oncologist still basically demand chemo?  For starters, when breast cancer comes back, it is 300x more deadly.

I think there's another fascinating, albeit mind-blowingly sad and demoralizing issue here:  if you go to the forum on how old folks were when they got diagnosed, a huge percentage got recurrence.  How chemo actually stops that in 5% of patients, I wouldn't know. But as my doctor says, when you are the 1%, it's your 100%.  And as one woman on the boards said, she already blew the statistics getting this young in the first place.  That's emotional response to statistics, I know, but I don't know how else to respond at this time.  It's the way my oncologist is responding, too.

Regarding the chemo protocols, I just want to clarify.  TC is a newer protocol.  AC is not. AC is what my grandfather got.  And it's on the table for me, if my oncotype comes back high.  That sort of blows my mind.

As I always say, complicated stuff.

Anonymous

Shannon, your personal/family history with chemo is very different than mine.  In my family, everyone who had cancer and didn't do chemo is either still alive and cancer free, or died years later of something else.  Everyone who treated their cancer with chemo died of that cancer.

I chose not to do chemo in spite of having a large, grade 3, her+ tumor.  More than two years later, I feel great, and am in better health than I was in for most of my adult life.  A family member who was diagnosed at about the same time who did chemo is now dealing with a recurrence.

MHP70, there are ways to induce menopause that have many fewer and much less drastic side effects than chemo.  If you believe that you need that in addition to Tamoxifen, ask your onc about Lupron shots.

The only time that death rates from breast cancer lowered significantly was when Tamoxifen came into wide use.  Chemo doesn't ever cure breast cancer, so why do so many doctors insist on using it to prevent recurrence? 

konakat

The problem with chemo is that it's just recently getting more fine-tuned.  They still use the blast all rapidly-dividing cells (cancer and good cells) to smithereens chemo when first diagnosed.  The idea is to get any remaining cancer cells that may have entered your system and not removed with surgery.

But newer stuff is getting more targeted.  Like herceptin which goes after a certain protein.  There's a new targeted chemo starting in some trials in the US called Retsin-G (sp) that only goes after cancer cells.  I don't think until it gets to the genetic level or targeted molecular level and when the cancer cells can be better analysed to make the targeted treatments (or cures, hopefully) will there be any really good chemo with minimal or no side effects.  We're getting there, but it's soooooo slow.

shannon56

PatMom -- I never said that chemo "cured" anyone.  No one is ever "cured" of cancer you are either active or in remission.  My aunt has been disease free (NED) for 22+ years, my daughter's MIL has been NED for 18 years, and her mother for 3 years -- all had chemo.  Not all cancer needs chemo it definitely depends on the Stage, Grade, and hormones involved.  The woman I had in mind when I posted had a large tumor and many lymphnodes involved.  Chemo was recommended by her doctors but she refused the treatment.  Within 6 mos. the cancer had spread to all her organs and she died before the year was out (less than a year from dx).

I'm very happy for those who chose not to do chemo and are NED.  You still need to be vigilant as this disease is sneaky.

CrunchyPoodleMama

Shannon, thanks for the clarification... when you throw around blanket statements like "the only people I know who've died from BC are those that DIDN'T do chemo. All the rest are still alive," without clarifying that you're talking about three people who had chemo and ONE who didn't, you can see how that could be construed as way off base.

If that woman who didn't have chemo was really as advanced as you're describing, sadly, it may have been too late for her no matter what course of treatment (or lack thereof) she pursued. Chemo might have been able to turn that 6 months into a few years... or it might have weakened her further... we just can't know.

I haven't seen a forum, for instance, of women who chose to go against their doctors wishes to do chemo/radiation/tamox and went the progesterone balancing route who had good results.  

This is sort of what I'm doing (although chemo wasn't recommended for me since I have DCIS)... I'm considering myself a one-person study of what happens when I reject radiation and Tamoxifen (which the doctor recommended) in favor of natural hormone balancing techniques (NOT just progesterone cream, which actually I'm not even using at all right now, but other natural methods). I'm betting on it working! but of course only time will tell!

BarbaraA

Here's my two cents: I read everything I can about breast cancer. I make the best decisions I can for myself based on my doctor's advice and my own reading and researching. In my case, chemo would bring the recurrance risk down 3%. At age 58, the possible long term side effects outweighed the benefit in my mind, As others have said, this is a very personal decision and mine works for me.

shannon56

I don't think I'll post here again as it really is a support thread for those using homeopathic treatments.  My last post related 4 different cases, I could have gone on and on but thought the 3 were sufficient.  I still don't know any one with bc that was Stage IIb or higher that survived 5 years or more that refused chemo treatment.

But as you all say it's your body, your life, and your decission.

thenewme

CrunchyPoodleMama, thanks for the links, but I guess I'm reading them different than you since I still don't see where they conclude that iodine deficiency is a major risk factor for most women who develop breast cancer.  Your admonition for me to do my homework may be a bit misplaced, since I am forever researching and asking questions here and other places, asking for more information, discussion, and clarification.

The article I posted  re: bioidentical progesterone was more "food for thought" than for primary research sources.  I think it raises important points and questions about BHRT  As always, we're free to agree or disagree, but healthy discussion is always welcome.

In any case, the original poster was questioning the credibility of the source, which  IMHO is the most important first step in researching (thanks, MHP70, for starting the discussion!). Here are a few of my reasons to think the source credibility is suspect:

1.Dr. Lee died in 2003, so a lot of his material is outdated. 

