The Fungal Theory

squidwitch42

Evebarry,

Sending you positive energy and well wishes. Never easy to get ready, but know we do understand and you will be in my thoughts and prayers.

Traci

Anonymous

evebarry,

I hope this cheers you up some:

http://www.rattlebox.com/ecard/cards/59

I care about you.

hugs,

Donna

Hindsfeet

It is not my intention to resurrect the bco fungal-theory thread. I needed to come back to share one final last thought. It's about a yeast antibody blood test...

First to say, Shelia was right...we went underground. We've started our own website where we can freely discuss alternative topics without harassment. It may not have been your intent, but I personally felt I did not have the freedom here to discuss or learn more about the fungal theory or any other alternative approach to cancer. There are a few women here at bco, whom I've connected with that believe mostly in conventional medicine. They have been gracious, and are a big support to me. So...yes, there is a little support here.

 Since I mentioned earlier on this fungal theory thread that I was having a yeast antibody blood test, I wanted to share the results of this test. A lot of people may not realize that such a blood test exist. Sadly, most doctors don't realize that a lot of diseases or physical problems are caused by yeast overgrowth. Maybe this is why they don't tell us of this blood test? Three of the doctors, I saw this past year said that I couldn't have systemic yeast problem unless I was on chemo or had AIDs. Tonight, I was at a art show, where I had the opportunity to chat with a doctor. I asked him about the fungal theory, yeast connection. He said too that yeast is often the root cause of a lot of diseases and a lot of people are unaware of it.

Every since last Spring, after two rounds of antibiotics that weakened my immune system, I suspected  candida overgrowth. The doctors did not believe me to have a serious yeast problem. It didn't help that I had to have two more weeks of antibiotics for H Pylori in late Sept, Oct. As you know, I got seriously ill. The antifungal supplements, and yeast free diet helped me a lot. But, I felt as though the yeast strong hold in me put me at risk for cancer.  I knew that I had a systemic yeast problem. So...I asked my doctor for a yeast antibody blood test...to see if there was a present yeast infection in the blood.

Sure enough, my recent yeast antibody blood test came back elevated levels for a present yeast infection in the blood, and a past yeast infections. The levels were way high, over the top. I knew it.

Again, most doctors dismiss systemic yeast overgrowth unless you have aids or seriously compromise immune system. I am convinced that the yeast infection in my whole body put me at risk for a weaken immune system, and at risk for cancer.

INFORMATION ON THE YEAST BLOOD ANTIBODY TEST.....ASK YOUR DOCTOR FOR SUCH A TEST.

Generally, candida tests measures a number of different things: serum candida antigen, IgA antibodies, IgM antibodies, and IgG antibodies. he IgA, IgM and IgG antibodies are antibodies that your body has produced in order to fight different strains of candida.

The IgM antibody indicates a present infection, IgG reflects a past or ongoing infection and is usually produced after initial exposure (this means that your infection is more severe if IgG levels are elevated). Elevated IgA levels may indicate a more superficial candida infection.

The test also gives you a measure of Candida Antigen present, as well. This number needs to be below 306 (on the test below from US Biotek) to be considered a non-reactive candida infection.

~

Tuesday, March 8^th, I will have a lumpectomy for my present breast cancer. After the surgery, my doctor is putting me on two anti-fungal prescriptions. I will be on the nystatin for two months. I will be on a yeast free diet without anything white, sugar, breads or fruit. I will only eat veggies and meat. I will also be detoxing with Paul D Arco tea. I don't like this sort of therapy, but the idea that it will hopefully kill the fungus in me is worth it. After the two months, my doctor is going to give me the blood test again, thyroid antibody test, thyroid test and more to see if the yeast infection is gone, and if my blood tests improves...also to see if the thyroid test changes. I totally realize that it is really hard to get rid of yeast overgrowth as it too can go into remission.

I am so happy that I have a doctor who wants to get to the root of my problems rather than throwing medicine at something that they don't understand. For me, the fungal theory or yeast connection link to cancer makes sense. In my life, I see the connection.

motheroffoursons

Evebarry,

First of all prayers for your surgery.

Just a note.  Elevated antibodies are found as a result of different types of infections and diseases.  They are not specific only for yeast.

Best of Luck!

kira1234

Evebarry, My prayers will be going up for you during your surgery.