2. His website (www.johnleemd.com)  is primarily a commercial site, which is a red flag for me.  It seems very hypocritical to accuse "Big Pharma" of being financially driven, but he himself runs a very commercial site which presumably contributes to his bottom line.

3. His basic premise is the importance of "hormone balancing," which I think is terribly oversimplified. 

4. His insistence that "bioidentical" HRT is better/safer than conventional HRT is heavily disputed by scientific evidence. 

5. His book titles are a dead giveaway for conspiracy theory which, for me, is very discrediting.

6. His reliance on saliva testing for hormonal status is disputed by scientific evidence.

7. His recommendations for (and business relationships with) specific products/services he sells makes him appear extremely biased, which is discrediting.

8. His heavy reliance on testimonials to "prove" his theories is discrediting.

9.  His endorsement/profit from products such as the "Dr. Gauss Electromagnetic Field meter" and a mattress cover supposedly helpful for preventing sudden infant death syndrome from "gases coming from dirty crib mattresses..."  well, I won't even go there.

Anyway, I find this thread really interesting!  Source credibility is so important to me!  

PS- I have to respectfully disagree with Althea about the credibility of www.breastcancerchoices.org and stopthethyroidmadness.org, but those are probably best left to another time, another thread.

3jaysmom

shannon 56, if u r leaving, im sorry.. i read these posts to get a glimmer into what i can do to increase my survival. i finished a grueling session of chemo 22 in all, and had a dblmx, but could not tolerate any als, and refused tamoxifen; because of high stroke risk...although i have since learned the ones i did try were almost as risky.. i told my onco she was not going to be in the bed with me all twwisted up, unable to speak, or walk.. im qualified to say that. ive had 4 strokes, 3 requiring learning either to learn to walk, or talk.. i have had multiple sclerosis for 20 yrs, mostly, in remission..but taxotere woke  right up. so, now, i fight two  horrible beasts.  i keep my mouth shut mostly on the site; but these ladies have done their research, so i do read, and take notes. go back, ull see most of my posts r about "cant we all just get along"  they r passionate in their beliefs, and r helpful to s, even if we r going more "traditional".. i feel we ALL need it other, and we need 2 be more loving towards one another, i guess im just a pollyanna.... maybe ,u could be like me, and glean what u need from these incredible women, who r researching their hearts out, not so much worrying about each others hearts. im interested in what other sites u visit. if u would, id love a pm.  good luck in your decision making, no matter what course u take. lifeis hard; we need each other...3jaysmom

shannon56

3jaysmom  -- thank you for your words of encouragement.  i believe in using every tool possible to beat this disease into submission.  my future DIL encourages me to meditate, my manicurist to try probiotics, one or two people have tried to get to use pot, and of course prayer has been know to work miracles or at least give some peace.  Pot is out of the question for me period but may work for others.  once I get through next Tues I'll be back to a better diet -- I turn to food for comfort in times of high stress.

MBJ

I find it always interesting that when someone reads a book, they get differrent things out of it.  I read the book in question a couple of months ago while undergoing adjuvent chemo.  From what I recall, he only talks about preventative measures using alternative measures at the earliest detection of changes in the breast as being helpful.  Yes, pharmaceuticals make billions off of cancer and they are trying today to figure out how they can make billions off of bioidenticals.  I am grateful that many cancer treatments today aren't as horifying as they were years ago, but still, I believe this is a preventative book, not a book about a cure.  I also believe that progesterone contributed to my BC.  I am triple negative and there are studies that now point to BC pills as the cause just like HRT can also cause BC.  BC pills are all about the progesterone and I received deadly doses of it for hormonal imbalances on & off since I was 14 and I was 50 at diagnosis.  I was very thorough in reading Dr. Lee's book because I was diagnosed prior to BC with adrenal fatigue.  In the back of his book he lists symptoms and I had every one!  I also found out from his book, that progesterone would make make my symptoms worse (I have also had horrible uterine fibroids).  I am a huge advocate for iodine supplementation.  I found breastcancerchoices.org 2 years before my diagnosis.  I was afraid of supplementing with iodine and, who knows, if I had maybe I wouldn't be here speaking on this board.  There is another book, Breast Cancer & Iodine, that, although not exactly a great read, it was most informative about our bodies need for iodine and how the huge surge in Thyroid & Breast Cancers are related to this lack.  The future of BC treatment is preventative.  Everything else is just poisoning, burning and cutting the body which isn't what I would call a "cure".  I have chosen a complete lifestyle change: eat healthier, work smarter, more excercise, learn to say no.  I cut out most dairy, haven't eaten red meat in years, and I have added the occasional organic chicken back into my diet--I always ate lots of fish.  I had great dr's and I have an optomistic outlook for the future, not because of my treatments, but because of the alternative supports I have given my body now to prevent future recurrence.  I'm a triple neg, it's my only hope.

mathteacher

Hi MBJ,

If I may, I'd like to clear up some confusion.

Birth control pills and conventional HRT use progestins, not natural progesterone. They're completely different. I'm in the same shoes as you --- I used progestin-based birth control pills. Progestins in the dosage in conventional HRT and BC pills suppress our body's own protective progesterone. I remember Dr. Zava speaking at a conference and saying that giving women with irregular cycles BC pills with progestin was the absolute wrong thing to do because these women were progesterone deficient in the first place and the pills aggravated the deficiency. The BC pills would make them more likely to have breast cancer in the long run.

He is very against teenagers getting the BC pill for just this reason--progesterone suppression.