Karen

Jainey

Hi Everyone ... Today is going to be a beautiful day! I have been reading this post for a few months ... Let's keep on topic, if not for ourselves but for the new ones as well. Let's not forget that we all have Cancer and are desperately trying to understand and remove it from our existence ... Getting Lost is only Human, but we can also get back on Track. Hugs ...

Hindsfeet

motheroffoursons...the particuliar test they did for me was only for yeast infection. At least that is what the doctor said.  The fungal infection is the only infection I have...other than cancer. I also have thyroid antibodies that differ from the yeast test.

For those who have been following my surgery on March 8th...it was yesterday, or last night.Thanks for your thoughts and prayers.  It went well. I will know more on Friday when I get back the pathology report. You don't know anything until then. I haven't looked under the dressing so I don't know what kind of scar I have. Looks a little much from the bandage. I hope not. Resting today.

impositive

I had all but given up this thread....but due to PM s from many of you, I wanted to share something I've been reading. It's a book by 3 German doctors, all currently or formerly, with the World Health Organization. The book is Prevention of Breast Cancer, Hope at Last by AV Constantini, MD, Heinrich Wieland, MD and Lars I. Qvick, MD. I feel it's important that these issues are known, especially to those of us with cancer.

These doctors believe that the cause of breast cancer (or any cancer) is not genetic but is a food contamination disease, namely...mycotoxins, produced by the mold/fungus in our food supply.

Our grains are stored in dark, moist, warm silos where mold is allowed to grow. We also consume foods like mushrooms as well as foods made with yeasts, both fungi.

Currently the only mycotoxin being regulated in the US is Aflatoxin, which has been described as one of the most carcinogenic substance known to man. But is it enough???

There are an estimated 1.5 million species of fungus, with only about 5% of these being formally identified. Most fungi produce one or more metabolites (mycotoxins/poisons) that serve to insure their existence.

They state that... the subject of fungi and their toxins, as being a cause of degenerative and cancerous disease in both animals and humans , has been essentially ignored by physicians and medical researchers. The reason for this blind spot is that the tens of thousands of published articles on fungi and mycotoxins appear in the food science and microbiology literature and only seldom, if ever, in medical journals. Physicians simply have not been exposed to the information on mycotoxins nor to the globally recognized and serious nature of the carcinogenicity and pathogenicity of these toxins.

impositive

What about risk factors?

There are risk factors found in the history of some, but not all, patients who develop bc. The problem of understanding the true rolls of these risk factors is complicated by the fact that they are not consistently found in all bc studies. Furthermore, there is no explanation as to precisely how these risk factors are involved in the entire cancer process. Clearly, something is missing.

From Breast Cancer, Hope at Last

"Cancer can only be conquered when the true cause has been determined and eradicated.The concept of the fungal/mycotoxin cause of bc provides us with the missing piece of the puzzle. Each risk factor is explained by a fungal/mycotoxin etiology.....It should be noted that each and every effective (non-surgical) preventive measure and therapeutic agent employed against bc share an antifungal and/or antimycotoxin mode of action. This includes all chemotherapy drugs and radiation therapy. The anti-breast cancer drug tamoxifen, for example, is antifungal, as well.Many studies present inconsistencies with respect to risk factors for bc. One example is meat: some studies have shown it as being a risk factor, while others have found no association. These inconsistencies of various risk factors are easily explained by the fact that mycotoxins are not always present to the same degree, from time to time, in any particular food.Storage of foods and the fermentation processes used to make foods such as bread, cheese, beer, wine and other alcoholic beverages, may be contaminated by variable amounts of fungi and their toxins. Fresh foods, particularly fresh fish, fresh fruits and vegetables are relatively free of fungi/toxins because of the protective antifungal metabolites they still contain. Where ever fruits and vegetables are implicated as being a risk factor, further investigation indicates that the quality of the food was compromised by fungal contamination. Knowledge of the fungal/mycotoxin etiology of breast cancer allows women to now make the appropriate dietary choices which will prevent the loss of their breasts and the premature loss of their lives.

The number one dietary risk factor for cancer is alcohol consumption and the number two is tobacco. What do these two have in common? Mycotoxins. Alcohol itself, is a mycotoxin made by the brewers yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and tobacco is fermented with sugar and yeast. Beer causes abdominal obesity (beer belly)-a clinical finding in many bc patients.　

This all had a profound effect on me. How many times have we been a part of a discussion where we or others have said "I'm a vegetarian, I have always eaten healthy, yet I still got cancer" or "I have always exercised regularly and I still got cancer" or "I have no genetic ties but I still got bc." I would venture to guess that we ALL, to some degree eat one or more of the following on a regular basis; stored grains (breads, cereals, corn and corn products, sugar, wine, beer, alcohol, meat or animal products that have been fed grains, etc), packaged foods, peanuts...the list of contaminated food goes on. An example of what one would think "healthy" is apple juice. We've probably all given it to our children. Here's a pubmed abstract link. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19610336

It shows that patulin, which is a mycotoxin , had contaminated apple juice in Michigan.

We've also seen the rise of cancer rates occur with the industrialization of our food. Could our modern food storage practices and subsequent mold/fungus/mycotoxin issues be the cause of this rise? Perhaps the incidental cancer cases they saw in early times were related to "breathing" mold spores (such as in a moldy home) and not to food contamination, since in those days they ate mostly whole, fresh foods.

The concept that bc is inherited is based upon a number of reports documenting that patients with cancer often have a family history. There is also genetic research that has become popular in the past decade. However, it should be stressed that most patients do not have a family history of bc nor do they show evidence of a genetic cause. The increased incidence of bc in the first degree relatives of bc patients has led to a search for cancer related genes. This search was rewarded by the finding of gene abnormalities in cancer cells. It is important to stress however, that these gene findings did not involve normal genes, but rather damaged/mutated ones. Normal genes can not cause cancer any more that an elephant's genes can make it fly.So what the researchers found, then, is that a normal gene was mutated in some bc patients. The finding of a gene mutation must always raise the question of how that gene became mutated in the first place. It also raises the question of whether or not this mutated gene in the familial gene pool is being transferred from the mothers to their daughters. This is unlikely, though, because only a small percentage of related bc patients share identical mutation gene patterns. Finally, the virtual absence of bc in several oriental countries prior to World War ll being replaced by a bc epidemic traced to the western diet is not an inherited genetic phenomenon. This leaves us with the alternative possibility which is that there is an environmental gene-mutating toxin present in the nourishment which the mothers transfer through the placenta to the fetus, in the mother's milk during lactation, and lastly, in the food which the infant will consume during it's childhood and later on in life.

(They list several studies reporting aflatoxin found in breast milk and also how aflatoxin has been shown to mutate the P53 gene, as well as P53 gene mutations found in bc .)

　

happytobhere

What kind of fugas are you talking about?  I was on a antifugal meds last year and found out in Dec.  that i have BC,

Anonymous

Research on bread indicates that:

1. More than 98 percent of convicted felons are bread users.
2. Fully HALF of all children who grow up in bread-consuming households score
below average on standardized tests.
3. In the 18th century, when virtually all bread was baked in the home, the
average life expectancy was less than 50 years; infant mortality rates were
unacceptably high; many women died in childbirth; and diseases such as typhoid,
yellow fever, and influenza ravaged whole nations.
4. More than 90 percent of violent crimes are committed within 24 hours of
eating bread.
5. Bread is made from a substance called "dough." It has been proven that as
little as one pound of dough can be used to suffocate a mouse. The average
American eats more bread than that in one month!
6. Primitive tribal societies that have no bread exhibit a low incidence of
cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's disease, and osteoporosis.
7. Bread has been proven to be addictive. Subjects deprived of bread and given
only water to eat begged for bread after as little as two days.
8. Bread is often a "gateway" food item, leading the user to "harder" items such as peanut butter, jelly and even cold cuts.
9. Bread has been proven to absorb water. Since the human body is more than 90
percent water, it follows that eating bread could lead to your body being taken
over by this absorptive food product, turning you into a soggy, gooey bread-pudding person.
10. Newborn babies can choke on bread.
11. Bread is baked at temperatures as high as 400 degrees Fahrenheit! That kind
of heat can kill an adult in less than one minute.
12. Most American bread eaters are utterly unable to distinguish between
significant scientific fact and meaningless statistical babbling.

In light of these frightening statistics, it has been proposed that the
following bread restrictions be made:

1. No sale of bread to minors.

2. A nationwide "Just Say No To Toast" campaign, complete celebrity TV spots and bumper stickers.
3. A 300 percent federal tax on all bread to pay for all the societal ills we
might associate with bread.
4. No animal or human images, nor any primary colors (which may appeal to
children) may be used to promote bread usage.
5. The establishment of "Bread-free" zones around schools.

We seem to tolerate the flipped logic and antithetical terms of some of
those who promote what many call woo.  Isn't it time we say so?

Here's a short list of puzzling terms:

Health Food Store---as if you can buy health there, or that the items they
sell are really foods; tragedies, such as the ephedra/caffeine, kava kava and other messes,  attest to the fact that these are sometimes "Death Food Stores"

Alternative Medicine---often an alternative to science-based care

Naturopathy---what is natural about synthetic i.v.  chelation agents or bioidentical hormone therapy ?

Well, science doesn't know everything.  Science knows that it doesn't
know everything.  Otherwise it would stop.  ... Just 'cause science doesn't
know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy
tale most appeals to ya'

In other words, It's very common, and very silly, to point out that there are many questions as yet unanswered by science, and then to claim it's legitimate to fill in the gaps with whatever arbitrary nonsense you want to make up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPs_j1EEplI

>

motheroffoursons

Black Cat, I loved your correlation without causation list.  I laughed until I almost cried.

I had promised myself that I would no longer post to this thread because of the gross science errors and misinterpreted studies.  However, the recent post had some information I feel compelled to correct.

Impositive, you have done a remarkable job in collecting information about fungi, especially candida.  However, I agree with the other posters that you need to take a micro course to get your information straight.

One of the errors that I never bothered to correct is that yeasts are anaerobes.  Most use either form of energy pathways, anaerobic or aerobic depending on the availability of oxygen and glucose.  If it was only anaerobic, we would have a lot of "happy" people snitching bread dough!

Furthermore, the assertion that the alcohol produced by anaerobic respiration is a mycotoxin is completely absurd.  I have attached a link for this.  Mycotoxins attack cells in a much more complex way than alcohol ingestion.  Here is the link:

Other low-molecular-weight fungal metabolites such as ethanol that are toxic only in high concentrations are not considered mycotoxins.  Source: (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC164220/

Alcohol is only a byproduct of a metabolic pathway.  Asserting it is a mycotoxin is as absurd as stating the byproducts of human respiration, carbon dioxide and water, are toxins because if you get too much in your lungs, you die.

The fact that radiation kills both fungal and cancer cells does not imply a relationship between them.  That is a logic error.

In summary, it is still my contention that a fungus is not a cancer. However, mycotoxins produced by fungi can be carcinogenic as can many other compounds, chemicals, and other conditions such as exposure to high radiation levels.  My prayers for the people living near the nuclear reactor in Japan.

impositive

happytobhere,They (in this book) are basically saying that fungi produce mycotoxins and that some mycotoxins are known to be carcinogenic.  Since there are an estimated 1.5 million species with only about 5% of those being formally identified, we could be talling about a known or an unknown fungus.  Aflatoxin is the one that is regulated in the US.  It is produced by several of the Aspergillus species.  But there are many more mycotoxins that could be implicated in our diet as being slow chronic poisons to our bodies.   Do you mind my asking why you were taking antifungals?  

impositive

Quoted from the above mentioned book;

Alcohol is derived from yeast-fermented fruits or grains...

Alcohol is a yeast-produced mycotoxin...

Fungi/mycotoxins are found in liquors...

Alcohol causes breast cancer... 

A fact which is not generally appreciated is that all of the alcohol (ethanol) found in all alcoholic beverages consumed by humans happens to be a metabolite produced by the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.  (This yeast is called Baker's Yeast when used to make yeast fermented bread products.  When used to make alcohol from grains or fruits, it is called Brewer's Yeast.)

 Since ethanol is a fungal metabolite which is toxic to other species of life (fungi, viruses, bacteria, humans, etc.), it is included in the catagory of mycotoxins.  The first metabolite of ethanol, acetaldehyde, is also mutagenic in a variety of test systems.....

 It should be more widely appreciated that alcohol, by definition, is actually a mycotoxin, and synergy between it and other mycotoxins is well documented.  See Toskulkao et al. (1982, 1986, 1988, 1991), Sahaphong et al. (1992), and Tanaka et al. (1989).

The pubmed article linked in mofs' post above states that alcohol isn't considered a mycotoxin because it's only toxic in high concentrations.  A mycotoxin is a fungal poison and if ethanol is poisonous to us in high concentrations or slow chronic doses...It's still a poison.  There are too many out there that know the effects of chronic alcohol consumption or acute alcohol poisoning to say that it cant be considered a poison. Even if you've never experienced the extremes, most of us who have drank know the effects of it.  Dizziness, nausea, personality aberrations, headaches, hangovers, etc.

 

 

motheroffoursons

Here is a few more references to establish that alcohol is not a mycotoxin.

A toxin is a protein produced by

plants, certain animals, and bacteria that are dangerous for other living organisms. http://uwadmnweb.uwyo.edu/vetsci/Courses/PATB_4130/Fall09/(24)%20NOTES%20How%20toxins%20and%20poisons%20cause%20disease.pdf

http://www.mailguard.org/drlera/bacterial_diseases/protein_toxins.htm

Information from CDC

Biological Toxins. Biological toxins (also referred to as biotoxins) are nonliving toxic proteins that are naturally produced by many different types of living organisms.

http://cmr.asm.org/cgi/content/full/16/3/497

. Other low-molecular-weight fungal metabolitessuch as ethanol that are toxic only in high concentrations arenot considered mycotoxins

Impositive, I see there is a difference between a mycotoxin and a metabolic waste produce, alcohol.  A mycoprotein is produced by a fungus for a specific functional purpose such as dissolving the substrate in which it is growing.  The mycotoxin, such as that on grains, is a parasite on the grains but also causes disease in other organisms.  Snake venom is like this, a functional toxin.

A fungus produces a mycotoxin for a specific function, not as a waste product.

Do not confuse the terms toxic and biological toxin.  Lots of things cana be toxic in large amounts, but that does not make them biological toxins such as snake venom, etc.

impositive

Myco=fungus (myco is the greek word for fungus)....toxin=poison (A toxin is a poisonous substance produced by living cells or organisms(ex: fungus).....

In the context of biology, poisons are substances that can cause disturbances to organisms, usually by chemical reaction or other activity on the molecular scale, when a sufficient quantity is absorbed by an organism. (ex: mycotoxins).  (see Wikipedia)

mofs' link (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC164220/)  states:

"Other low-molecular-weight fungal metabolites such as ethanol that are toxic only in high concentrations are not considered mycotoxins."

Therefore, we have established that ethanol IS a fungal metabolite....toxic only in high doses.  However, the author states they are not considered mycotoxins.  Yet the author goes on to say that Patulin (from a mold found on apples and other fruits) is also toxic at high concentration in laboratory settings, but evidence for natural poisoning is indirect and inconclusive. Nevertheless, the Joint Food and Agriculture Organization-World Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives has established a provisional maximum tolerable daily intake for patulin of 0.4 mg/kg of body weight per day AND during the 1960s, patulin was "reclassified" as a mycotoxin.

Whether this author has "classified" ethanol as a mycotoxin is inconsequential.  It IS a fungal metabolite that IS toxic to our systems, be it in high doses (alcohol poisoning) or chronic, slow, deliberate doses.  This is the primary point the authors of the book Breast Cancer, Hope at Last are making....We are being poisoned slowly but surely by these mycotoxins in our food (and beverage) supply.

mofs' link is interesting as it states all of the following:

"Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by microfungi that are capable of causing disease and death in humans and other animals."

It describes their use from medicinal to bioterrorism or chemical warfare agents.

"Frank growth of fungi on animal hosts produces the diseases collectively called mycoses, while dietary, respiratory, dermal, and other exposures to toxic fungal metabolites produce the diseases collectively called mycotoxicoses." 

"In contrast to mycoses, mycotoxicoses are examples of "poisoning by natural means."

"It is difficult to define mycotoxin in a few words. All mycotoxins are low-molecular-weight natural products (i.e., small molecules) produced as secondary metabolites by filamentous fungi. These metabolites constitute a toxigenically and chemically heterogeneous assemblage that are grouped together only because the members can cause disease and death in human beings and other vertebrates."

" Mycotoxins are not only hard to define, they are also challenging to classify." 

"Accepting that it is often difficult to distinguish between acute and chronic effects, many papers on mycotoxicoses blur this basic dichotomy entirely, and it is not always easy to interpret the published data on purported health effects. Almost certainly, the main human and veterinary health burden of mycotoxin exposure is related to chronic exposure (e.g., cancer induction, kidney toxicity, immune suppression)."

"the field of mycotoxin research is so large and so fragmented, and the criteria for establishing human mycotoxicoses are so elusive"

"Mycotoxins can enter the food chain in the field, during storage, or at later points. Mycotoxin problems are exacerbated whenever shipping, handling, and storage practices are conducive to mold growth. The end result is that mycotoxins are commonly found in foods. Kuiper-Goodman, a leading figure in the risk assessment field, ranks mycotoxins as the most important chronic dietary risk factor, higher than synthetic contaminants, plant toxins, food additives, or pesticide residues."

"Mycotoxins usually enter the body via ingestion of contaminated foods, but inhalation of toxigenic spores and direct dermal contact are also important routes."

"there is sufficient evidence from animal models and human epidemiological data to conclude that mycotoxins pose an important danger to human and animal health, albeit one that is hard to pin down. The incidence of mycotoxicoses may be more common than suspected. It is easy to attribute the symptoms of acute mycotoxin poisoning to other causes; the opposite is true of etiology. It is not easy to prove that cancer and other chronic conditions are caused by mycotoxin exposure. In summary, in the absence of appropriate investigative criteria and reliable laboratory tests, the mycotoxicoses will remain diagnostically daunting diseases."

ALL THESE STATEMENTS ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE STATEMENTS THE AUTHORS OF THE BOOK, BREAST CANCER, HOPE AT LAST, ARE MAKING. 

Thank you for your link mofs.

motheroffoursons

Okay, I am actually tired of this thread and this will be my last post, I hope. No matter what facts I include you will find some other interpretation or weird web site that will state otherwise.

Alcohol is classified as a primary metabolite.

Mycotoxins are classified as secondary metabolites.

Therefore, alcohol is not a mycotoxin.

Again, mycotoxins are produced by fungi for a various function, reducing competition for food sources, protection, and dissolving the substrates for food.

Alcohol is not produced for a function but is a waste byproduct of a metabolic pathway.

Incidentally, just because Patulin and alcohol are only toxic at high levels does not equate them in the same class.

thenewme

Hi Black-Cat and Motheroffoursons,

Thanks so much for your input here!  I think it's so important for anyone stumbling across these types of posts to find accurate and scientific evidence-based correction of misinformation.  Thanks!

impositive

Haven't been to BCO recently as I just returned from vacation. 

Here's the big picture.  As with any other toxins in our diets and/or our environments, we need to avoid mycotoxins as the book points out.  Some, such as Aflatoxin, have been proven to mutate cells and cause cancer.  Others have been known to be estrogenic and still others have not yet been identified.  It has been shown that these toxins are found in our grain supply (mainly corn and corn products, breads, cereals, etc.), peanuts and meat products that were fed contaminated grains and antibiotics (which are themselves mycotoxins). 

Alcohol is the item being argued here.  Even if I were to concede that the final product (ethanol) is not a mycotoxin (which I do not), it is made with the grains that were too contaminated for human food or animal feed use. (If grains test above 20 ppb, they must be passed on to be used for animal feed.  If they test above 300 ppb, they cant be used for animals. So instead of disposing of the grain altogether, it is passed on to be used to make...guess what...alcohol.  So you are still getting the mycotoxins when you consume alcohol.

Is it such a harmful message, passed along by these doctors, that our diet of contaminated grains and grains by-products be avoided?  Even if we focus on one known carcinogenic mycotoxin, Alfatoxin, we would be doing ourselves a favor to eliminate all known sources as best we could.  Grains are recommended as the major source of nutrition on the US Food Pyramid.  Could it be that our chronic consumption of these toxins are causing us to be sick?

Ladies...I dont understand your contention. 

digger

And impositive, therein lies the whole problem, you don't understand it. What's even scarier is that you think you do...

Hindsfeet

Glad to have you back impositive...hope you had a good vacation.

 Science is all over the map. It's always changing. What we know now, in the future, may be barbaric. You can find just about anything you want on the Internet (even from medical experts) from just about every point of view. In the end it is old fashion common sense that makes the most sense.

The reason, I came to this tread is because in my gut, I knew there was a connection with yeast and cancer. I had absolutely no proof. At that time, I had not done any reading or research. I just knew.

What I feared after my recent surgery was that general anesthesia would push me over the edge, again making me vulnerable to a major yeast infection. During surgery, I was given an IV for antibiotics...yuk! Sure enough, after surgery, my mouth broke out with sores. I have thrush. My primary N.P. looked at it and said, "thrush again". It was hard to eat and talk for several days. I've been on diflucan, anti-fungal supplements, and a very serious yeast free diet. This yeast infection seems even harder to kick. My immune system is shot.  I am slowly getting better.

Amazingly, recently, I've met several DOCTORS to whom I have shared this theory with. They all agreed that yes, there could be a connection between cancer/yeast. None of them laughed at me, or said, I was nuts. I spoke with one doc today, who said, you know, I think you are right about the fungus. These are experts? I didn't throw out huge medical terms in my conversation with them. I just shared simply what I perceived to be true. They were all intrigued.

It seems that people who are in the real world, doctors and other experts can handle the fungal discussion. They agree that there is merit to it. They get it, and the naysayers here at bco, don't? The fungal theory gets under your skin. This is what I believe that impositive doesn't get.

Perhaps, impositive doesn't get the contention because she isn't giving information that is going to kill anyone. She is merely sharing what she is learning, reading. I see no harm in that. Again, ladies, do we have to pass everything by you before posting on bco? Do other ladies have the right to a differing opinion? Or do we all have to agree with you?

Anonymous

hi evebarry,

my mother is also taking selenium as well as zinc supplement, mainly because she was diagnosed with too much arsenic in her body.

my mother has switched to brown rice and whole weat bread (if she ever have to eat carbs) but her main meals are raw fruits and veggies and juices..

my mother, myself and my daughter also went to a NP for allergy testing, and we were all tested as allergic to wheat..with me being the weakest in terms of tolerance, my daughter as the strongest.

impositive

Evie, thanks for posting. Had a great vacation.  I understand your intuitiveness, as I too felt it.  Right brain or left, (I seem to be somewhere in the middle) it is simply common sense.  Hang in there...I know you've been pretty miserable with "die off", it gets better. 

impositive

Digger, Your a little off track here.  What I said was, I dont understand the "contention of you ladies" to my posting about mycotoxins in our food supply. 

Would any of you disagree that there are mycotoxins in our food supply and that those toxins, namely aflatoxin are cancer causing?

impositive

Could it be that people dont have a reaction to the wheat itself but to something IN the wheat? 

How about meat, it has been implicated in some studies to cause cancer but not in others.  Could it be something IN the meat and not the meat itself?  A variable that's found in some meat at different levels...some of the time?

Some people have violent reactions to peanuts...maybe it's not the peanut itself but the mycotoxins found within.

Hindsfeet

Sorry..impositive...I did not mean to say that you do not have commonsense. I meant that a lot of terms tossed about probably loses most women, who don't have a dictionary in hand.. In defense, I was saying that the whole yeast connection to cancer pretty much make sense to me  What I meant wasn't a put down...sorry if it came accross that way.

Today I'm picking up a prescription for nystatin. I wonder what the side effects are for nystatin? I am done with diflucan for awhile because it is hard on your liver and I believe I read here that yeast can gain an immunity to fungal drugs? I have to take the nystatin for a month! It is said to break down the outside cell of fungi.

nanay...I take selimum...probably should add zinc.. I take a lot of supplements.

impositive

Evie, I didn't take your post offensively at all.  After I read it back, I see I may have thrown you off by using the wording I did .  I agree that this is all basically common sense, no matter how your brain works, left or right.  I think the left brains are so busy trying to pick apart the science that they can't grasp the simple common sense of it all. I find that to be the issue with my DH who is very left brained.  He tends to make everything difficult when it doesn't need to be.

impositive

Oh, btw, I've read that the side effects for Nystatin are minimal (except for maybe die-off) becasue it is a  "gut" anti-fungal, where Diflucan is systemic.  Nystatin apparently doesn't get absorbed through the gut so it doesn't get into your blood stream and cause side effects.  There is also a Nystatin lozenge for mouth sores.  Did your doc prescribe that?

I know you've been pretty miserable, I sure hope it helps!

happytobhere

evebarry what did you find out about you test?

happytobhere

 Any one that can help last April I had a toe fungus and had to take Lamisil and had a bad reaction to it.  Then 8 months larter here am with BC.  Not sure if it had anything to do with it or not.  What kind of supplement should I be on?  I know to stay away from sugar.  If you head the back of the lables just about everything has sugar in it.  I did not take chemo and hope that I made the right choice not to.  I am on week 2 of rads.  I know i have read to make sure that I keep something on.  So far I have had no problems.  I am taking Tamoxifen week 3 on it no weight gain a little bit of hot flashes.  I just can not sleep.  Any help?